One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: torch on November 25, 2012, 12:32:45 AM
-
Please play Griffiths in the forward line!
-
KPD.
-
CHF
Two ruckman size forwards in Vickery and Griffiths, seems a natural three man combination with Jack. It'd stretch most defense.
If god willing we have a good injury run, Rance Grimes Chaplin (Astbury McIntosh Mcbean) gives us the luxury of playing Griffin forward if dimma so chooses
-
I prefer him in the backline.
-
Will probably be injured so Hardwick won't need to worry about finding a spot for him. Doesn't get a gig down back when Rance, Grimesy & The Gardener are fit. 3rd tall up forward is his best bet
-
Will probably be injured so Hardwick won't need to worry about finding a spot for him. Doesn't get a gig down back when Rance, Grimesy & The Gardener are fit. 3rd tall up forward is his best bet
Then Elton comes in so the structure would not be too dissimilar.
(Or Astbury / McBean , maybe onhanlon)
-
Will probably be injured so Hardwick won't need to worry about finding a spot for him. Doesn't get a gig down back when Rance, Grimesy & The Gardener are fit. 3rd tall up forward is his best bet
Then Elton comes in so the structure would not be too dissimilar.
(Or Astbury / McBean , maybe onhanlon)
Clearly we have options
-
I'd like to see him at CHF. Lets hope he's injury free.
-
Dont care where he plays ,just would like to see him on the park
-
Would like to see him lineup at fullback and put it straight through the middle.
-
ff for me.
one thing for sure at least one of astbury or griffiths has to be developed as a key forward. we cant rely on vickery to play chf if hes to be a second ruck he has to play out of a pocket.
we have jack who is proven and we have a fill in in mcguane that is it.
look at the list
tall defenders in the clubs opinion
chaplin,rance,grimes, darrou, astbury, griffiths plus mcguane if need be and the new boy mcintosh.
now look at the tall forwards
riewoldt, elton, vickery who most are asking to play chf and 2nd ruck we go around in circles what happens to structure if our chf goes into the ruck for 40% of agame, mcguane lets face it he is a liability.
we need two more tall forwards, failing that one of astbury or griffiths just has to be developed up forward if not both of them.
-
Please play Griffiths in the forward line!
X2
-
Would like to see him in forwardline
-
Please play Griffiths in the forward line!
X2
x3
-
CHF is the obvious choice for super boot. he has the tricks to dominate this posi and really make his mark
-
ff for me.
one thing for sure at least one of astbury or griffiths has to be developed as a key forward. we cant rely on vickery to play chf if hes to be a second ruck he has to play out of a pocket.
we have jack who is proven and we have a fill in in mcguane that is it.
That's BS Jack isn't proven until he wins a Coleman kicking 150
-
Makes 100% sense to me. Griffiths should go forward and lead up the wings to provide a transitional target from HB. He could easily spin around and launch it quickly and deeply into our F50 then and give Jack and Vickery every chance in the world to compete one out with their opponents. He is also quick on the lead and agile enough to turn his opponent inside out so he could double back and double lead giving him every chance to roost goals himself. The only downside to him going forward is that his super boot was great to kick over the zones from kickins and his height and speed made him a tough opponent on leading forwards.
I still think we needs more firepower up forward rather than down back currently.
-
Looks a gun CHB in the making. Leave him in the backline.
-
Looks a gun CHB in the making. Leave him in the backline.
x 2
His disposal alone is just what we need out of the back half ;D
-
Hard decision would love two for each end! But unless he can improve his spoiling I believe the forward line is for him
-
I think he'll play as the third man up in defence now that Grimes seems stuffed.
Not sure he gets involved enough to be a KPF.
-
I think he'll play as the third man up in defence now that Grimes seems stuffed.
