One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: one-eyed on February 12, 2013, 02:21:12 PM
-
On the knife's edge
afl.com.au
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
Richmond
Tyrone Vickery
Vickery didn't play after round 11 last year because of a shoulder injury and needs to rediscover his form of 2011 to have the graph heading back in the right direction. With increased competition from forward Todd Elton, who showed promise against the Indigenous All Stars in Alice Springs with a handful of nice marks, plus the presence of rookie ruckman Orren Stephenson, Vickery will be determined to remind the football world why he was a top-10 draft selection in 2008. He is expected to play in the NAB Cup after a strong pre-season.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-02-12/on-the-knifes-edge
-
Vickery??! Vickery's spot is not at risk. Until his form is an issue rather than his health, he is crucial to our team structure. We don't have another player who can cover him effectively in his role as CHF/2nd Ruck.
-
WTF is a key to our structure, has plenty more years considering how long we gave clean knees Hughes and lazy Jay.
Cue CD
-
WTF is a key to our structure, has plenty more years considering how long we gave clean knees Hughes and lazy Jay.
Cue CD
You'll have to do better than that.
-
LOL I give you rep points for that CD
-
Well I have to spread rep. You'll have to settle for a PM with a duncan donuts flavour thrown in
-
WTF is a key to our structure, has plenty more years considering how long we gave clean knees Hughes and lazy Jay.
Cue CD
Is that question for me Chuck or are you just having a joke with Coach? By 'key to our structure' I'm referring to his position on the field. In 2011 he was a genuine forward option and kicked 30+ goals while also giving our ruckman an opportunity to rest. I expect Vickery, with added size and experience plus an injury free preseason, to fulfill both elements of his role significantly better this year too. :cheers
-
I don't see TV who is still only 22 being on a knife's edge. Sure we're hoping he has a good year after a disappointing 2012 due to injury and that his shoulders are right now but I don't see him being given the flick/traded at the end of the year. Apart from the obvious (McGuane, White & co.), the likes of Nahas, Jacko and even Kingy would be more on the edge.
-
i reckon Ty is on as much of a knifes edge as cotch is
-
I think the Coach is on a knife edge, precariously placed on the Port/Tiger knife edges.
-
Damien Hardwick ...
Finals = contract extension
No Finals = terminated
-
Damien Hardwick ...
Finals = contract extension
No Finals = terminated
Disagree. I think you must qualify things first. If we don't make the finals and have had a dream run with injuries then he probably should go. If, however, we lose several key players and we are just pipped for a finals spot, he stays!
-
Im dying here :help
-
Dustin Martin
-
:shh
-
Dustin Martin
I reckon he might be sitting on the pointy end of the knife, not just the long edge. Big year for young Dusty in so many ways.
-
thread title gives me a hash craving
-
Hymie Glickstein
-
thread title gives me a hash craving
Rugged yet beautiful steak knives
-
WTF is a key to our structure, has plenty more years considering how long we gave clean knees Hughes and lazy Jay.
Cue CD
Is that question for me Chuck or are you just having a joke with Coach? By 'key to our structure' I'm referring to his position on the field. In 2011 he was a genuine forward option and kicked 30+ goals while also giving our ruckman an opportunity to rest. I expect Vickery, with added size and experience plus an injury free preseason, to fulfill both elements of his role significantly better this year too. :cheers
Nah nothing to do with you Stripes, it was as serious a comment as I offer these days based on the stupid article.
CD and I have differing views on Jay and I was expecting him to jump in (I love CD but on jay he is a bit off the planet)
-
You were a fan back in the day. Should have stayed on the bandwagon. I made a pooload of $$ by putting a grand on him to be Port's leading goal kicker in 2010. No one was expecting much but in Coach we trust :shh Did average more goals for time on the field than Riewoldt btw :shh
Sorry rogerd, I hope I haven't big noted myself here. Vickery does need a good year. For himself and for us.
-
WTF is a key to our structure, has plenty more years considering how long we gave clean knees Hughes and lazy Jay.
Cue CD
agree
-
I made a pooload of $$ by putting a grand on him to be Port's leading goal kicker in 2010.
Good on ya :thumbsup
-
Nahas for mine is the one that looks to be in jeopardy.. Still cant kick on his left and Sheds has definately moved past him for that forward spot. Nahas doesnt bring enough and we have moved past him..
