One-Eyed Richmond Forum

Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: froars on March 16, 2014, 04:34:33 PM

Title: Forward Structure
Post by: froars on March 16, 2014, 04:34:33 PM
Forward Structure – not working.  I saw glimpses of it last year and it worried me a bit.  First game means poo really, and they may get it together, and we know Jack even in a crap year can kick over 60.  But it’s the players around him that are not working well, Jack’s giving out poor body language still, no crumbers, no good leads, no good delivery going on yesterday, the keys are being out-manned when it’s bombed in.  Can’t rely on resting midfielders to kick the goals, they’re down there for the bonus goals.  I prefer Vickery out, keep Jack only for a bit longer to see if he can get his head straight and persist with Griffiths, he looks more likely than Vicky.

Who's our forwards coach?
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Judge Roughneck on March 16, 2014, 04:37:56 PM
Is the game plan still kick to the forward pocket and win a throw in?

Entry to the forward line is as much of an issue as forward structure IMO

The jack Griffiths Vickery trio has potential  (assuming tyrone turns up)in Victoria games. King/bannfield/llyodmtype would of been handy
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: froars on March 16, 2014, 04:42:44 PM
Add to that keeping forward pressure to keep it in there, non-existent yesterday.
Have to persist with Edwards, he just tries a bit harder than the others and maybe not as good, but I'd prefer someone having a go at least.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Judge Roughneck on March 16, 2014, 04:47:05 PM
At one stage Vickery had a good chase followed by griffo. Leading to winning the ball back. If blokes four meters tall combined can chase the littles ones should be able to also

Everyone loves Newman but are we going to win the flag with in a forward pocket?

Donuts/shaneEdwards did some good work forward
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: WilliamPowell on March 16, 2014, 06:12:48 PM
Lade is our forwards coach

Add to that keeping forward pressure to keep it in there, non-existent yesterday.


BINGO
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: YellowandBlackBlood on March 16, 2014, 06:13:42 PM
Lade is our forwards coach

Add to that keeping forward pressure to keep it in there, non-existent yesterday.


BINGO
Wasn't he a ruckman that rarely kicked a goal?
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: TigerLand on March 16, 2014, 06:42:47 PM
Everything was against us, (all our own fault).

Poor delivery.
Essentially wet weather footy, with high humidity and a wet ball, not ideal for tall forwards.
Our forward line was filled with tall forwards with no small forwards around them
We bombed the ball in long against numbers back for GC.
We had no forward pressure to keep it in there.

So in short, we kicked the ball poorly in long and high to our tall forwards who weren't on their game and had wet hands with a slippery ball, we were out numbered and had no1 at the fall of the ball to crumb and had no pressure on keeping it in there.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Penelope on March 16, 2014, 09:35:38 PM
high humidity does not make for wet weather football or create a wet ball.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: YellowandBlackBlood on March 16, 2014, 09:43:48 PM
high humidity does not make for wet weather football or create a wet ball.
But we had the wet ball and they had the dry ball! :banghead
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: tigs2011 on March 16, 2014, 09:50:50 PM
Wasn't even that humid. Tonight is stuffing humid. We'd have lost by 15 goals in tonight's weather.  :whistle
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Andyy on March 16, 2014, 11:38:47 PM
Jack should just be FF, never CHF. He at least knows how to lead.

Vickery was behind all night and got toweled. Should play half-forward flank IMO just nowhere near the goal square - waste of time kicking it to him there.

ATM looks to me like Griff knows better how to play KPF than Vickery.

Ditch Newman. Play King or Lloyd. King for pressure, Lloyd because I thought he showed plenty in the NAB.

And get Knights/Lennon in ASAP. Need a medium real bad.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: TigerLand on March 17, 2014, 01:48:46 AM
high humidity does not make for wet weather football or create a wet ball.

Is it quantum physics to understand that March Queensland weather involves higher humidity and dew % compared to dry Victorian conditions?
Thus making it closer to wet conditions than dry? Not to mention the higher amount of sweating = slippery pill. I apologise if that is difficult to understand, I assumed wrong.

But surely you can see having 3 KP forwards in March on the GC was a bad idea?

Keep Smiling Al.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: RollsRoyce on March 17, 2014, 08:16:16 AM
Everything was against us, (all our own fault).

Poor delivery.
Essentially wet weather footy, with high humidity and a wet ball, not ideal for tall forwards.
Our forward line was filled with tall forwards with no small forwards around them
We bombed the ball in long against numbers back for GC.
We had no forward pressure to keep it in there.

So in short, we kicked the ball poorly in long and high to our tall forwards who weren't on their game and had wet hands with a slippery ball, we were out numbered and had no1 at the fall of the ball to crumb and had no pressure on keeping it in there.

Essentially everything you said Popelord, plus:
-We had a number of players down on the night (Ellis, Conca, Chaplin)
-The usual non-contribution from inexplicable automatic selections like Grigg and Petterd
-Dustin Martin wasted in the backline until the end of the game
-The cardinal sin that Richmond seems to commit over and over of allowing teams to clog up our forward line, yet find acres of open space in attack on the rebound, because our players are too lazy to follow their opponents out.
-It has to be said, pro-Gold Coast umpiring all night long. Notably, inconsistent interpretation of around the neck.
Phew- in the light of all that it's amazing that we only lost by 18 points.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: froars on March 17, 2014, 08:41:41 AM
Edwards needs to be gifted games like Vickery and Jack seem to each week.  He will run around and provide options, even if he's not getting it, and not hide behind the point post all day waiting for it to come to him.  Until Jack starts leading better, I'd be working the team around Edwards.  If plan A doesn't work, go to plan B. If that doesn't work, go to plan C.  They just seemed to have no plan at all on the weekend.  The forward line just doesn't work well together and I blame the coaching for letting it get this far.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: froars on March 17, 2014, 08:45:20 AM

-The cardinal sin that Richmond seems to commit over and over of allowing teams to clog up our forward line, yet find acres of open space in attack on the rebound, because our players are too lazy to follow their opponents out.
Yes  :bow
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Penelope on March 17, 2014, 09:03:00 AM
high humidity does not make for wet weather football or create a wet ball.

Is it quantum physics to understand that March Queensland weather involves higher humidity and dew % compared to dry Victorian conditions?
Thus making it closer to wet conditions than dry? Not to mention the higher amount of sweating = slippery pill. I apologise if that is difficult to understand, I assumed wrong.

But surely you can see having 3 KP forwards in March on the GC was a bad idea?

Keep Smiling Al.
nah, quantam phyics has nothing to do with weather conditions at all.

Yeah i do have trouble understanding when, I can tell you, from having played football in humid conditions, the ball was no where near as slippery as it gets on cool mild nights.

the only part of your guesswork that has some merit is that the ball can get little slippery after some time, from being handled by sweaty hands, but given in the afl the ball is often changed after behind or goal, i doubt this would be an issue.

your magical theory also doesnt explain how the GC were able to hold their marks and their tall forwards made our kpd look undersized
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: SCHammo on March 17, 2014, 09:03:52 AM
Leave Jack at home I think he was one out in the 50 3 times and we hit all 3 vickery can not I repeat can not be a key target he is to hot and cold more cold then anything... I feel Griffiths is only in the team till Ivan is back and then they will move hampson up forward with jack vickery CHF and have 3 little fellas around them....
believe dusty will go back there next game he may have had a lot of the ball but his kicks from the back half were short ones and then running by for the hand ball etc....
hay we have a wee off we couldn't have played any worse so all positiives
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: froars on March 17, 2014, 09:23:00 AM
Hardwick blames the forwards for this week, as we all do, but what did he do himself to try and get it happening.  Not a great deal from what I could see.  Lots of suggestions from the idiot box, but nothing from the coach's box.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Smokey on March 17, 2014, 09:31:46 AM

Is it quantum physics to understand that March Queensland weather involves higher humidity and dew % compared to dry Victorian conditions?
Thus making it closer to wet conditions than dry? Not to mention the higher amount of sweating = slippery pill. I apologise if that is difficult to understand, I assumed wrong.


Is it quantum physics to understand that conditions on the night were no different to conditions in Melb or Syd on Friday night (look at the recordings on the BOM site if you don't believe me) yet we would never have considered using them as an excuse/reason if we had played and lost at those venues?  No ice vests, no extra water carriers, no sun, no tangible difference to what they have been training and playing in for the past 4 months.  Fact is the time for excuses has gone - we rate ourselves as Top 4 material, we carry strong 'hurt' over from last year, we have enough games experience in our still youngish list, we know the game plan, we bang on about our new culture ad nauseum and if we had turned up with any sort of commitment to winning we would have beaten them without slipping over, without spilling marks and without needing to find invalid excuses for not winning.  Not defending, not chasing, not delivering, not leading, not getting in front, not backing up, not talking, not thinking - go digging in among those jewels and you'll find the reasons we lost.  Even discussing the conditions is in a small way trying to let the players escape full culpability for the real reasons they lost and what they must correct in a damn hurry if they hold any lofty ambitions about playing in finals this year.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: FooffooValve on March 17, 2014, 10:54:37 AM
Jack should just be FF, never CHF. He at least knows how to lead.

Vickery was behind all night and got toweled. Should play half-forward flank IMO just nowhere near the goal square - waste of time kicking it to him there.

ATM looks to me like Griff knows better how to play KPF than Vickery.