Not sure he gets involved enough to be a KPF.
gotta ask do you think he gets involved enough as a kpd. mate hes been in the main underwhelming.
he may move well and he may be able to roost a ball but theres more to being an afl player than that. i reckon people get sucked in by these two things and expect him to be something he aint.
has always been a ff and should be played there.
ffs jayden post was infinately more involved in games down back than griffiths and we cut him.
im not having a go at him either i understand the injuries etc he has heaps of potential and that is about all hes getting by on atm potential.
we have a 200cm power forward whos quick is a great kick and you want him to play third tall down back.
if he plays back imo its kp or nothing. he wants to start consistently taking marks managing to spoil in the air consistently applying pressure without the ball laying a few tackles and he sure as hell wants find a heap more ball if hes to utilise his footskills.
play him at ff his 8 possesions a game may equate to 2 or 3 goals a game. plonk him deep forward and at the least he has to have a tall defender on him and what a long target if we have no option but go long. imo if he can start taking some big marks its ideal.
plonk him deep and let him lead at the ball and most tall defenders will struggle to go with him. he can go out past 50 and still be dangerous with his kick.
he is definately being wasted in the back line. besides we have dire need of tall forwards the list is screaming out for him and possibly another to develop forward.
-
Claw I rarely agree with you ,but on this i do 100%
-
The risk of re-injuring his shoulders is too great to warrant throwing Griffo in the forward line at this point in time. The club knows what theyre doing, and is very aware of his attributes as well as his shortcomings. It's not just what a player brings to the table, it's also about how he fits into the team's structure.
-
I think he'll play as the third man up in defence now that Grimes seems stuffed.
Not sure he gets involved enough to be a KPF.
gotta ask do you think he gets involved enough as a kpd. mate hes been in the main underwhelming.
he may move well and he may be able to roost a ball but theres more to being an afl player than that. i reckon people get sucked in by these two things and expect him to be something he aint.
has always been a ff and should be played there.
ffs jayden post was infinately more involved in games down back than griffiths and we cut him.
im not having a go at him either i understand the injuries etc he has heaps of potential and that is about all hes getting by on atm potential.
we have a 200cm power forward whos quick is a great kick and you want him to play third tall down back.
if he plays back imo its kp or nothing. he wants to start consistently taking marks managing to spoil in the air consistently applying pressure without the ball laying a few tackles and he sure as hell wants find a heap more ball if hes to utilise his footskills.
play him at ff his 8 possesions a game may equate to 2 or 3 goals a game. plonk him deep forward and at the least he has to have a tall defender on him and what a long target if we have no option but go long. imo if he can start taking some big marks its ideal.
plonk him deep and let him lead at the ball and most tall defenders will struggle to go with him. he can go out past 50 and still be dangerous with his kick.
he is definately being wasted in the back line. besides we have dire need of tall forwards the list is screaming out for him and possibly another to develop forward.
I honestly have a feeling he's more chance of becoming a gun CHB or FB than forward.
Seems to me a player who benefits from being led to the ball and who can spoil/mark from behind than having his shoulders punched.
He's got a very cool head and makes good decision with the footy. Quite like him in the backline to be honest.
-
Doesn't take enough marks
-
doesnt take enough marks???????????he aint on the park long enough
-
Dont agree with people saying less knocks in the backline than forward line. It aint forward's knocking fowards...
-
I think he'll play as the third man up in defence now that Grimes seems stuffed.
Not sure he gets involved enough to be a KPF.
gotta ask do you think he gets involved enough as a kpd. mate hes been in the main underwhelming.
he may move well and he may be able to roost a ball but theres more to being an afl player than that. i reckon people get sucked in by these two things and expect him to be something he aint.
has always been a ff and should be played there.
ffs jayden post was infinately more involved in games down back than griffiths and we cut him.
im not having a go at him either i understand the injuries etc he has heaps of potential and that is about all hes getting by on atm potential.
we have a 200cm power forward whos quick is a great kick and you want him to play third tall down back.
if he plays back imo its kp or nothing. he wants to start consistently taking marks managing to spoil in the air consistently applying pressure without the ball laying a few tackles and he sure as hell wants find a heap more ball if hes to utilise his footskills.
play him at ff his 8 possesions a game may equate to 2 or 3 goals a game. plonk him deep forward and at the least he has to have a tall defender on him and what a long target if we have no option but go long. imo if he can start taking some big marks its ideal.
plonk him deep and let him lead at the ball and most tall defenders will struggle to go with him. he can go out past 50 and still be dangerous with his kick.
he is definately being wasted in the back line. besides we have dire need of tall forwards the list is screaming out for him and possibly another to develop forward.