-
I made a pooload of $$ by putting a grand on him to be Port's leading goal kicker in 2010.
Good on ya :thumbsup
You forgot to reply to the bit about him averaging more goals than Riewoldt for time spent on the field. :thumbsup
-
Sounds like adam thomson and his contested possies
If jay wasn't so fat he may have kicked more than jackie boy full stop
-
Sounds like adam thomson and his contested possies
If jay wasn't so fat he may have kicked more than jackie boy full stop
Sting ray Jay is only good for a handful of games a year anyway, never know a man to be so injury prone!
-
Sounds like adam thomson and his contested possies
If jay wasn't so fat he may have kicked more than jackie boy full stop
They averaged 2.8 and 2.9. shiltz though missed near 3 quarters against the crows, a quarter and 1/2 against Carlton and a fair amount of time on the sidelines against the Dogs. Fatness is an issue. All those problems playing at a club who has the least inside 50s of any club in the last 4 seasons
Sounds like adam thomson and his contested possies
If jay wasn't so fat he may have kicked more than jackie boy full stop
Sting ray Jay is only good for a handful of games a year anyway, never know a man to be so injury prone!
Very weird injuries. Riewoldt might get the odd injury if he ever performed a courageous act.
-
No argument,, Jack was kept and Jay has gone,, i support Jack and hope Jay doesnt get a kick against us.. i support the team not the player
-
It's a battle of the love children. Chuck v Coach & Shooter v Rooboy. Anyone else sticking their heads in actually has no idea what we're talking about ;D
-
hmmm... nothing like an elitist culture.. No wonder it infected the club so horrendously
-
Yeah well you come to Club80 and see if you quickly turn into a snobby wank or not. ;D
-
Yeah well you come to Club80 and see if you quickly turn into a snobby wank or not. ;D
How would you know, you have never been :huh
-
i dont admire status.. :wallywink or big noting.. i leave that for people who lack self esteem
-
Yeah well you come to Club80 and see if you quickly turn into a snobby wank or not. ;D
How would you know, you have never been :huh
I'm a veteran of Club80.
i dont admire status.. :wallywink or big noting.. i leave that for people who lack self esteem
You will never know anything until you attend Club80. And that's a fact, Jack
-
they do a good dip at club80, birdie num num :burgereater
cant tell you what flavour it is though
-
they do a good dip at club80, birdie num num :burgereater
cant tell you what flavour it is though
Would tell you what I've heard, but OE would have to snip it :banghead
-
You were a fan back in the day. Should have stayed on the bandwagon. I made a pooload of $$ by putting a grand on him to be Port's leading goal kicker in 2010. No one was expecting much but in Coach we trust :shh Did average more goals for time on the field than Riewoldt btw :shh
Good work.
Would have liked to have seen Jay working alongside Jack.
Semi understand why but it was an odd decision to have him on the list for 7 years & then move him on for peanuts at the same time Richo retired.
Making Cameron look pretty foolish now.
-
Vicks will be a 200 gamer ;)
-
It's a battle of the love children. Chuck v Coach & Shooter v Rooboy. Anyone else sticking their heads in actually has no idea what we're talking about ;D
Sometimes I have trouble understanding what I'm talking about let alone you peanuts
-
It's a battle of the love children. Chuck v Coach & Shooter v Rooboy. Anyone else sticking their heads in actually has no idea what we're talking about ;D
Sometimes I have trouble understanding what I'm talking about let alone you peanuts
Me too. I get into arguments on here and forget what they're even about
-
It's a battle of the love children. Chuck v Coach & Shooter v Rooboy. Anyone else sticking their heads in actually has no idea what we're talking about ;D
Sometimes I have trouble understanding what I'm talking about let alone you peanuts
Me too. I get into arguments on here and forget what they're even about
LMAO
-
It's a battle of the love children. Chuck v Coach & Shooter v Rooboy. Anyone else sticking their heads in actually has no idea what we're talking about ;D
Sometimes I have trouble understanding what I'm talking about let alone you peanuts
Me too. I get into arguments on here and forget what they're even about
Dementia could be a blessing for a tiger supporter.....
-
fair call
-
What?