Ditch Newman. Play King or Lloyd. King for pressure, Lloyd because I thought he showed plenty in the NAB.

And get Knights/Lennon in ASAP. Need a medium real bad.

I actually think Vickery was at his most dangerous in the square, and his worst further out. Chain him to a goal post so that the dangerous space is in front of him. When he's up the ground he plays from behind, hoping for the mids to find the space behind him - stupid.

Dimma should have had the nuts to sub out Riewoldt (doing absolutely NOTHING), move Vickery to the square and Griffiths out to CHF. It might not have worked on the night, but at least he would have made a statement - if you play like poo you'll be subbed off, no matter who you are.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: the claw on March 17, 2014, 07:38:53 PM
high humidity does not make for wet weather football or create a wet ball.

Is it quantum physics to understand that March Queensland weather involves higher humidity and dew % compared to dry Victorian conditions?
Thus making it closer to wet conditions than dry? Not to mention the higher amount of sweating = slippery pill. I apologise if that is difficult to understand, I assumed wrong.

But surely you can see having 3 KP forwards in March on the GC was a bad idea?

Keep Smiling Al.
lets see sam day 196/103, charlie dixon 200/105, tom lynch 199/101.  the same sort of structure worked okay for gc.
keep on saying it there is nothing wrong with the way we structured up and intend to structure up.  fact is good sides maintain their structure no matter the conditions.
if we talk about the quality of our talls then perhaps we will get closer to what the problem is. most certainly out talls were poor it wont matter who we play if we get that sort of output and performance from them we will fail.

every single side plays two permanent kpfs. every single side also compliments them with a ruck/for or for/ruck  and that is a minimum.
we have numbers but do we have the quality within those numbers. not imo.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: YellowandBlackBlood on March 17, 2014, 07:56:18 PM
high humidity does not make for wet weather football or create a wet ball.

Is it quantum physics to understand that March Queensland weather involves higher humidity and dew % compared to dry Victorian conditions?
Thus making it closer to wet conditions than dry? Not to mention the higher amount of sweating = slippery pill. I apologise if that is difficult to understand, I assumed wrong.

But surely you can see having 3 KP forwards in March on the GC was a bad idea?

Keep Smiling Al.
lets see sam day 196/103, charlie dixon 200/105, tom lynch 199/101.  the same sort of structure worked okay for gc.
keep on saying it there is nothing wrong with the way we structured up and intend to structure up.  fact is good sides maintain their structure no matter the conditions.
if we talk about the quality of our talls then perhaps we will get closer to what the problem is. most certainly out talls were poor it wont matter who we play if we get that sort of output and performance from them we will fail.

every single side plays two permanent kpfs. every single side also compliments them with a ruck/for or for/ruck  and that is a minimum.
we have numbers but do we have the quality within those numbers. not imo.
TBH I thought we lost because they wanted the ball more. They were prepared to run harder and for longer.  They went in harder.  All of these things meant they outnumbered us at most contests.
Their talls didn't exactly thrash our backs.  In fact it was Ablett, Swallow, Prestia and co that killed us.  Their willingness to run their guts out was too much for our team who were expecting a much easier match.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Willy on March 17, 2014, 09:00:13 PM
We need good small forwards. Real bad.
We need both forward pressure and a bit of X factor opportunism.
I agree with Claw re: structure. I think the balance of talls is fine. Problem is that most of them played like ass, as did our smalls who are slow to begin with.
Newman, Pettard, Foley out.
Jacko, King, Knights in.
Vickery thin ice.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: (•))(©™ on March 17, 2014, 09:55:15 PM
Fk Newman off
Dusty chases ball and rests up forward with cotch or lids. 
Slimmer jack at FF.
Edwards king for Cecelia Tyson on flank. Preferably on another ground.

Grriffiths on a wing.boomers or grass cutters.
Add a match day plan.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: one-eyed on March 17, 2014, 10:05:26 PM
Astbury post-game interview ...

VIDEO: http://www.richmondfc.com.au/video/2014-03-16/round-1-astbury-post-match


 “They (the Suns) spat a few ‘mids’ out at stages and we got caught napping a few times.  That’s when they went coast-to-coast,” Astbury told ‘Roar Vision’ post-match.

“We’ve been susceptible to that sort of play in the past, so we really need to make sure we rectify that.

“We also need to make sure that we lower our eyes and give our forwards a better opportunity to take marks one-on-one . . . That’s something we’ll assess during the week.”

Full article at: http://www.richmondfc.com.au/news/2014-03-17/tigers-to-learn-from-round-1-loss
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: froars on March 17, 2014, 10:12:40 PM
Dermie
https://soundcloud.com/sen1116/dermott-brereton-on-the-run-2
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: WilliamPowell on March 17, 2014, 10:15:56 PM
Dermie
https://soundcloud.com/sen1116/dermott-brereton-on-the-run-2

Reckon his comments about Tyrone are spot on
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: froars on March 17, 2014, 10:22:46 PM
Dermie
https://soundcloud.com/sen1116/dermott-brereton-on-the-run-2

Reckon his comments about Tyrone are spot on

Force your team mates to kick it to you by getting in the right position.    Prepare for the ball to come to you in the worst-case scenario.  Vickers leads thinking this is going to be put to advantage and if it’s not put to advantage, he’s terribly disadvantaged.   Little bit of Richo allowed to exist at the club, the emotional side.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Judge Roughneck on March 17, 2014, 10:55:50 PM
Are they instructed to

Dinky limb 15 kicks?

Kick forward pocket win throw in?
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Eat_em_Alive on March 17, 2014, 11:38:34 PM
Edwards needs to be gifted games like Vickery and Jack seem to each week.  He will run around and provide options, even if he's not getting it, and not hide behind the point post all day waiting for it to come to him.  Until Jack starts leading better, I'd be working the team around Edwards.  If plan A doesn't work, go to plan B. If that doesn't work, go to plan C.  They just seemed to have no plan at all on the weekend.  The forward line just doesn't work well together and I blame the coaching for letting it get this far.

I cant argue with this
It is a problem that has not been addressed for some time now
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: 🏅Dooks on March 18, 2014, 06:32:56 AM
Cant remember any other side trying to turn a FF Coleman medalist into another position.

Come to think of it we try to turn to many players into things they arent. Newman a forward? Dusty a backman? Etc etc etc

I cant recall Stevie j being forced to play in the backline. Or Hawkins.

We dont line up to our players strengths. Either they are extremely slow learners or Hardwick has got it terribly wrong

Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: (•))(©™ on March 18, 2014, 07:05:14 AM
Cant remember any other side trying to turn a FF Coleman medalist into another position.

Come to think of it we try to turn to many players into things they arent. Newman a forward? Dusty a backman? Etc etc etc

I cant recall Stevie j being forced to play in the backline. Or Hawkins.

We dont line up to our players strengths. Either they are extremely slow learners or Hardwick has got it terribly wrong

That's right.

We line players up to opposition strengths, it seems.

A coach with a defensive mindset and a poor mans Euclid.

A game plan that adhered the players strengths would be nice also.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Stripes on March 18, 2014, 12:37:45 PM
I think people maybe misconstruing Dimmas intentions here. He is just trying to make our players, side and structure more flexible and unpredictable. I don't think he has ever really believed Dusty would play a season out at HB but rather wanted to have the option of playing him there so he could then rotate other players through the middle and have Dusty less exhausted when he moved him into the middle or forward later in a game.

Jack is being moved to HF because 1) it makes us less predictable 2) he is very creative and sets up goals  3) he can become a link player & 4) he gets more of the ball in his hands. Jack didn't, or wasn't allowed to, do this last Saturday.

I'm not sure if the three talls on small grounds are going to work. If one acts as a push up link player then it may work in this case but three stay at home forwards doesn't do the job. Dimma needs to rotate Vickery, Griffiths and Jack around the forwardline and if one player is not taking his opportunities - move him away from the goal square.  :cheers
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: georgies31 on March 18, 2014, 03:26:45 PM
I just cant understand what Dimma wants sometimes.He has a gun forward who has won the coleman twice and second behind Franklin for the most goals kicked last couple of seasons and we dont sit him in the sqaure and and make him the main target.Any other team what do that, but for some reason Dimma is obessed with this hawks game plan of sharing the forward load.I agree to a extent a good idea,but we dont have the forward cattle hawks have simple as that.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Coach on March 18, 2014, 03:39:01 PM
Playing Riewoldt at half forward isn't unpredictable, it's just brothel. He has kicked and set up goals from full forward brilliantly in the past. I'd rather he kicked 70 and set up 25 than kick 35-40 and set up 30 from half forward.

This will sound laughable but we gotta get Aaron Edwards into this team. He's the only bloke at the club who leads up at the footy EVERY stuffing time.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Coach on March 18, 2014, 03:41:40 PM
Cant remember any other side trying to turn a FF Coleman medalist into another position.

Come to think of it we try to turn to many players into things they arent. Newman a forward? Dusty a backman? Etc etc etc

I cant recall Stevie j being forced to play in the backline. Or Hawkins.

We dont line up to our players strengths. Either they are extremely slow learners or Hardwick has got it terribly wrong

That's right.

We line players up to opposition strengths, it seems.

A coach with a defensive mindset and a poor mans Euclid.

A game plan that adhered the players strengths would be nice also.