I honestly have a feeling he's more chance of becoming a gun CHB or FB than forward.
Seems to me a player who benefits from being led to the ball and who can spoil/mark from behind than having his shoulders punched.
He's got a very cool head and makes good decision with the footy. Quite like him in the backline to be honest.
Same and I recall in a few games him getting a fair bit of the ball. Hes barely strung together 40 games of footy over the past 4-5 years, he needs games and "the feel of ball slap on hand" to borrow a saying from one of oer's finest ;D Playing back allows him to get more involved in the play and as his confidence grows he can become more of a release man rather than Rance.
Definitely has the makings of a true KPP swingman
-
Dont agree with people saying less knocks in the backline than forward line. It aint forward's knocking fowards...
Exactly. There's not a position on the ground where you have a small risk of getting injured. You can get injured in any position and Griffo normally hurts himself when he's putting his socks on anyway. Doesn't get anywhere near enough footy and that needs to change next year. Riewoldt is incapable of sharing the square so Full Forward is out of the question as well. CHF is up for grabs
-
Quite the conundrum has size and strength for the backline but equally he is mobile enough to use at CHF. Marking 80 out and penetrating disposal to fwd targets is something we clearly lack. Will give us another dimension. If he marks within 60 it's a legitimate shot at goal.
Makes Grimes or Astbury and their fitness so critical for our backline freeing up Griff to play at CHF.
-
CHF hardest spot to play.
-
CHF hardest spot to play.
It's why Jack doesn't play there...
:fishing
-
Jacks a bit fat/slow.
Suited to the square
-
Just became a lot more likely Griffo will play down back again with the latest setback to Grimes.
-
Astbury is the key.
-
any chf worth their salt can play chb, and visa versa.
-
Richo couldn't and he's the best CHF the game has had in a very long time apart from Duck
-
couldn't or didn't?
-
He couldn't play down back to save his life
-
jack has footy smarts one of the biggest needs to play chf. his lack of pace doesnt count so much when you have to run all the time. at ff jacks lack of pace has regularly cost us dearly its one reason why he struggles on frawley . frawley easily has him covered on the lead and out bodies him with greater strength 99 time out of 100.
we have an ideal structure to develop up forward but we refuse to go down that path.
vickery in a fp allows us to have him play significant development time in the ruck. he is the resting ruckman there. why play him in a key post only to lose your structure for 40% of a game do collingwood geelong wce etc do this not on your life. are we really going to ask him to play chf and then spend significant time in the ruck. we really cant have it both ways.
so who plays or who do we develop at chf for when vickery is in ruck bloody hell we cant find 1 chf yet alone two.
griffiths at ff as i said in the other post. hes a natural ff who provides just about every option you could wish for. size height strength speed and hopefully contesti=ed marking.
riewoldt at chf and in the short term while griffiths and vickery develop we may lose a bit of scoring power by playing him here. just my opinion but jacks attributes a better suited to this role than ff.
looking at the list imo astbury should be developed as a chf and todd elton as a second ruck come forward. that leaves us needing to recruit another young ff to round out our list of forwards.
finally while it is certainly possible based on what ive seen of both astbury and griffiths playing as defenders they have done nothing at all to make them standouts in fact i see them struggle with key aspects of the role. i have already said i believe post has shown more as a defender and we cut him.
imo they have far more value and upside as forwards.
to me a lot of it comes down to having just a bit more patience and reign in the expectations. this is what happens when you build a list with smls/med first you sort of stagnate while you wait for your structure talls to develop.