-
Vickery??! Vickery's spot is not at risk. Until his form is an issue rather than his health, he is crucial to our team structure. We don't have another player who can cover him effectively in his role as CHF/2nd Ruck.
i constantly have issue with this thinking.
chf is almost the key [position on the ground yet we want to play a bloke there part time. no other team actually does this. they play two genuine kpfs and a tall player who is the second ruck.
to me vickery should start in a pocket, jack at ff, and griffiths/elton at chf. when ivan has a break vickery goes into the ruck, our structure is not lost. this then allows us to say bring a very good smaller marking player on to the ground whos excellent and quick on the lead like Aaron Edwards. its an ideal change up.
if vickery is to play chf we need to find a for/ruck
as for form well as far as i can see vickery has one half decent yr behind him form to me is very much an issue. from what ive seen elton to me already looks a better marking player.
-
at this point in time having griff or elton at CHF is like having a huge black hole there where every opposition attack would get sucked through there.Later in the year yes griff or elton might slot in there nicely
-
Vickery??! Vickery's spot is not at risk. Until his form is an issue rather than his health, he is crucial to our team structure. We don't have another player who can cover him effectively in his role as CHF/2nd Ruck.
i constantly have issue with this thinking.
chf is almost the key [position on the ground yet we want to play a bloke there part time. no other team actually does this. they play two genuine kpfs and a tall player who is the second ruck.
to me vickery should start in a pocket, jack at ff, and griffiths/elton at chf. when ivan has a break vickery goes into the ruck, our structure is not lost. this then allows us to say bring a very good smaller marking player on to the ground whos excellent and quick on the lead like Aaron Edwards. its an ideal change up.
if vickery is to play chf we need to find a for/ruck
as for form well as far as i can see vickery has one half decent yr behind him form to me is very much an issue. from what ive seen elton to me already looks a better marking player.
Geez thats a 70's 80's forward setup. chf - ff - and ruckman resting in a pocket..
i dont think we have designated positions like there was yesteryear..
-
Vickery??! Vickery's spot is not at risk. Until his form is an issue rather than his health, he is crucial to our team structure. We don't have another player who can cover him effectively in his role as CHF/2nd Ruck.
i constantly have issue with this thinking.
chf is almost the key [position on the ground yet we want to play a bloke there part time. no other team actually does this. they play two genuine kpfs and a tall player who is the second ruck.
to me vickery should start in a pocket, jack at ff, and griffiths/elton at chf. when ivan has a break vickery goes into the ruck, our structure is not lost. this then allows us to say bring a very good smaller marking player on to the ground whos excellent and quick on the lead like Aaron Edwards. its an ideal change up.
if vickery is to play chf we need to find a for/ruck
as for form well as far as i can see vickery has one half decent yr behind him form to me is very much an issue. from what ive seen elton to me already looks a better marking player.
Geez thats a 70's 80's forward setup. chf - ff - and ruckman resting in a pocket..
i dont think we have designated positions like there was yesteryear..
most clubs must be taking a leaf out of the 80s hand book then.
sydney in the gf went with lrt goodes reid and pyke all forward. the r/u went with roughhead franklin gunston.
geelong the yr before pods hawkins and ottens with west in the ruck. ottens nearly always rested in a pocket.
i could go on and on seems to me the good sides structure up that way.
sometimes in footy the more we percieve things change the more they stay the same eh.
-
Vickery??! Vickery's spot is not at risk. Until his form is an issue rather than his health, he is crucial to our team structure. We don't have another player who can cover him effectively in his role as CHF/2nd Ruck.
i constantly have issue with this thinking.
chf is almost the key [position on the ground yet we want to play a bloke there part time. no other team actually does this. they play two genuine kpfs and a tall player who is the second ruck.
to me vickery should start in a pocket, jack at ff, and griffiths/elton at chf. when ivan has a break vickery goes into the ruck, our structure is not lost. this then allows us to say bring a very good smaller marking player on to the ground whos excellent and quick on the lead like Aaron Edwards. its an ideal change up.
if vickery is to play chf we need to find a for/ruck
as for form well as far as i can see vickery has one half decent yr behind him form to me is very much an issue. from what ive seen elton to me already looks a better marking player.
Collingwood? FF CHF Dawes, Dawes pinch hits.
Adelaide? Tippet CHF FF and pinch hits (well used to haha)
Calrton had Hampton play CHF FF and pinch hit
Essendon and Ryder?
Hawks and Roughy?
Saints and Kosi
Theres a lot of teams that have their second ruckman playing KP
-
I think Jake King's position must be tenuous.
Give his injuries and his age along with the number of small/mid sized forwards we have on the list.