Can you imagine what wankhouse will be thinking if he can have Jamison/Henderson sit on Riewoldt at half forward. Then he looks up and sees Martin going to the backline, he'd be laughing. Hardwick doing all the coaching for the opposition. They don't have to make a move
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: tigs2011 on March 18, 2014, 03:51:35 PM
Playing Riewoldt at half forward isn't unpredictable, it's just brothel. He has kicked and set up goals from full forward brilliantly in the past. I'd rather he kicked 70 and set up 25 than kick 35-40 and set up 30 from half forward.

This will sound laughable but we gotta get Aaron Edwards into this team. He's the only bloke at the club who leads up at the footy EVERY stuffing time.
Griffiths led up too. Pity he had to play his own role and then a bright spark went off in Dimma's head and he subbed him off leaving no one to lead.

Jack FF
Griff CHF/2nd ruck
Edwards/Vickery as the other forward.


Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Fluffy Tiger on March 18, 2014, 03:56:40 PM
Playing Riewoldt at half forward isn't unpredictable, it's just brothel. He has kicked and set up goals from full forward brilliantly in the past. I'd rather he kicked 70 and set up 25 than kick 35-40 and set up 30 from half forward.

This will sound laughable but we gotta get Aaron Edwards into this team. He's the only bloke at the club who leads up at the footy EVERY stuffing time.
Griffiths led up too. Pity he had to play his own role and then a bright spark went off in Dimma's head and he subbed him off leaving no one to lead.

Jack FF
Griff CHF/2nd ruck
Edwards/Vickery as the other forward.

And two small fowards at thier feet, front and centre to get the spillage and put foward presure on. Pettard and Newman do NOT count as this type.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: YellowandBlackBlood on March 18, 2014, 04:19:40 PM
Playing Riewoldt at half forward isn't unpredictable, it's just brothel. He has kicked and set up goals from full forward brilliantly in the past. I'd rather he kicked 70 and set up 25 than kick 35-40 and set up 30 from half forward.

This will sound laughable but we gotta get Aaron Edwards into this team. He's the only bloke at the club who leads up at the footy EVERY stuffing time.
Griffiths led up too. Pity he had to play his own role and then a bright spark went off in Dimma's head and he subbed him off leaving no one to lead.

Jack FF
Griff CHF/2nd ruck
Edwards/Vickery as the other forward.

And two small fowards at thier feet, front and centre to get the spillage and put foward presure on. Pettard and Newman do NOT count as this type.
we actually need Banfield in the team.  Too bad the big O was elevated instead - I don't think he makes a good small forward! ;D
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: gerkin greg on March 18, 2014, 04:48:07 PM
one thing we don't ever need is banfield in the team

cmon now
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: YellowandBlackBlood on March 18, 2014, 05:02:00 PM
one thing we don't ever need is banfield in the team

cmon now
Wouldn't have done any worse than our forwards did last Saturday..... :whistle
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: gerkin greg on March 18, 2014, 05:51:35 PM
Sure but that would have been a good game from him

you see?
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: YellowandBlackBlood on March 18, 2014, 06:11:47 PM
Sure but that would have been a good game from him

you see?
:clapping :lol
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: the claw on March 18, 2014, 08:02:45 PM
reckon we need to sort out the second kpf spot. going by the off season  our reserves game last week and forward needs  the sort of thing id like to see happen.
fb/  morris - chaplin - astbury.   the talls are suspect imo but there isnt really any other options. reckon conca needs the play in front of him.
hb/ conca - rance - vlastuin
 
c/  houli - martin - deledio. imo a soft and very outside centre line. these blokes just have to start winning some contested ball and have a defensive impact.

hf/ knights - griffiths - king.     some will say its too tall i say rubbish. i have always believed a edwards should be played as a strong marking medium sized player. griffiths and riewoldt stay at home and hampson shares the ruck load with orren. king will at least add some defensive pressure and knights can kick a goal and has a bit of polish.
ff/ hampson  - riewoldt - a edwards.

ruck/ stephenson - jackson - cotchin. reckon the big o can at least compete in the ruck. never thought id say it in my lifetime but jackson adds some needed competetivness. cotchin must be praying some other mids will step up and win some contested ball.

int/  thomas - ellis - foley -  sub gordon or failing that, s edwards / mcdonough/ lloyd. reckon ellis foley thomas and gordon give a good mix of midfield rotations. foley and ellis really need to step up. gordon is one who can play forward and is a good size.
shame miles is not on the list proper would play him in a heartbeat.

outs would be
vickery,s edwards, grigg, mcdonough,newman, petterd,
ins
stephenson, gordon, jackson, knights,king, a edwards.
we all know 6 changes wont happen but i sure as hell hope we do it. dimma needs to send a very loud message early that performances like that are not acceptable and the players will be held accountable.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Stripes on March 18, 2014, 08:29:44 PM
reckon we need to sort out the second kpf spot. going by the off season  our reserves game last week and forward needs  the sort of thing id like to see happen.
fb/  morris - chaplin - astbury.   the talls are suspect imo but there isnt really any other options. reckon conca needs the play in front of him.
hb/ conca - rance - vlastuin
 
c/  houli - martin - deledio. imo a soft and very outside centre line. these blokes just have to start winning some contested ball and have a defensive impact.

hf/ knights - griffiths - king.     some will say its too tall i say rubbish. i have always believed a edwards should be played as a strong marking medium sized player. griffiths and riewoldt stay at home and hampson shares the ruck load with orren. king will at least add some defensive pressure and knights can kick a goal and has a bit of polish.
ff/ hampson  - riewoldt - a edwards.

ruck/ stephenson - jackson - cotchin. reckon the big o can at least compete in the ruck. never thought id say it in my lifetime but jackson adds some needed competetivness. cotchin must be praying some other mids will step up and win some contested ball.

int/  thomas - ellis - foley -  sub gordon or failing that, s edwards / mcdonough/ lloyd. reckon ellis foley thomas and gordon give a good mix of midfield rotations. foley and ellis really need to step up. gordon is one who can play forward and is a good size.
shame miles is not on the list proper would play him in a heartbeat.

outs would be
vickery,s edwards, grigg, mcdonough,newman, petterd,
ins
stephenson, gordon, jackson, knights,king, a edwards.
we all know 6 changes wont happen but i sure as hell hope we do it. dimma needs to send a very loud message early that performances like that are not acceptable and the players will be held accountable.

I would not take out Grigg or S.Edwards. We need the extra run which was desperately lacking last Saturday and heavily needed against teams that like Carlton who like to sling shot/over-run us. I would bring in Gordan as sub too. With King and Jackson coming in I would make some hard decisions and take out Foley, Petterd and.....Newman (won't happen - yet) or McDonough (move Newman back).

Gordan would make an impact coming in as a sub that Foley didn't. Even Lloyd would give us more as a sub.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: the claw on March 18, 2014, 09:25:36 PM
i reckon selective running and pace makes both grigg and edwards liabilities when it comes to the sling shot. throw ineffective tackles or in griggs case non existent tackles.  no matter how hard they run when they think they can get a kick it doesnt make up for the rest.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Stripes on March 19, 2014, 12:02:32 PM
i reckon selective running and pace makes both grigg and edwards liabilities when it comes to the sling shot. throw ineffective tackles or in griggs case non existent tackles.  no matter how hard they run when they think they can get a kick it doesnt make up for the rest.

Their run and ability to find space to allow us to switch play and find an outside runner is crucial. As much as you may detest other elements of their game Grigg, Ellis and Houli's role is to find that space. Without it we lose our ball movement and delivery into the F50. It's what GC did to us.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Judge Roughneck on March 19, 2014, 12:58:56 PM
In your words Maric is not a kpp forward

And yet Hampson is?

reckon we need to sort out the second kpf spot. going by the off season  our reserves game last week and forward needs  the sort of thing id like to see happen.
fb/  morris - chaplin - astbury.   the talls are suspect imo but there isnt really any other options. reckon conca needs the play in front of him.
hb/ conca - rance - vlastuin
 
c/  houli - martin - deledio. imo a soft and very outside centre line. these blokes just have to start winning some contested ball and have a defensive impact.

hf/ knights - griffiths - king.     some will say its too tall i say rubbish. i have always believed a edwards should be played as a strong marking medium sized player. griffiths and riewoldt stay at home and hampson shares the ruck load with orren. king will at least add some defensive pressure and knights can kick a goal and has a bit of polish.
ff/ hampson  - riewoldt - a edwards.

ruck/ stephenson - jackson - cotchin. reckon the big o can at least compete in the ruck. never thought id say it in my lifetime but jackson adds some needed competetivness. cotchin must be praying some other mids will step up and win some contested ball.

int/  thomas - ellis - foley -  sub gordon or failing that, s edwards / mcdonough/ lloyd. reckon ellis foley thomas and gordon give a good mix of midfield rotations. foley and ellis really need to step up. gordon is one who can play forward and is a good size.
shame miles is not on the list proper would play him in a heartbeat.

outs would be
vickery,s edwards, grigg, mcdonough,newman, petterd,
ins
stephenson, gordon, jackson, knights,king, a edwards.
we all know 6 changes wont happen but i sure as hell hope we do it. dimma needs to send a very loud message early that performances like that are not acceptable and the players will be held accountable.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: tigs2011 on March 19, 2014, 03:26:09 PM
i reckon selective running and pace makes both grigg and edwards liabilities when it comes to the sling shot. throw ineffective tackles or in griggs case non existent tackles.  no matter how hard they run when they think they can get a kick it doesnt make up for the rest.
Personally reckon it's unfair to lump Edwards in with Grigg in this regard. In fact, it's probably unfair to lump any AFL player or any poster on here in the lazy category with Grigg.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Judge Roughneck on November 28, 2014, 05:37:03 PM
Talls options:

McBean
Vickery
Griffiths
Mckenzie
Maric
Riewoldt
Elton

Small/mid:

Deledio
Martin
Cotchin
Shane Edwards
Lloyd
Gordon
Lennon
Hunt
Ellis
Ellis
Conca

Etc
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Judge Roughneck on November 28, 2014, 05:39:39 PM
reckon we need to sort out the second kpf spot. going by the off season  our reserves game last week and forward needs  the sort of thing id like to see happen.
fb/  morris - chaplin - astbury.   the talls are suspect imo but there isnt really any other options. reckon conca needs the play in front of him.
hb/ conca - rance - vlastuin
 
c/  houli - martin - deledio. imo a soft and very outside centre line. these blokes just have to start winning some contested ball and have a defensive impact.

hf/ knights - griffiths - king.     some will say its too tall i say rubbish. i have always believed a edwards should be played as a strong marking medium sized player. griffiths and riewoldt stay at home and hampson shares the ruck load with orren. king will at least add some defensive pressure and knights can kick a goal and has a bit of polish.
ff/ hampson  - riewoldt - a edwards.

ruck/ stephenson - jackson - cotchin. reckon the big o can at least compete in the ruck. never thought id say it in my lifetime but jackson adds some needed competetivness. cotchin must be praying some other mids will step up and win some contested ball.

int/  thomas - ellis - foley -  sub gordon or failing that, s edwards / mcdonough/ lloyd. reckon ellis foley thomas and gordon give a good mix of midfield rotations. foley and ellis really need to step up. gordon is one who can play forward and is a good size.
shame miles is not on the list proper would play him in a heartbeat.

outs would be
vickery,s edwards, grigg, mcdonough,newman, petterd,
ins
stephenson, gordon, jackson, knights,king, a edwards.
we all know 6 changes wont happen but i sure as hell hope we do it. dimma needs to send a very loud message early that performances like that are not acceptable and the players will be held accountable.

Ory

2 of those 3 KPFs 200cm ...
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: the claw on November 29, 2014, 11:21:21 AM
reckon we need to sort out the second kpf spot. going by the off season  our reserves game last week and forward needs  the sort of thing id like to see happen.
fb/  morris - chaplin - astbury.   the talls are suspect imo but there isnt really any other options. reckon conca needs the play in front of him.
hb/ conca - rance - vlastuin
 
c/  houli - martin - deledio. imo a soft and very outside centre line. these blokes just have to start winning some contested ball and have a defensive impact.

hf/ knights - griffiths - king.     some will say its too tall i say rubbish. i have always believed a edwards should be played as a strong marking medium sized player. griffiths and riewoldt stay at home and hampson shares the ruck load with orren. king will at least add some defensive pressure and knights can kick a goal and has a bit of polish.
ff/ hampson  - riewoldt - a edwards.

ruck/ stephenson - jackson - cotchin. reckon the big o can at least compete in the ruck. never thought id say it in my lifetime but jackson adds some needed competetivness. cotchin must be praying some other mids will step up and win some contested ball.

int/  thomas - ellis - foley -  sub gordon or failing that, s edwards / mcdonough/ lloyd. reckon ellis foley thomas and gordon give a good mix of midfield rotations. foley and ellis really need to step up. gordon is one who can play forward and is a good size.
shame miles is not on the list proper would play him in a heartbeat.

outs would be
vickery,s edwards, grigg, mcdonough,newman, petterd,
ins
stephenson, gordon, jackson, knights,king, a edwards.
we all know 6 changes wont happen but i sure as hell hope we do it. dimma needs to send a very loud message early that performances like that are not acceptable and the players will be held accountable.

Ory

2 of those 3 KPFs 200cm ...
so in march this yr just before the season opener we had how many tall fwds under 200cm. whats that i hear you say, just one. my god how threakin thick are you sometimes.
by the way you gunna grow some balls and give me that list
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Judge Roughneck on December 01, 2014, 01:57:55 AM
reckon we need to sort out the second kpf spot. going by the off season  our reserves game last week and forward needs  the sort of thing id like to see happen.
fb/  morris - chaplin - astbury.   the talls are suspect imo but there isnt really any other options. reckon conca needs the play in front of him.
hb/ conca - rance - vlastuin
 
c/  houli - martin - deledio. imo a soft and very outside centre line. these blokes just have to start winning some contested ball and have a defensive impact.

hf/ knights - griffiths - king.     some will say its too tall i say rubbish. i have always believed a edwards should be played as a strong marking medium sized player. griffiths and riewoldt stay at home and hampson shares the ruck load with orren. king will at least add some defensive pressure and knights can kick a goal and has a bit of polish.
ff/ hampson  - riewoldt - a edwards.

ruck/ stephenson - jackson - cotchin. reckon the big o can at least compete in the ruck. never thought id say it in my lifetime but jackson adds some needed competetivness. cotchin must be praying some other mids will step up and win some contested ball.

int/  thomas - ellis - foley -  sub gordon or failing that, s edwards / mcdonough/ lloyd. reckon ellis foley thomas and gordon give a good mix of midfield rotations. foley and ellis really need to step up. gordon is one who can play forward and is a good size.
shame miles is not on the list proper would play him in a heartbeat.

outs would be
vickery,s edwards, grigg, mcdonough,newman, petterd,
ins
stephenson, gordon, jackson, knights,king, a edwards.
we all know 6 changes wont happen but i sure as hell hope we do it. dimma needs to send a very loud message early that performances like that are not acceptable and the players will be held accountable.

Ory

2 of those 3 KPFs 200cm ...
so in march this yr just before the season opener we had how many tall fwds under 200cm. whats that i hear you say, just one. my god how threakin thick are you sometimes.

are you implying griffiths and vickery wont be able to work in the same 22?

or two of the combination of: McKenzie, griffiths and vickery. assuming mckenzie  grows 4 cm


Quote
by the way you gunna grow some balls and give me that list

hows this for a list

if mcbean gets and game, and mckenzie grows four cms. they will be the 19/20 200cm in the history of the club  :cheers


Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Owl on December 01, 2014, 07:49:33 AM
I say we just load the whole forward half with everyone over 195cm, one of the bastards has to take a mark right?
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Judge Roughneck on December 01, 2014, 02:13:22 PM
I say we just load the whole forward half with everyone over 195cm, one of the bastards has to take a mark right?

Id like to play deledio Martin  Cotchin.  forward

 :shh

In the past we have not had the midfield depth
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: JP Tiger on December 01, 2014, 02:59:38 PM
I say we just load the whole forward half with everyone over 195cm, one of the bastards has to take a mark right?

Id like to play deledio Martin  Cotchin.  forward

 :shh

In the past we have not had the midfield depth

Correct!  We haven't had the depth to rotate our better players into our forward line often enough, hopefully Ellis can come in & release one of them.  Deledio playing CHF was our best & most versatile option by a long way, his unique set of talents make him a gun key forward.  We all know how good Dusty is one out near goal, just ask Teddy Richards!  Cotch is a very good small forward too, great user & sharer of the pill.  We can't release all three at once, but we can set up more rotations.  Miles, Dusty & Ellis as a starting combo, then rotate like crazy!    :thumbsup   
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Judge Roughneck on December 01, 2014, 03:02:40 PM
deledio is unplayable @ chf

would crap on big guy on the lead and the ground and little guys in the air

if you left him there 90% of the game (will never happen, crap ourslf and put him back pocket when the opposition gets a run on) he win the coleman
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Chuck17 on December 01, 2014, 03:53:51 PM
Cotch is a very good small forward too, great user & sharer of the pill. 

Really I must have been reading another forum on here this year then
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: JP Tiger on December 01, 2014, 06:17:14 PM
Cotch is a very good small forward too, great user & sharer of the pill. 

Really I must have been reading another forum on here this year then

Goal Assists for 2014
Jack    18
Dusty  18
Sheds  16
Cotch   13
Lids     12
------------
Miles     2

To add some perspective - Ablett 19.  League high - Robbie Gray 33  C/o AFL site.

I have no idea what you have been reading or why ...
 
13 goal assists by Cotch isn't poor (Ablett on 19) & it shows his ability to share it & create goals for others is at least reasonable for a midfielder.  More time up forward would give him more chances to impact the scoreboard himself or to set up others.  I'd really like to see Cotch given a shot at the famed 'defensive small forward' role more often - providing we have the depth to cover him in the middle!       
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: (•))(©™ on December 01, 2014, 06:20:46 PM
Current RFC Fwd structure.

(http://www.futureofmankind.co.uk/Billy_Meier/gaiaguys/peace3.jpg)
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: (•))(©™ on December 01, 2014, 06:23:23 PM
This end is the goal square, fyi
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Chuck17 on December 01, 2014, 07:56:29 PM
Cotch is a very good small forward too, great user & sharer of the pill. 

Really I must have been reading another forum on here this year then

Goal Assists for 2014
Jack    18
Dusty  18
Sheds  16
Cotch   13
Lids     12
------------
Miles     2

To add some perspective - Ablett 19.  League high - Robbie Gray 33  C/o AFL site.

I have no idea what you have been reading or why ...
 