looking from my list perspective we have
tall forwards
riewoldt mature, griffiths junior, astbury development, elton junior, mcguane mature. definately need at least one more genuine tall forward.
tall defenders
chaplin mature, rance development , grimes ijuryhow long?? junior , mcintosh junior, darrou junior. i personally would like us to target at least one more tall defender even a mature one like kyle hartigan,
that would mean we could afford to actually develop one of astbury or griffiths or both as a tall forward where they should be developed imo.
rucks
maric mature, derickx mature, vickery ruck/for development, mcbean ruck/def junior. a good number it does lack a junior of marics type. with this all i can say is they must relly think derickx will come on in leaps and bounds yet they have hardly played him as a ruckman.
so not only do i think astbury and griffiths more suited to key forward roles by developing them there we actually go a fair way to balancing the list out properly and have development occuring to cove all areas and provide some sort of depth.
-
It's probablu not going to happen. Riewoldt doesn't have a big enough tank to play CHF and he doesn't work hard enough anyway. He needs to play closer to goal where we can use his strengths. He's a very good kick for goal but not a great field kick. No use playing him CHF where he would get 10 touches and one or two goals. Need him deep where he can have those massive games where he bags 6+
-
It's probablu not going to happen. Riewoldt doesn't have a big enough tank to play CHF and he doesn't work hard enough anyway. He needs to play closer to goal where we can use his strengths. He's a very good kick for goal but not a great field kick. No use playing him CHF where he would get 10 touches and one or two goals. Need him deep where he can have those massive games where he bags 6+
jack certainly has the capacity to run all day. as junior his workrate was phenomenal. imo the injuries hes had and managed to carry has limited his work in this area certainly the last couple of yrs.
i reckon you would still get 40 plus goals a game out of him at chf.
as a chf he would be getting far more than 10 possies a game and as for firld kicking its decent besides his decision making is spot on and more than makes up for this.
everyone keeps on saying we need a chf well imo we have a good one we just dont play him there. everyone worries if we move jack where will the goals come from well we have a 200cm ff who was touted to be the next lockett andinstead of showing faith and patience in him as a forward we choose to develop him as a so so defender instead.
the key is development i get critical with those in charge because i feel far too often we play blokes out of their natural positions never to go back to what they had shown they do best.
-
Live in the Bellerive area, claw? Jack did have a good workrate as a youngster but that was a long time ago. I happen to have seen a bit of of him live when he played seniors at a young age in Tasmania. He's a full forward these days and he only brings his good workrate to the table every so often (eg end of season games like the ones against Port & Essendon). If he works hard every week he is too good not to play at full forward. When he is being lazy then yeah, chuck him up the field. But then he might have a sook
-
It's probablu not going to happen. Riewoldt doesn't have a big enough tank to play CHF and he doesn't work hard enough anyway. He needs to play closer to goal where we can use his strengths. He's a very good kick for goal but not a great field kick. No use playing him CHF where he would get 10 touches and one or two goals. Need him deep where he can have those massive games where he bags 6+
jack certainly has the capacity to run all day. as junior his workrate was phenomenal. imo the injuries hes had and managed to carry has limited his work in this area certainly the last couple of yrs.
i reckon you would still get 40 plus goals a game out of him at chf.
as a chf he would be getting far more than 10 possies a game and as for firld kicking its decent besides his decision making is spot on and more than makes up for this.
everyone keeps on saying we need a chf well imo we have a good one we just dont play him there. everyone worries if we move jack where will the goals come from well we have a 200cm ff who was touted to be the next lockett andinstead of showing faith and patience in him as a forward we choose to develop him as a so so defender instead.
the key is development i get critical with those in charge because i feel far too often we play blokes out of their natural positions never to go back to what they had shown they do best.