Jake will need to make every opportunity count.
-
I think Jake King's position must be tenuous.
Give his injuries and his age along with the number of small/mid sized forwards we have on the list.
Jake will need to make every opportunity count.
Totally agree, however he is a favourite of Hardwick's so that may override any rational selection criteria and keep him safe regardless. Ditto Jackson.
The sword of Damocles is hanging over Whitey, McG and Derrickx.
-
Vickery??! Vickery's spot is not at risk. Until his form is an issue rather than his health, he is crucial to our team structure. We don't have another player who can cover him effectively in his role as CHF/2nd Ruck.
i constantly have issue with this thinking.
chf is almost the key [position on the ground yet we want to play a bloke there part time. no other team actually does this. they play two genuine kpfs and a tall player who is the second ruck.
to me vickery should start in a pocket, jack at ff, and griffiths/elton at chf. when ivan has a break vickery goes into the ruck, our structure is not lost. this then allows us to say bring a very good smaller marking player on to the ground whos excellent and quick on the lead like Aaron Edwards. its an ideal change up.
if vickery is to play chf we need to find a for/ruck
as for form well as far as i can see vickery has one half decent yr behind him form to me is very much an issue. from what ive seen elton to me already looks a better marking player.
Collingwood? FF CHF Dawes, Dawes pinch hits.
Adelaide? Tippet CHF FF and pinch hits (well used to haha)
Calrton had Hampton play CHF FF and pinch hit
Essendon and Ryder?
Hawks and Roughy?
Saints and Kosi
Theres a lot of teams that have their second ruckman playing KP
So who on our list could do that role better than Vickery?
-
Vickery??! Vickery's spot is not at risk. Until his form is an issue rather than his health, he is crucial to our team structure. We don't have another player who can cover him effectively in his role as CHF/2nd Ruck.
i constantly have issue with this thinking.
chf is almost the key [position on the ground yet we want to play a bloke there part time. no other team actually does this. they play two genuine kpfs and a tall player who is the second ruck.
to me vickery should start in a pocket, jack at ff, and griffiths/elton at chf. when ivan has a break vickery goes into the ruck, our structure is not lost. this then allows us to say bring a very good smaller marking player on to the ground whos excellent and quick on the lead like Aaron Edwards. its an ideal change up.
if vickery is to play chf we need to find a for/ruck
as for form well as far as i can see vickery has one half decent yr behind him form to me is very much an issue. from what ive seen elton to me already looks a better marking player.
Collingwood? FF CHF Dawes, Dawes pinch hits.
Adelaide? Tippet CHF FF and pinch hits (well used to haha)
Calrton had Hampton play CHF FF and pinch hit
Essendon and Ryder?
Hawks and Roughy?
Saints and Kosi
Theres a lot of teams that have their second ruckman playing KP
So who on our list could do that role better than Vickery?
I'm not arguing, I reckon his safe at CHF. But I also agree with Claw if a player such as Elton, Griff or Astbury can step up and be a good CHF then Vickery should be shoved into a pocket and swap between ruck and CHF if need be.
-
Fair call on Vickery. I would love to see Griff or Elton move into the forward line so we have three quality talls spreading the defenders.
-
Vickery??! Vickery's spot is not at risk. Until his form is an issue rather than his health, he is crucial to our team structure. We don't have another player who can cover him effectively in his role as CHF/2nd Ruck.
i constantly have issue with this thinking.
chf is almost the key [position on the ground yet we want to play a bloke there part time. no other team actually does this. they play two genuine kpfs and a tall player who is the second ruck.
to me vickery should start in a pocket, jack at ff, and griffiths/elton at chf. when ivan has a break vickery goes into the ruck, our structure is not lost. this then allows us to say bring a very good smaller marking player on to the ground whos excellent and quick on the lead like Aaron Edwards. its an ideal change up.
if vickery is to play chf we need to find a for/ruck
as for form well as far as i can see vickery has one half decent yr behind him form to me is very much an issue. from what ive seen elton to me already looks a better marking player.
Geez thats a 70's 80's forward setup. chf - ff - and ruckman resting in a pocket..
i dont think we have designated positions like there was yesteryear..
most clubs must be taking a leaf out of the 80s hand book then.
sydney in the gf went with lrt goodes reid and pyke all forward. the r/u went with roughhead franklin gunston.
geelong the yr before pods hawkins and ottens with west in the ruck. ottens nearly always rested in a pocket.
i could go on and on seems to me the good sides structure up that way.
sometimes in footy the more we percieve things change the more they stay the same eh.