13 goal assists by Cotch isn't poor (Ablett on 19) & it shows his ability to share it & create goals for others is at least reasonable for a midfielder.  More time up forward would give him more chances to impact the scoreboard himself or to set up others.  I'd really like to see Cotch given a shot at the famed 'defensive small forward' role more often - providing we have the depth to cover him in the middle!       

It was this forum actually , good point on what I was reading and why, I often ask myself that question

FWIW I am with you on Cotch, we are blessed to have him and the knobs that can't see that are deluded
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: the claw on December 01, 2014, 09:23:43 PM
hmm people wanted to play riewoldt vickery griffiths and ffs at times mcbean in the one fwd line this yr. yet the same people complained about the lack of fwd pressure and how easy sides took the ball out of our fwd line. go figure.

 what was the area of biggest failure this yr, whats that i hear the fwd line.
the epitimy of madness is to do the same thing over and over expecting different results each time.or maybe some really do believe in magical fairies.


on 6 occasions last yr we played all of vickery, riewoldt, and griffiths in the same fwd line. we lost on 4 occasions only beating a lamentable gws and carlton in rnd 2 where they should have overrun us.
id say playing all three in the same fwd line did not work,  it created all sorts of problems for us not the opposition. yet some wanted to add mcbean to the mix.

is there a place for vickery and griffiths in the same fwd line. imo no. both play exactly the same role and both have  shown  so far they are not good enough to play either the ruck role or kpf role exclusively. hence i dont believe we can play both. play one as a 2nd ruck with time fwd and find a more traditional kpf who is capable of playing kpf exclusively to partner riewoldt.

as for cotchin, deledio, martin here i was under the impression they rotated fairly regularly thru the fwd line. geez between the 3 they must have kicked close to 100 goals. there was nearly always one of em in the fwd half thus solving one of the flank problems.
my issue with this is i dont think any of them are good defensively, especially deledio and martin. geez that is going to cause a stir.

Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: The Big Richo on December 02, 2014, 12:00:40 PM
Martin and Deledio don't need to be good defensively.

Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: WA Tiger on December 02, 2014, 12:46:02 PM
God, lets not start the cuase to send them down back to learn their defensive roles AGAIN.. :banghead

Agree with you TBR!
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Penelope on December 02, 2014, 12:57:42 PM
hmm people wanted to play riewoldt vickery griffiths and ffs at times mcbean in the one fwd line this yr. yet the same people complained about the lack of fwd pressure and how easy sides took the ball out of our fwd line. go figure.

 what was the area of biggest failure this yr, whats that i hear the fwd line.
the epitimy of madness is to do the same thing over and over expecting different results each time.or maybe some really do believe in magical fairies.


on 6 occasions last yr we played all of vickery, riewoldt, and griffiths in the same fwd line. we lost on 4 occasions only beating a lamentable gws and carlton in rnd 2 where they should have overrun us.
id say playing all three in the same fwd line did not work,  it created all sorts of problems for us not the opposition. yet some wanted to add mcbean to the mix.

is there a place for vickery and griffiths in the same fwd line. imo no. both play exactly the same role and both have  shown  so far they are not good enough to play either the ruck role or kpf role exclusively. hence i dont believe we can play both. play one as a 2nd ruck with time fwd and find a more traditional kpf who is capable of playing kpf exclusively to partner riewoldt.

as for cotchin, deledio, martin here i was under the impression they rotated fairly regularly thru the fwd line. geez between the 3 they must have kicked close to 100 goals. there was nearly always one of em in the fwd half thus solving one of the flank problems.
my issue with this is i dont think any of them are good defensively, especially deledio and martin. geez that is going to cause a stir.

geez the moon must be about to collide with the earth, coz i fully agree about playing three tall forwards, and not just last year.

I know other teams do it with success, but over the last 3-4 years our forward line has worked much better with only two tall forwards.

whether this is simply a result of the dynamics of the players involved or down to coaching/gameplan i do not know.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Chuck17 on December 02, 2014, 02:31:10 PM
Need to do a rotational system where the third tall forward goes to the backline to work on their defensive skills
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Go Richo 12 on December 02, 2014, 08:24:26 PM
 :laugh:
I still think the best forward structure is two forward pockets either side of a full forward, preferably close to the goals, and two forward flankers either side of a centre half forward a little further up the ground.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: (•))(©™ on December 02, 2014, 08:26:49 PM
Just get the midfielders to kick them.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Chuck17 on December 02, 2014, 08:32:54 PM
:laugh:
I still think the best forward structure is two forward pockets either side of a full forward, preferably close to the goals, and two forward flankers either side of a centre half forward a little further up the ground.

Sometimes a simple plan is the best
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: WA Tiger on December 02, 2014, 08:45:52 PM
:laugh:
I still think the best forward structure is two forward pockets either side of a full forward, preferably close to the goals, and two forward flankers either side of a centre half forward a little further up the ground.

Would love to see that happen again.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: dwaino on December 02, 2014, 08:55:09 PM
Tortoise formation was also quite a handy forward structure

(http://lieseleroux.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/testudo.jpg)
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Chuck17 on December 02, 2014, 09:04:30 PM
Tortoise formation was also quite a handy forward structure

(http://lieseleroux.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/testudo.jpg)

Very effective versus superior but undisciplined enemy
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: dwaino on December 02, 2014, 09:14:49 PM
No good having 200cm blokes poking their  head out the top either.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Go Richo 12 on December 02, 2014, 09:17:04 PM
No one over 200 cms has ever been good at our club. This clearly explains why.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Penelope on December 02, 2014, 09:43:25 PM
 :lol
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: the claw on December 02, 2014, 11:15:07 PM
Martin and Deledio don't need to be good defensively.
yes they do, everyone in the team needs to be good defensively.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: the claw on December 02, 2014, 11:25:24 PM
hmm people wanted to play riewoldt vickery griffiths and ffs at times mcbean in the one fwd line this yr. yet the same people complained about the lack of fwd pressure and how easy sides took the ball out of our fwd line. go figure.

 what was the area of biggest failure this yr, whats that i hear the fwd line.
the epitimy of madness is to do the same thing over and over expecting different results each time.or maybe some really do believe in magical fairies.


on 6 occasions last yr we played all of vickery, riewoldt, and griffiths in the same fwd line. we lost on 4 occasions only beating a lamentable gws and carlton in rnd 2 where they should have overrun us.
id say playing all three in the same fwd line did not work,  it created all sorts of problems for us not the opposition. yet some wanted to add mcbean to the mix.

is there a place for vickery and griffiths in the same fwd line. imo no. both play exactly the same role and both have  shown  so far they are not good enough to play either the ruck role or kpf role exclusively. hence i dont believe we can play both. play one as a 2nd ruck with time fwd and find a more traditional kpf who is capable of playing kpf exclusively to partner riewoldt.

as for cotchin, deledio, martin here i was under the impression they rotated fairly regularly thru the fwd line. geez between the 3 they must have kicked close to 100 goals. there was nearly always one of em in the fwd half thus solving one of the flank problems.
my issue with this is i dont think any of them are good defensively, especially deledio and martin. geez that is going to cause a stir.

geez the moon must be about to collide with the earth, coz i fully agree about playing three tall forwards, and not just last year.

I know other teams do it with success, but over the last 3-4 years our forward line has worked much better with only two tall forwards.

whether this is simply a result of the dynamics of the players involved or down to coaching/gameplan i do not know.
hmm maybe the moons turned blue.
the fact most other teams do it with success just  leaves the dynamics of the players involved.
maybe just maybe it has something to do with so many 200cm ruck/fwds we play alongside the not so quick riewoldt. of course there is no place for a more traditional sized fwd line that seems to work so well at other clubs. that would just be silly.

Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Penelope on December 02, 2014, 11:39:20 PM
do you really believe that if these blokes were 2-3 cm shorter then the forward line would magically click playing 3 talls?

Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Smokey on December 02, 2014, 11:46:21 PM
Tortoise formation was also quite a handy forward structure


Very effective versus superior but undisciplined enemy

And quite useless when negotiating a low-wire entanglement.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: the claw on December 03, 2014, 01:58:37 AM
do you really believe that if these blokes were 2-3 cm shorter then the forward line would magically click playing 3 talls?
hmm shouldnt you be asking yourself that. you know what i think if you read what written. cmon stop going off on another tangent and ignoring what is being said. you dont need to ask that question if you was being genuine.

so its to be  questions with questions is it. i can see we are going to go far here eh.
how many 200cm players have become good consistent kpfs i ask  again. it aint hard to answer.but you blokes have done everything you can not to answer it. what 1 3 5 out of how many.

how many 200cm players have played exclusively kpf in a premiership in the last 10 yrs.

geez how many 200cm players have played fwd exclusively ever.


why is it so many of the better kpfs have been taken in the last 10 15 yrs in the 194 - 197 height range. but silly me to even suggest its a good  height range to look at when looking for a guide to take a kpf. even better to ignore that when replying. or even better ignore just about everything that has been said when replying or if we dont ignore whats been said just being plain old disingenuous.
you know i cant recall one topic where you have ever given a straight answer. there must be a mental problem to be this way id say. hm,m paranoia maybe. or maybe you just feel inadequate or threatened.

it  seems  you would rather take a 200cm kpf  because so many at that height work out, that is  gold.i can think of just two current players who play exclusively fwd at 200cm who are decent.
i cant think of one club who has more than ONE permanent  200cm fwd as part of their structure.
yep those 200cm fwds are taking the league by storm.

so let me get this straight. you arre saying most sides play three tall fwds  say 192cm 195cm and possibly even a fwd ruck at 200cm. but you cant determine if us playing the slow riewoldt at 195cm and two 200cm ruck/fwds actually affects the dynamics, wow. i feel sorry for ya.

yes it does seem the extra 3 cm makes a difference when it comes to finding good  kpfs. just my opinion by the way what is yours again. no dont answer im dont need to hear another non answer.

seems  you think theres plenty of kpfs  to be had at 200cm or that its not unusual for a 200cm player to be decent and play exclusively fwd, unbelievable. what is it again your arguing here. no dont answer that i dont want to go off on another inoccuous tangent where straight answers are unheard of.



Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Judge Roughneck on December 03, 2014, 05:00:47 AM
Absence of proof is not proof of absence


Given the following facts:

 - The club is about 150 years old
 - There have only been 18 - 200cm / 200cm plus players in the club long history
- a vast majority of these, have been on the list recent years, or are on it currently
 - Corey Ellis is the same size as jack dyer
 - the number of highly rated tall kpp drafted high in recent years


Is it not possible. That the future will contain more 200cm kpf regardless of the past statistics?
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: froars on December 03, 2014, 06:32:26 AM
End of season and I don't think they rectified much during the year.  In fact, I think Jack is becoming a liability - or more of one perhaps.  He is the last of the dinosaur full forwards that sit around goal getting double teamed.  He has to do more next year around the ground to justify his spot, and I don't think he has the ability to do that, to play a more versatile role for the team other than a one trick pony.  Basically, he has to work harder.  Forwards do more these days and the game is passing him by.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: 1965 on December 03, 2014, 07:26:49 AM
Absence of proof is not proof of absence


Given the following facts:

 - The club is about 150 years old
 - There have only been 18 - 200cm / 200cm plus players in the club long history
- a vast majority of these, have been on the list recent years, or are on it currently
 - Corey Ellis is the same size as jack dyer
 - the number of highly rated tall kpp drafted high in recent years


Is it not possible. That the future will contain more 200cm kpf regardless of the past statistics?

Judge making sense, OMG what is the world coming to.

 :lol
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Penelope on December 03, 2014, 09:36:25 AM
do you really believe that if these blokes were 2-3 cm shorter then the forward line would magically click playing 3 talls?
hmm shouldnt you be asking yourself that. you know what i think if you read what written. cmon stop going off on another tangent and ignoring what is being said. you dont need to ask that question if you was being genuine.

so its to be  questions with questions is it. i can see we are going to go far here eh.
how many 200cm players have become good consistent kpfs i ask  again. it aint hard to answer.but you blokes have done everything you can not to answer it. what 1 3 5 out of how many.

how many 200cm players have played exclusively kpf in a premiership in the last 10 yrs.

geez how many 200cm players have played fwd exclusively ever.


why is it so many of the better kpfs have been taken in the last 10 15 yrs in the 194 - 197 height range. but silly me to even suggest its a good  height range to look at when looking for a guide to take a kpf. even better to ignore that when replying. or even better ignore just about everything that has been said when replying or if we dont ignore whats been said just being plain old disingenuous.
you know i cant recall one topic where you have ever given a straight answer. there must be a mental problem to be this way id say. hm,m paranoia maybe. or maybe you just feel inadequate or threatened.

it  seems  you would rather take a 200cm kpf  because so many at that height work out, that is  gold.i can think of just two current players who play exclusively fwd at 200cm who are decent.
i cant think of one club who has more than ONE permanent  200cm fwd as part of their structure.
yep those 200cm fwds are taking the league by storm.

so let me get this straight. you arre saying most sides play three tall fwds  say 192cm 195cm and possibly even a fwd ruck at 200cm. but you cant determine if us playing the slow riewoldt at 195cm and two 200cm ruck/fwds actually affects the dynamics, wow. i feel sorry for ya.

yes it does seem the extra 3 cm makes a difference when it comes to finding good  kpfs. just my opinion by the way what is yours again. no dont answer im dont need to hear another non answer.

seems  you think theres plenty of kpfs  to be had at 200cm or that its not unusual for a 200cm player to be decent and play exclusively fwd, unbelievable. what is it again your arguing here. no dont answer that i dont want to go off on another inoccuous tangent where straight answers are unheard of.
LMAO straight answers you ask for but you pile out this long winded dribble.
First of all, just because someone doesnt agree with you,that doesnt mean they believe the extreme opposite. that is just either stupid or disingenuous.

Bottom line is that you were the one that made a comment about needing our KPF to be under 200cm for team balance.

You are the one that contanstly has gone about how many 200cm KPF have made it, yet not once have you talked about the attributes of a KPF.

Your whole argument has been around their height, nothing else, so what conclusions can anyone draw about your views?

Pretty sure i summed up my view with this

surely the taller the kpf is, with all other thing being equal, the harder he is to match up on?
Did you not read, forget or just conveniently ignore it.

At the end of the day, i am not going to write a bloke off for being a KPF because he is tall, id rather look at his football ability.

Everything you have posted on the subject suggests that you would, while ignoring his football ability.

It;s amazing how when we actually agree on something, you find a way to argue. are you really that petty?
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Judge Roughneck on December 15, 2014, 11:49:36 AM
Absence of proof is not proof of absence


Given the following facts:

 - The club is about 150 years old
 - There have only been 18 - 200cm / 200cm plus players in the club long history
- a vast majority of these, have been on the list recent years, or are on it currently
 - Corey Ellis is the same size as jack dyer
 - the number of highly rated tall kpp drafted high in recent years


Is it not possible. That the future will contain more 200cm kpf regardless of the past statistics?

Judge making sense, OMG what is the world coming to.

 :lol

 :damnpc :damnpc
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: one-eyed on December 21, 2014, 07:12:32 PM
For those that like quirky graphical stats. We are above AFL average for long distance goals and below average for close-in goals (inside 15m).


Champion Data AFL @championdata twitter:

"Where every team took (green) and conceded (red) shots at goal in 2014."

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B3LG6CkCAAAL_WS.png:large)
https://twitter.com/championdata/status/536710007257972736
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: yellowandback on December 21, 2014, 08:24:20 PM
Yes but are we above average for 200cm+ kpfs who have made it?
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: lamington on December 22, 2014, 03:42:29 PM
No surprise Adelaide, Hawthorn, and Port have done really well within 15m of goal. Again this tells us we need a goal sneak or anyone really to back Jack up ala Gunston and Roughead. Can't recall the last decent small crumbing forward we've had. Andrew Krakouer? Nathan Brown?
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Andyy on December 22, 2014, 09:48:15 PM
Nathan Brown for sure. We identified a top talent and went and paid for him.

But for that broken leg it worked a charm. Need to do it again if we're to win a flag with Lids imo.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Stalin on August 09, 2015, 12:39:28 PM
high humidity does not make for wet weather football or create a wet ball.

Is it quantum physics to understand that March Queensland weather involves higher humidity and dew % compared to dry Victorian conditions?
Thus making it closer to wet conditions than dry? Not to mention the higher amount of sweating = slippery pill. I apologise if that is difficult to understand, I assumed wrong.

But surely you can see having 3 KP forwards in March on the GC was a bad idea?

Keep Smiling Al.
lets see sam day 196/103, charlie dixon 200/105, tom lynch 199/101.  the same sort of structure worked okay for gc.
keep on saying it there is nothing wrong with the way we structured up and intend to structure up.  fact is good sides maintain their structure no matter the conditions.
if we talk about the quality of our talls then perhaps we will get closer to what the problem is. most certainly out talls were poor it wont matter who we play if we get that sort of output and performance from them we will fail.

every single side plays two permanent kpfs. every single side also compliments them with a ruck/for or for/ruck  and that is a minimum.
we have numbers but do we have the quality within those numbers. not imo.

Apparently

Charlie Dixon - port
Jay the German - freo


Wtf is Richmond doing
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Eat_em_Alive on August 09, 2015, 03:07:17 PM
Locked and loaded  :thumbsup
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Tigeritis™©® on August 09, 2015, 04:17:47 PM
Even though we have the worst forward line in top eight we do have the second best defence in the top eight.  :thumbsup :thumbsdown

We need goal kickers but Blair & FJ was too busy trying to get Trengove over the line for a first round pick.  :rollin
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Stalin on November 25, 2015, 01:02:20 PM
Locked and loaded  :thumbsup

there is certainly a lot of options  :shh
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: the claw on December 15, 2015, 06:54:44 PM
Locked and loaded  :thumbsup
LOL We have been locked and loaded for the last three yrs.
We have one decent tall defender, one decent tall fwd one okay ruckman and the rest of the talls is a mish mash of kids hacks and so so players.Locked and loaded and back on the road to nowhere.

Just one bad run of injuries and there will be no talk of top 4 and premierships, instead the talk will be how to avoid the spoon.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Willy on December 15, 2015, 07:18:49 PM

Just one bad run of injuries and there will be no talk of top 4 and premierships, instead the talk will be how to avoid the spoon.

Dream come true for you
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Stalin on December 15, 2015, 07:24:52 PM
Well Lennon out till 2018
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: the claw on December 15, 2015, 08:31:51 PM

Just one bad run of injuries and there will be no talk of top 4 and premierships, instead the talk will be how to avoid the spoon.