Your certainly an optimist Claw but if you think we can get 40 goals a game out of him you really need to call the club and let them in on your theory!! ;D
-
It's probablu not going to happen. Riewoldt doesn't have a big enough tank to play CHF and he doesn't work hard enough anyway. He needs to play closer to goal where we can use his strengths. He's a very good kick for goal but not a great field kick. No use playing him CHF where he would get 10 touches and one or two goals. Need him deep where he can have those massive games where he bags 6+
jack certainly has the capacity to run all day. as junior his workrate was phenomenal. imo the injuries hes had and managed to carry has limited his work in this area certainly the last couple of yrs.
i reckon you would still get 40 plus goals a game out of him at chf.
as a chf he would be getting far more than 10 possies a game and as for firld kicking its decent besides his decision making is spot on and more than makes up for this.
everyone keeps on saying we need a chf well imo we have a good one we just dont play him there. everyone worries if we move jack where will the goals come from well we have a 200cm ff who was touted to be the next lockett andinstead of showing faith and patience in him as a forward we choose to develop him as a so so defender instead.
the key is development i get critical with those in charge because i feel far too often we play blokes out of their natural positions never to go back to what they had shown they do best.
Your certainly an optimist Claw but if you think we can get 40 goals a game out of him you really need to call the club and let them in on your theory!! ;D
:lol
-
It's probablu not going to happen. Riewoldt doesn't have a big enough tank to play CHF and he doesn't work hard enough anyway. He needs to play closer to goal where we can use his strengths. He's a very good kick for goal but not a great field kick. No use playing him CHF where he would get 10 touches and one or two goals. Need him deep where he can have those massive games where he bags 6+
Agree, FF and sometimes a roaming fwd between FF and CHF, hes a smart player and knows where the right spots are. He is not quick enough for a CHF, a good CHF needs to go on big 40-50 metre repeat runs up the wings to give our runners out of defence an option, if people think his lack of pace is a liability at FF, get ready for some heartache when he loses the contest to a more nimble opponent on the wing. Nah, leave him in the fwd 50 where his footy nous and goal kicking ability can create goals out of nothing
-
+ Jack can't kick over 50m. If he had a big kick then maybe 40 goals from CHF but he doesn't so he won't unless he drops into the 50 a lot, which makes him playing CHF redundant.
-
CHF is the obvious choice for super boot. he has the tricks to dominate this posi and really make his mark
Whoa, would. Love to see him kick a goal from the centre square
-
gotta say i disagree. but just to keep the conversation going if pace is all important to play chf can someone tell me the super quick chf at each team. aside from franklin id say there arent really any. plus most of the two key forwards at each club especially the established ones are right up there for kicking goals.
i reiterate for me chf is all about smarts and workrate. imo jack has work rate or he used to i see no reason why he cant have it again.he certainly survives on footy smarts.
how often were all of us peeed of this yr with jack trying to one on one body opponents and fail. how peeed off were we that he would not lead it was a regular occurance imo far too many of his goals came from being opportunistic if you like.
how much better to have a 200cm and when fully developed powerhouse going one on one and clunking marks. . or just to change it up super quick on the lead where most cant go with him. these are the keys to your ff along with being a good kick. if griffiths is being beaten he can get on the bike and get outside 50 and still be dangerous.
in different circumstances a hypothetical, what should hawthorn do struggling down back play franklin back in a similar cirumstance to griffiths at richmond or continue to develop him as a forward. buddy may well have if developed there made a good chb but as a forward hes sensational. we need to allow griffiths to be sensational hes a natural full forward who needs to be develped as such.
play him at ff and get jack on his bike and at chf id take 40 goals from jack and 60 80 from griffiths anyday.
one final question anyone have the stats on the number of goals kicked outside 50 by all chf i bet my bottom dollar it is a low as. of course you will have blokes like cloke and buddy who can really thump it and kick more than their fair share outside 50 but even with them id bet its a small percentage besides ive seen jack kick outside 50 people make it sound like he cant kick over a jam tin.
-
any chf worth their salt can play chb, and visa versa.
Not true.
Its more easy for a chf to move back, than vice versa.