You could and often you do go on and on.. :shh
Anyway what i was alluding to is they aren't playing the traditional roles you portray they should. Vickery plays as the lead up forward and Jack plays as an all round forward, leading, jumping and crumbing. Miller or McG were decoys and blockers that occasionally were used when the other 2 were covered which will become A. Edwards role. Thats how i read the forward game play they employ.
Vickery is not a part timer he has a team role which is to predominantly play forward but goes into the ruck at stages of the game. i have no issue with this. Griff does the same but his role is in defence and iirc he also had a go rucking although very brief.
Tall players that can do this are vital and as yeahright pointed out other teams also have guys that pinch hit in the ruck while mainly staying as forwards
-
Vickery??! Vickery's spot is not at risk. Until his form is an issue rather than his health, he is crucial to our team structure. We don't have another player who can cover him effectively in his role as CHF/2nd Ruck.
i constantly have issue with this thinking.
chf is almost the key [position on the ground yet we want to play a bloke there part time. no other team actually does this. they play two genuine kpfs and a tall player who is the second ruck.
to me vickery should start in a pocket, jack at ff, and griffiths/elton at chf. when ivan has a break vickery goes into the ruck, our structure is not lost. this then allows us to say bring a very good smaller marking player on to the ground whos excellent and quick on the lead like Aaron Edwards. its an ideal change up.
if vickery is to play chf we need to find a for/ruck
as for form well as far as i can see vickery has one half decent yr behind him form to me is very much an issue. from what ive seen elton to me already looks a better marking player.
Collingwood? FF CHF Dawes, Dawes pinch hits.
Adelaide? Tippet CHF FF and pinch hits (well used to haha)
Calrton had Hampton play CHF FF and pinch hit
Essendon and Ryder?
Hawks and Roughy?
Saints and Kosi
Theres a lot of teams that have their second ruckman playing KP
dawes is kp not a ruckman he went there when brown retired. in his place they played both tarrant and goldsackk as stay at home kpfs. one reason dawes wanted out was he did not want to be used as a pinch hitter.
adelaide i agree mainly because they had no one else. towards the end of the yr josh jenkins did get the second ruck role leaving both walker and tippett at home. tippett going leaves a big hole.
carlton use hampson as a second ruck he is a ruckman first and foremost.waite when fit plays kp henderson plays kp probably casboult now and hampson as the ruck/for with kruezer going forward at times as well.
hawks have used roughy everywhere.and they have used their kpf as a second ruckman out of neccesity. who else is there. imo they went and got hale to play as a for ruck but have had no luck injury wise with their other ruckmen. even then they still go with franklin and gunston still undersized but looks a player.
last yr stkilda went with riewoldt wilkes and kosi they have added lee to this mix. perhaps they have learnt what most other sides have.
essendon dont rely on ryder to be their key forward at times they rotated all three of ryder bellchambers and hille thru the forward line. ryder to me is our vickery just a lot better atm.
when fit they have used three talls and ryder. hurley crameri gumbleton ryder with the arrival of daniher this will only get stronger.
just two questions. 1/ do you think it wise to go into games with just vickery and riewoldt as tall options.
2/ what is preferable have your chf play chf and maintain structure or have him go off in the ruck leaving just one tall forward.
in fairness to hardwick he did realise the importance of structure with miller. unfortunately miller was never good enough. we played miller because of where griffiths astbury and post were at injured or not ready. its time to go back to that strategy.
-
1/ do you think it wise to go into games with just vickery and riewoldt as tall options.
2/ what is preferable have your chf play chf and maintain structure or have him go off in the ruck leaving just one tall forward.
This is entirely subjective an entirely relies upon the game plan. Just because it looks good on paper doesn't make it practical or genius. We've played three tall forwards before (Riewoldt, Vickery, Griffiths late 2011, Riewoldt, Vickery, Miller early 2012) and it doesn't work for us. Three blokes doesn't make three targets. The opposition will pick the weakest one, rotate their extra tall through Riewoldt, and play through the useless forward. We need more space in the forward 50 to isolate Riewoldt's defenders, not congesting it even more with an extra half arsed option. At least throwing in a competent small or medium (hoping this can be Knights) forces the oppositions hand and makes one of their quarterback-type players accountable for a man. Also means that unless they're happy for this extra player to chop them up, they have to bring one less tall, making it easier on Riewoldt.