Dream come true for you
Why would you say that im just being realistic about our talls and our depth. You know instead of spitting the old dummy and talking about dreams you have nfi about tell me in a reasoned way why our tall depth is so good and why we could still make the 8 without Rance, Riewoldt, and big Ivan. I have aready seen what happens to the backline when Rance doesnt play and what i have seen of Vickery and Griffiths to date makes me cringe.

Do we really want to talk about losing Big Ivan?  Hmm i thought not.

I am prepared as usual to put it out there. We will struggle to make the 8 even injury free. I shudder to think what will happen if we have a bad injury run which has not happened in Hardwicks time.

Who was our marqee player who is going to take us to the next level? Oh yeah  softie Yarran, whos going to get the ball to him? we know he wont go and get it for himself.I shudder to think Grigg, Houli, Grimes, Vickery,Yarran, Ellis, Chaplin weak soft pricks and then theres the mentaly weak pricks na better to not go there yet.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Willy on December 15, 2015, 08:44:50 PM

Just one bad run of injuries and there will be no talk of top 4 and premierships, instead the talk will be how to avoid the spoon.

Dream come true for you
tell me in a reasoned way why our tall depth is so good and why we could still make the 8 without Rance, Riewoldt, and big Ivan.

lol, where are you pulling this poo from?

I think we would be very hard pressed to make finals from that position. 

To lose two AA big men and your 1st choice ruckman for the whole season would be pretty unfortunate. I think even the best teams would struggle with that.

What's your point?

For the record, I'm actually not bullish about our club's chances next year. I think there are plenty of "ifs" that will need to go our way if we are to do anything significant in 2016. I just don't seek out negativity and rejoice in hanging poo on the club they way you do.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: the claw on December 15, 2015, 09:49:09 PM

Just one bad run of injuries and there will be no talk of top 4 and premierships, instead the talk will be how to avoid the spoon.

Dream come true for you
tell me in a reasoned way why our tall depth is so good and why we could still make the 8 without Rance, Riewoldt, and big Ivan.

lol, where are you pulling this poo from?

I think we would be very hard pressed to make finals from that position. 

To lose two AA big men and your 1st choice ruckman for the whole season would be pretty unfortunate. I think even the best teams would struggle with that.

What's your point?

For the record, I'm actually not bullish about our club's chances next year. I think there are plenty of "ifs" that will need to go our way if we are to do anything significant in 2016. I just don't seek out negativity and rejoice in hanging poo on the club they way you do.
[/quote You think i rejoice in hanging poo on the club wow.  Its called reality.
I can think of one side this year who made a gf who lost as much. Its not about rejoicing its about being honest. Most sides will drop off losing those players  but if we lose them we will finish bottom third.Thats the difference between middling and top.
I dont rejoice in anything remotely involved with the club not onfield good or bad. Theres only getting it right and getting it wrong. IMO We still get far too much wrong and our results reflect that.
If negativity means a lack of sugar coating thats fine by me.

So 7 yrs into Hardwicks rebuild and your still not bullish about our chances what does that say? oh yeay lets all be positive ffs.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Stalin on March 07, 2016, 08:47:24 PM
Chol

Chol

Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: 🏅Dooks on March 07, 2016, 09:42:29 PM
Yessss big man  :clapping
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Diocletian on March 07, 2016, 10:46:57 PM
No shortage of options this year.....


Talls: Riewoldt/ McBean/Vickery /Chol/Griffiths/ (?Mckenzie?)

Small /medium/resting mids: Rioli/Yarran/Edwards/Butler/Markov/Deledio/Martin/Cotchin/Lennon/Lloyd/Short/Lambert/Morris*

Swingmen: Moore/Astbury/Chaplin*

Resting tall: Maric/Hamspud(har har)


*according to the Supercoach Seven of Nine


Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: lamington on March 08, 2016, 12:18:37 AM
No shortage of options this year.....


Talls: Riewoldt/ McBean/Vickery /Chol/Griffiths/ (?Mckenzie?)

Small /medium/resting mids: Rioli/Yarran/Edwards/Butler/Markov/Deledio/Martin/Cotchin/Lennon/Lloyd/Short/Lambert/Morris*

Swingmen: Moore/Astbury/Chaplin*

Resting tall: Maric/Hamspud(har har)


*according to the Supercoach Seven of Nine

something tells me Dimma will try Rance at FF at some point this year ala Harry Taylor a few season back
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Tigeritis™©® on March 08, 2016, 06:40:41 PM
This was definitely an area that frustrated me a lot last year. I hope they've improved this over the summer.  :pray
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Stalin on March 08, 2016, 08:00:24 PM
No shortage of options this year.....

More reason Lids should play back
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Diocletian on March 08, 2016, 08:08:39 PM
Good idea - if Brenton Sanderson was coaching every other side....
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: the claw on March 08, 2016, 09:24:39 PM
No shortage of options this year.....


Talls: Riewoldt/ McBean/Vickery /Chol/Griffiths/ (?Mckenzie?)

Small /medium/resting mids: Rioli/Yarran/Edwards/Butler/Markov/Deledio/Martin/Cotchin/Lennon/Lloyd/Short/Lambert/Morris*

Swingmen: Moore/Astbury/Chaplin*

Resting tall: Maric/Hamspud(har har)


*according to the Supercoach Seven of Nine
McBean to date dud.Vickery to date ordinary.Chol very skinny first yr rookie.Griffiths dud to date. McKenzie suffering depression who knows when he will get back. Whos the one missing just imagine if he is lost  is there any quality  outside of him.
This is the state of our tall fwd stocks after 6 years of Hardwick and 10 yrs of Jackson.

WE can do the same sort of thing for most areas of the list. Top end talent in most areas is shallow  there is not enough and the drop off to the next tiers  is like falling of the face of Everest.

Where is our 35 -40 goal a yr sml fwd  oh i see we are still waiting and hoping,  one of the players on the list can become this. Arent we supposed to be a top 4 side.Again 6 yrs of dimwit and 10 yrs of Jackson and still we wait.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: JP Tiger on March 08, 2016, 09:59:04 PM
No shortage of options this year.....


Talls: Riewoldt/ McBean/Vickery /Chol/Griffiths/ (?Mckenzie?)

Small /medium/resting mids: Rioli/Yarran/Edwards/Butler/Markov/Deledio/Martin/Cotchin/Lennon/Lloyd/Short/Lambert/Morris*

Swingmen: Moore/Astbury/Chaplin*

Resting tall: Maric/Hamspud(har har)


*according to the Supercoach Seven of Nine
McBean to date dud.Vickery to date ordinary.Chol very skinny first yr rookie.Griffiths dud to date. McKenzie suffering depression who knows when he will get back. Whos the one missing just imagine if he is lost  is there any quality  outside of him.
This is the state of our tall fwd stocks after 6 years of Hardwick and 10 yrs of Jackson.

WE can do the same sort of thing for most areas of the list. Top end talent in most areas is shallow  there is not enough and the drop off to the next tiers  is like falling of the face of Everest.

Where is our 35 -40 goal a yr sml fwd  oh i see we are still waiting and hoping,  one of the players on the list can become this. Arent we supposed to be a top 4 side.Again 6 yrs of dimwit and 10 yrs of Jackson and still we wait.
Jack says hello, he wonders if you've seen his 2 Coleman Medals anywhere?  He keeps forgetting them too!  Then Lids, Cotch & Rancey were going to pop in but they are going to a meeting of the AA players tonight.  Dusty, Milo & Sheds will pop in later ... :snidegrin
It is a pretty thin list when you leave out all the best players!   :lol
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Stalin on March 08, 2016, 11:31:37 PM
No shortage of options this year.....


Talls: Riewoldt/ McBean/Vickery /Chol/Griffiths/ (?Mckenzie?)

Small /medium/resting mids: Rioli/Yarran/Edwards/Butler/Markov/Deledio/Martin/Cotchin/Lennon/Lloyd/Short/Lambert/Morris*

Swingmen: Moore/Astbury/Chaplin*

Resting tall: Maric/Hamspud(har har)


*according to the Supercoach Seven of Nine
McBean to date dud.Vickery to date ordinary.Chol very skinny first yr rookie.Griffiths dud to date. McKenzie suffering depression who knows when he will get back. Whos the one missing just imagine if he is lost  is there any quality  outside of him.
This is the state of our tall fwd stocks after 6 years of Hardwick and 10 yrs of Jackson.

WE can do the same sort of thing for most areas of the list. Top end talent in most areas is shallow  there is not enough and the drop off to the next tiers  is like falling of the face of Everest.

Where is our 35 -40 goal a yr sml fwd  oh i see we are still waiting and hoping,  one of the players on the list can become this. Arent we supposed to be a top 4 side.Again 6 yrs of dimwit and 10 yrs of Jackson and still we wait.

McBean kicked most goals in Vfl at a young age

Vickery one of Select few in afl in his age group to have kicked 100 afl goals

Chol very promising


Deledio reiwoldt yarren Edwards Lennon rioli martin Cotchin

Hard to deny there is a lot of firepower
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Stalin on March 09, 2016, 07:50:53 AM
More so

We only require chol, bean, griff to be the 5/6th forward

Not the go to man
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: the claw on March 10, 2016, 01:30:50 AM
No shortage of options this year.....


Talls: Riewoldt/ McBean/Vickery /Chol/Griffiths/ (?Mckenzie?)