This is why Wayne Carey. Joni.brown etc. Are payed the big bucks.
I'm not sure how to word it, buts its easier to play with ones back to the goal. As opposed to facing the play and led etc. As a chf. Chb u will will be led to the ball. And don't have to make the play.
-
gotta say i disagree. but just to keep the conversation going if pace is all important to play chf can someone tell me the super quick chf at each team. aside from franklin id say there arent really any. plus most of the two key forwards at each club especially the established ones are right up there for kicking goals.
i reiterate for me chf is all about smarts and workrate. imo jack has work rate or he used to i see no reason why he cant have it again.he certainly survives on footy smarts.
how often were all of us peeed of this yr with jack trying to one on one body opponents and fail. how peeed off were we that he would not lead it was a regular occurance imo far too many of his goals came from being opportunistic if you like.
how much better to have a 200cm and when fully developed powerhouse going one on one and clunking marks. . or just to change it up super quick on the lead where most cant go with him. these are the keys to your ff along with being a good kick. if griffiths is being beaten he can get on the bike and get outside 50 and still be dangerous.
in different circumstances a hypothetical, what should hawthorn do struggling down back play franklin back in a similar cirumstance to griffiths at richmond or continue to develop him as a forward. buddy may well have if developed there made a good chb but as a forward hes sensational. we need to allow griffiths to be sensational hes a natural full forward who needs to be develped as such.
play him at ff and get jack on his bike and at chf id take 40 goals from jack and 60 80 from griffiths anyday.
one final question anyone have the stats on the number of goals kicked outside 50 by all chf i bet my bottom dollar it is a low as. of course you will have blokes like cloke and buddy who can really thump it and kick more than their fair share outside 50 but even with them id bet its a small percentage besides ive seen jack kick outside 50 people make it sound like he cant kick over a jam tin.
its not just speed BUT ABILITY TO GO ON LONG DAMAGING LEADS UP THE GROUND at full pelt. cloke is not quick but does this really well, taylor Walker does it in spurts, Josh Kennedy and Darling do it too. J.Brown used to do it in his prime. Jack cant go full pelt for more than 15-20metres max the last few years. We need someone who can go on long searching leads to give us a chop out by taking strong marks on the wings under pressure. Our biggest weakness last season was never having a big fwd do that. That's what type of CHF richmond needs. Really its quite obvious JR is not a CHF, hes a quality FF and can also play in that slot between FF and CHF and lose his opponent with guile in traffic.
-
Would love to see Griff at CHF . Imagine marking it from the kick in and sending it straight back over the sticks ..
We could have have Ivan , Vicks and Griff all 60m from goal waiting for the bomb out of defense and midgets like King and co all applying the pressure inside 50 would be a hard zone to get out of for opposition defenders..
-
Would love to see Griff at CHF . Imagine marking it from the kick in and sending it straight back over the sticks ..
We could have have Ivan , Vicks and Griff all 60m from goal waiting for the bomb out of defense and midgets like King and co all applying the pressure inside 50 would be a hard zone to get out of for opposition defenders..
Riewoldts paddock 8)
-
any chf worth their salt can play chb, and visa versa.
Not true.
Its more easy for a chf to move back, than vice versa.
This is why Wayne Carey. Joni.brown etc. Are payed the big bucks.
I'm not sure how to word it, buts its easier to play with ones back to the goal. As opposed to facing the play and led etc. As a chf. Chb u will will be led to the ball. And don't have to make the play.
I take it you've never played in the backline?
as a backman if you are constantly led to the ball you will get a bath from a good forward.
as for not having to make the play. what about when the ball is coming out of the last line of defense. It is the CHB you should be making the play.
To play both CHB and CHF you need to be a smart footballer with a big tank and the most important thing is to be able to take a contested mark.
The players you mentioned could all have played CHB, but they were so good that they more value to their clubs at CHF.