Which brings me to point 2, a CHF's role is to make a contest and consider it a win if he can bring the ball to ground to the advantage of our crumbers. This doesn't have to be a tall player to fill in for Vickery when he goes into ruck. Just someone with enough body to make a strong lead and/or contest for a few minutes (might only be 1 or 2 entries). We're blessed to have Martin. He's too quick for a key defender, and too strong for a smaller type. The more we stack our midfield and the more forward time he gets, the harder our forward line gets to man up on.
I'm not sold on Griffiths at all yet, seems like he's one of those guys who are just good at a variety of roles, but not great at anything at all. I'm happy to change my mind on a two or three tall forward line once we have more than two worth while options like some of the other teams have done (like WCE), but just right now I don't agree. I'm really banking on Elton. Athletically he ticks all the boxes to be more than just another lumbering oaf up forward and could really compliment our fast and fluid outside game (when it works lol).
-
Great post, dwaino :cheers
-
Great post, gerks :cheers
more of this :thumbsup
-
Great post, dwaino :cheers
:lol
Was a good post though :thumbsup
-
Great post, derks :cheers
more of this :thumbsup
Another classy post :cheers
-
;D
Look there is obviously more than one way you can structure a successful forward line, aint gonna matter which way you go if the players aren't up to it and if easy shots at goal are continually missed. I don't really care what we do, just keep keep McGuane and Greggles away and uprgrade Nahas as quickly as possible please.
-
Point 1 - 3rd tall wasnt used as a "target" but was used to block defenders so Vickery and Jack could get space and running room.
oint 2 - Forwards play the whole ground forward of the half back line, please get past this old school CHF infatuation.
-
;D
Look there is obviously more than one way you can structure a successful forward line, aint gonna matter which way you go if the players aren't up to it and if easy shots at goal are continually missed. I don't really care what we do, just keep keep McGuane and Greggles away and uprgrade Nahas as quickly as possible please.
Neither do I, and I agree. I especially don't care this time of year. It's the time to back in who we've got, barrack for our team and enjoy another season of ups and downs.
-
Great post, dwaino :cheers
Great post dwiano....seriously. :thumbsup
Would love Griffiths or Elton pushing up the wings to give us that marking option and ability to launch it to our half forward (at least). This would allow Vickery to lead to CHF and become a target and clear space/defenders away from Jack.
-
;D
Look there is obviously more than one way you can structure a successful forward line, aint gonna matter which way you go if the players aren't up to it and if easy shots at goal are continually missed. I don't really care what we do, just keep keep McGuane and Greggles away and uprgrade Nahas as quickly as possible please.
Neither do I, and I agree. I especially don't care this time of year. It's the time to back in who we've got, barrack for our team and enjoy another season of ups and downs.
i like this time of year, we get to see the up and comers and what could have beens.. And the should not have beens
-
Vickery??! Vickery's spot is not at risk. Until his form is an issue rather than his health, he is crucial to our team structure. We don't have another player who can cover him effectively in his role as CHF/2nd Ruck.
i constantly have issue with this thinking.
chf is almost the key [position on the ground yet we want to play a bloke there part time. no other team actually does this. they play two genuine kpfs and a tall player who is the second ruck.
to me vickery should start in a pocket, jack at ff, and griffiths/elton at chf. when ivan has a break vickery goes into the ruck, our structure is not lost. this then allows us to say bring a very good smaller marking player on to the ground whos excellent and quick on the lead like Aaron Edwards. its an ideal change up.
if vickery is to play chf we need to find a for/ruck
as for form well as far as i can see vickery has one half decent yr behind him form to me is very much an issue. from what ive seen elton to me already looks a better marking player.
Collingwood? FF CHF Dawes, Dawes pinch hits.
Adelaide? Tippet CHF FF and pinch hits (well used to haha)
Calrton had Hampton play CHF FF and pinch hit
Essendon and Ryder?
Hawks and Roughy?