Small /medium/resting mids: Rioli/Yarran/Edwards/Butler/Markov/Deledio/Martin/Cotchin/Lennon/Lloyd/Short/Lambert/Morris*

Swingmen: Moore/Astbury/Chaplin*

Resting tall: Maric/Hamspud(har har)


*according to the Supercoach Seven of Nine
McBean to date dud.Vickery to date ordinary.Chol very skinny first yr rookie.Griffiths dud to date. McKenzie suffering depression who knows when he will get back. Whos the one missing just imagine if he is lost  is there any quality  outside of him.
This is the state of our tall fwd stocks after 6 years of Hardwick and 10 yrs of Jackson.

WE can do the same sort of thing for most areas of the list. Top end talent in most areas is shallow  there is not enough and the drop off to the next tiers  is like falling of the face of Everest.

Where is our 35 -40 goal a yr sml fwd  oh i see we are still waiting and hoping,  one of the players on the list can become this. Arent we supposed to be a top 4 side.Again 6 yrs of dimwit and 10 yrs of Jackson and still we wait.

McBean kicked most goals in Vfl at a young age

Vickery one of Select few in afl in his age group to have kicked 100 afl goals

Chol very promising


Deledio reiwoldt yarren Edwards Lennon rioli martin Cotchin

Hard to deny there is a lot of firepower
There is stuff all fire power  out side of one player.the performance of the fwd line says so.There is some potential with juniors but weather that potential is ever realised we await with bated breath,.
Take jack out and its just about the worst forward line in the comp to date. We want to pray it changes.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Stalin on March 10, 2016, 08:42:01 AM
No shortage of options this year.....


Talls: Riewoldt/ McBean/Vickery /Chol/Griffiths/ (?Mckenzie?)

Small /medium/resting mids: Rioli/Yarran/Edwards/Butler/Markov/Deledio/Martin/Cotchin/Lennon/Lloyd/Short/Lambert/Morris*

Swingmen: Moore/Astbury/Chaplin*

Resting tall: Maric/Hamspud(har har)


*according to the Supercoach Seven of Nine
McBean to date dud.Vickery to date ordinary.Chol very skinny first yr rookie.Griffiths dud to date. McKenzie suffering depression who knows when he will get back. Whos the one missing just imagine if he is lost  is there any quality  outside of him.
This is the state of our tall fwd stocks after 6 years of Hardwick and 10 yrs of Jackson.

WE can do the same sort of thing for most areas of the list. Top end talent in most areas is shallow  there is not enough and the drop off to the next tiers  is like falling of the face of Everest.

Where is our 35 -40 goal a yr sml fwd  oh i see we are still waiting and hoping,  one of the players on the list can become this. Arent we supposed to be a top 4 side.Again 6 yrs of dimwit and 10 yrs of Jackson and still we wait.

McBean kicked most goals in Vfl at a young age

Vickery one of Select few in afl in his age group to have kicked 100 afl goals

Chol very promising


Deledio reiwoldt yarren Edwards Lennon rioli martin Cotchin

Hard to deny there is a lot of firepower
There is stuff all fire power  out side of one player.the performance of the fwd line says so.There is some potential with juniors but weather that potential is ever realised we await with bated breath,.
Take jack out and its just about the worst forward line in the comp to date. We want to pray it changes.

take out

Roughed
Hawkins
Pavlich
Franklin

And  their respective sides don't look as flash do they
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Stalin on March 10, 2016, 08:58:06 AM
Can you give us the claw rating system

To define how good each of

Lennon
Deledio
Dusty
Cotchin
Edwards
Yarren

Are as afl standard forwards pls
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Penelope on March 10, 2016, 09:46:24 AM
No shortage of options this year.....


Talls: Riewoldt/ McBean/Vickery /Chol/Griffiths/ (?Mckenzie?)

Small /medium/resting mids: Rioli/Yarran/Edwards/Butler/Markov/Deledio/Martin/Cotchin/Lennon/Lloyd/Short/Lambert/Morris*

Swingmen: Moore/Astbury/Chaplin*

Resting tall: Maric/Hamspud(har har)


*according to the Supercoach Seven of Nine
McBean to date dud.Vickery to date ordinary.Chol very skinny first yr rookie.Griffiths dud to date. McKenzie suffering depression who knows when he will get back. Whos the one missing just imagine if he is lost  is there any quality  outside of him.
This is the state of our tall fwd stocks after 6 years of Hardwick and 10 yrs of Jackson.

WE can do the same sort of thing for most areas of the list. Top end talent in most areas is shallow  there is not enough and the drop off to the next tiers  is like falling of the face of Everest.

Where is our 35 -40 goal a yr sml fwd  oh i see we are still waiting and hoping,  one of the players on the list can become this. Arent we supposed to be a top 4 side.Again 6 yrs of dimwit and 10 yrs of Jackson and still we wait.

McBean kicked most goals in Vfl at a young age

Vickery one of Select few in afl in his age group to have kicked 100 afl goals

Chol very promising


Deledio reiwoldt yarren Edwards Lennon rioli martin Cotchin

Hard to deny there is a lot of firepower
There is stuff all fire power  out side of one player.the performance of the fwd line says so.There is some potential with juniors but weather that potential is ever realised we await with bated breath,.
Take jack out and its just about the worst forward line in the comp to date. We want to pray it changes.
funny how you list vickery as a good player when it suits your argument.

Cotchin,  Deledio, Rance Riewoldt, Edwards, Vickery all widely regarded as our better players
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: the claw on March 10, 2016, 02:59:31 PM
No shortage of options this year.....


Talls: Riewoldt/ McBean/Vickery /Chol/Griffiths/ (?Mckenzie?)

Small /medium/resting mids: Rioli/Yarran/Edwards/Butler/Markov/Deledio/Martin/Cotchin/Lennon/Lloyd/Short/Lambert/Morris*

Swingmen: Moore/Astbury/Chaplin*

Resting tall: Maric/Hamspud(har har)


*according to the Supercoach Seven of Nine
McBean to date dud.Vickery to date ordinary.Chol very skinny first yr rookie.Griffiths dud to date. McKenzie suffering depression who knows when he will get back. Whos the one missing just imagine if he is lost  is there any quality  outside of him.
This is the state of our tall fwd stocks after 6 years of Hardwick and 10 yrs of Jackson.

WE can do the same sort of thing for most areas of the list. Top end talent in most areas is shallow  there is not enough and the drop off to the next tiers  is like falling of the face of Everest.

Where is our 35 -40 goal a yr sml fwd  oh i see we are still waiting and hoping,  one of the players on the list can become this. Arent we supposed to be a top 4 side.Again 6 yrs of dimwit and 10 yrs of Jackson and still we wait.

McBean kicked most goals in Vfl at a young age

Vickery one of Select few in afl in his age group to have kicked 100 afl goals

Chol very promising


Deledio reiwoldt yarren Edwards Lennon rioli martin Cotchin

Hard to deny there is a lot of firepower
There is stuff all fire power  out side of one player.the performance of the fwd line says so.There is some potential with juniors but weather that potential is ever realised we await with bated breath,.
Take jack out and its just about the worst forward line in the comp to date. We want to pray it changes.
funny how you list vickery as a good player when it suits your argument.

Cotchin,  Deledio, Rance Riewoldt, Edwards, Vickery all widely regarded as our better players
Whats good for the goose is good for the gander Alison. ;)
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Petey on March 10, 2016, 03:32:45 PM
and you are the goose i take it?
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Penelope on March 10, 2016, 03:36:14 PM
 :lol
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Stalin on March 10, 2016, 04:24:41 PM
Can you give us the claw rating system

To define how good each of

Lennon
Deledio
Dusty
Cotchin
Edwards
Yarren

Are as afl standard forwards pls

lets go oracle, chop chop
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: torch on March 10, 2016, 11:40:30 PM
Is crap!

Has been since Hardwick existence!

If Jack wasn't there, we would be no
where near as what we are now!

No small forwards, no half forwards.

To defensive minded.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Tigeritis™©® on March 11, 2016, 12:11:09 AM
Still very very poor. Also our F50 defensive pressure is non existent.
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Diocletian on March 11, 2016, 12:34:52 AM
I'm sure we'll finally get it right in year 8....or 9.... :gotigers
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Penelope on March 11, 2016, 09:22:43 AM
Is crap!

To defensive minded.

Still very very poor. Also our F50 defensive pressure is non existent.

Can you two please get together and get your story straight?
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Tigeritis™©® on March 11, 2016, 09:33:22 AM
Is crap!

To defensive minded.

Still very very poor. Also our F50 defensive pressure is non existent.

Can you two please get together and get your story straight?
What's your opinion?
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Penelope on March 11, 2016, 09:57:54 AM
That you two need to get together and get your stories straight
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: Penelope on March 11, 2016, 06:03:03 PM
That you two need to get together and get your stories straight
Sorry I should of been more specific. I meant your opinion of Richmond's forward structure and F50 defensive pressure.
ask me again when i have watched some games
Title: Re: Forward Structure
Post by: WilliamPowell on March 11, 2016, 07:45:00 PM
SNIP  :banghead

Due to work I haven't been able to spend anytime here today

When i finally do all my time is spent snipping rubbish posts, childish nonsense, dleberate baiting and insultd

I don't care who started it but you all know the rules and that is keep your personal feuds of the forum

Continue with the rubbish that's gone on over the past 24-48 hours and this plate umpire will be calling "Strike"