The only thing "easier" about playing in the backline is you can hit the losse ball running and not bother having to stop and turn around, but considering a KPP strength should be in the air and particularly contested marking, that s not that relevant.
-
They are both hard positions to play but not all who play in one of those spots can play in both. Richo was incapable of playing any position where he couldn't chase after the footy. Not sure Adelaide have tried big gun Rutten up forward very often ;D
But forget about these blokes. We have the best swingman in football today...
McG
-
They are both hard positions to play but not all who play in one of those spots can play in both. Richo was incapable of playing any position where he couldn't chase after the footy. Not sure Adelaide have tried big gun Rutten up forward very often ;D
But forget about these blokes. We have the best swingman in football today...
McG
Yesssssss the Big G
-
he will play back which will push newman or Vlas into the mid easy as that :thumbsup
-
gotta say i disagree. but just to keep the conversation going if pace is all important to play chf can someone tell me the super quick chf at each team. aside from franklin id say there arent really any. plus most of the two key forwards at each club especially the established ones are right up there for kicking goals.
i reiterate for me chf is all about smarts and workrate. imo jack has work rate or he used to i see no reason why he cant have it again.he certainly survives on footy smarts.
how often were all of us peeed of this yr with jack trying to one on one body opponents and fail. how peeed off were we that he would not lead it was a regular occurance imo far too many of his goals came from being opportunistic if you like.
how much better to have a 200cm and when fully developed powerhouse going one on one and clunking marks. . or just to change it up super quick on the lead where most cant go with him. these are the keys to your ff along with being a good kick. if griffiths is being beaten he can get on the bike and get outside 50 and still be dangerous.
in different circumstances a hypothetical, what should hawthorn do struggling down back play franklin back in a similar cirumstance to griffiths at richmond or continue to develop him as a forward. buddy may well have if developed there made a good chb but as a forward hes sensational. we need to allow griffiths to be sensational hes a natural full forward who needs to be develped as such.
play him at ff and get jack on his bike and at chf id take 40 goals from jack and 60 80 from griffiths anyday.
one final question anyone have the stats on the number of goals kicked outside 50 by all chf i bet my bottom dollar it is a low as. of course you will have blokes like cloke and buddy who can really thump it and kick more than their fair share outside 50 but even with them id bet its a small percentage besides ive seen jack kick outside 50 people make it sound like he cant kick over a jam tin.
its not just speed BUT ABILITY TO GO ON LONG DAMAGING LEADS UP THE GROUND at full pelt. cloke is not quick but does this really well, taylor Walker does it in spurts, Josh Kennedy and Darling do it too. J.Brown used to do it in his prime. Jack cant go full pelt for more than 15-20metres max the last few years. We need someone who can go on long searching leads to give us a chop out by taking strong marks on the wings under pressure. Our biggest weakness last season was never having a big fwd do that. That's what type of CHF richmond needs. Really its quite obvious JR is not a CHF, hes a quality FF and can also play in that slot between FF and CHF and lose his opponent with guile in traffic.
i agree jack has not gone on those spurts the last few yrs but that does not mean hes not capable of it in fact his early history says hes more than capable.
hes had a lot of injuries the last few yrs that wouldnt be a major reason why why he doesnt do it would it. play a game spend the week recovering basically. as i said chf is bout work rate as you yourself implied to say jack is incapable of lifting his work rate when fully fit is just plain wrong.
his footy attributes are definately more suited to chf the only thing missing is the work rate he had it once there is no reason to believe he cant have it again.
anyway we disagree i think the main problem is people are loath to remove a 60 goal a yr player out of ff.
me i think long term it would be to our benefit and actually allow us to try a very promising ff who has all the attributes for the role to play ff. it would also allow us to play vickery in the role we desperately need him to perform that of a ruck/forward without the need to rob peter to pay paul on game days.
i really would like to hear from the club about exactly what role they think vickery will play. after 4 yrs they must have a damn good idea.
is he to be developed as a ruckman to take over from maric or is he to be nothing more than a kpp.
if hes to be a kpp there is no way in hell he should be playing ruck.especially if they insist on playing him as a chf look at the work load. for starters. this would mean we need to find a third tall option to also play in the ruck.
to me we have the round pegs to fit in the round holes but we are trying to fit square ones in instead.
if hes to be a 60% forward 40% ruck he should play out of a pocket as the third tall option. i would have thought these are simple basic structures to go thru.
-
If Griffiths can stay fit - then he will easily overtake TV as the preferred CHF. The Backline should not need him as the have the key posts covered i.e. Chaplain & Rance - with others to support - Grimes (once fit), Batchelor, Dea, Houli etc
-
If Griffiths can stay fit - then he will easily overtake TV as the preferred CHF. The Backline should not need him as the have the key posts covered i.e. Chaplain & Rance - with others to support - Grimes (once fit), Batchelor, Dea, Houli etc
dont think so mate Vickers had a killer season last year and is back up ruck were as Grff isnt.
Griff will stay a Hfb
-
Must have missed that season
-
nah you must of seen last year as you have shown you clearly know what your talking about :clapping
-
nah you must of seen last year as you have shown you clearly know what your talking about :clapping
As resident guru I have to say that Vickery was quite good in 2011 but that's as far as I would go. 2012 was a year to forget but he has an injury to hide behind for a year or so now. Gold pass ;D Does offer a lovely lead up the corridor but often gets ignored because Jack in the pocket with 3 opponents is somehow considered a better option
-
(Riewoldt) He's a very good kick for goal but not a great field kick.
Disagree. Very good field kick.
-
(Riewoldt) He's a very good kick for goal but not a great field kick.
Disagree. Very good field kick.
Agree
-
If Grimes, Chaplin and Rance are all on the park then it gives Dimma the flexibility to push Griffs forward. However, if one or more go down then Big Benny will stay in defence.
-
Ben has a lot of trouble just seeing games out.I dont really care where he plays at the moment ,just happy to see him get some game time,because only with time on the park are we going to see wheres his footballing is at ,and how good he can be
-
If Grimes, Chaplin and Rance are all on the park then it gives Dimma the flexibility to push Griffs forward. However, if one or more go down then Big Benny will stay in defence.
Unless Astbury come good sooner rather than later.
-
Ben has a lot of trouble just seeing games out.I dont really care where he plays at the moment ,just happy to see him get some game time,because only with time on the park are we going to see wheres his footballing is at ,and how good he can be
^ agree mate...as long as he stays fit & healthy I'm just happy to see him on the park...think he gives us good flexibility and it's nice to be talking about having a multitude of blokes capable of playing similar spots as opposed to years gone by where we were begging/praying for CHF/CHB's
-
My good fellow I was a chb and not too shabby. I have lots of love for the defender.
If you do a poll on AFL coaches who can u most not afford to love.
Pavlich v mcpharlin
S Reid v Richards
Reiwoldt v France
Franklin v gibson whoever is chb
Hawkins v mackie
The key forward is higher demand.
Ca4ey > jackovic
any chf worth their salt can play chb, and visa versa.
Not true.
Its more easy for a chf to move back, than vice versa.
This is why Wayne Carey. Joni.brown etc. Are payed the big bucks.
I'm not sure how to word it, buts its easier to play with ones back to the goal. As opposed to facing the play and led etc. As a chf. Chb u will will be led to the ball. And don't have to make the play.
I take it you've never played in the backline?
as a backman if you are constantly led to the ball you will get a bath from a good forward.
as for not having to make the play. what about when the ball is coming out of the last line of defense. It is the CHB you should be making the play.
To play both CHB and CHF you need to be a smart footballer with a big tank and the most important thing is to be able to take a contested mark.
The players you mentioned could all have played CHB, but they were so good that they more value to their clubs at CHF.
The only thing "easier" about playing in the backline is you can hit the losse ball running and not bother having to stop and turn around, but considering a KPP strength should be in the air and particularly contested marking, that s not that relevant.