Saints and Kosi
Theres a lot of teams that have their second ruckman playing KP
dawes is kp not a ruckman he went there when brown retired. in his place they played both tarrant and goldsackk as stay at home kpfs. one reason dawes wanted out was he did not want to be used as a pinch hitter.
adelaide i agree mainly because they had no one else. towards the end of the yr josh jenkins did get the second ruck role leaving both walker and tippett at home. tippett going leaves a big hole.
carlton use hampson as a second ruck he is a ruckman first and foremost.waite when fit plays kp henderson plays kp probably casboult now and hampson as the ruck/for with kruezer going forward at times as well.
hawks have used roughy everywhere.and they have used their kpf as a second ruckman out of neccesity. who else is there. imo they went and got hale to play as a for ruck but have had no luck injury wise with their other ruckmen. even then they still go with franklin and gunston still undersized but looks a player.
last yr stkilda went with riewoldt wilkes and kosi they have added lee to this mix. perhaps they have learnt what most other sides have.
essendon dont rely on ryder to be their key forward at times they rotated all three of ryder bellchambers and hille thru the forward line. ryder to me is our vickery just a lot better atm.
when fit they have used three talls and ryder. hurley crameri gumbleton ryder with the arrival of daniher this will only get stronger.
just two questions. 1/ do you think it wise to go into games with just vickery and riewoldt as tall options.
2/ what is preferable have your chf play chf and maintain structure or have him go off in the ruck leaving just one tall forward.
in fairness to hardwick he did realise the importance of structure with miller. unfortunately miller was never good enough. we played miller because of where griffiths astbury and post were at injured or not ready. its time to go back to that strategy.
In another thread I said I agree IF we had someone else to play CHF I'd love Vickery to stay deep and pinch hit. But until someone sticks their hand up and can play CHF to a decent level at a minimum, it's Vickerys spot to keep
-
Vickery??! Vickery's spot is not at risk. Until his form is an issue rather than his health, he is crucial to our team structure. We don't have another player who can cover him effectively in his role as CHF/2nd Ruck.
i constantly have issue with this thinking.
chf is almost the key [position on the ground yet we want to play a bloke there part time. no other team actually does this. they play two genuine kpfs and a tall player who is the second ruck.
to me vickery should start in a pocket, jack at ff, and griffiths/elton at chf. when ivan has a break vickery goes into the ruck, our structure is not lost. this then allows us to say bring a very good smaller marking player on to the ground whos excellent and quick on the lead like Aaron Edwards. its an ideal change up.
if vickery is to play chf we need to find a for/ruck
as for form well as far as i can see vickery has one half decent yr behind him form to me is very much an issue. from what ive seen elton to me already looks a better marking player.
Collingwood? FF CHF Dawes, Dawes pinch hits.
Adelaide? Tippet CHF FF and pinch hits (well used to haha)
Calrton had Hampton play CHF FF and pinch hit
Essendon and Ryder?
Hawks and Roughy?
Saints and Kosi
Theres a lot of teams that have their second ruckman playing KP
collingwood won a premiership with dawes and cloke as permanent kpfs. leigh brown a kpp played second ruck and he was poor when in the ruck lets not kid ourselves here.
last yr without brown they played dawes second ruck but included tarrant and goldsack in their forward line to maintain structure.
adelaide - yep have used tippett as the second ruck. mainly because of no other option coming thru.
last yr though they did play both jacobs and josh jenkins as the third ruck/forward a significant amount of games. tippett will be a big loss to them.
carlton - when fit waite and henderson were locks for the key forward posts. they will now probably play casboult at chf sending henderson back. hampson plays as the third tall changing in the ruck with either warnock or kruezer. to top em off they have walker who is a genuine tall and a marking option of a different type.i say when fit because both waite and henderson played just 11 games each last yr of course hampson was likely to be asked to pick up the slack.
essendon - do i really have to answer this see carlton its a similar scenario. one thing you can bank on when ryder goes in the ruck the other ruckman goes forward. his role is for/ruck and all that implies.
this yr their tall forward options are carlisle daniher, gumbleton, hurley, crameri with ryder hille and even bellchambers resting forward.
stkilda - agree have relied on kosi to play in the ruck and leave riewoldt by himself.though in 09 they did structure up with kosi and riewoldt as the key forwards with gardiner and steven king in the ruck. with gardiner going forward to make a third tall option. they lost king for good during 2010 and gardiner in the first gf.
where are they heading. well quality aside they have gone with wilkes and riewoldt last yr with kosi as third tallfor/ruck. leaving mcevoy to play 1st ruck. they have added to thjis by getting tom lee.
hawks - agree last yr they played roughie as the second ruck robbing themselves imo. still even with him in the ruck they had the 196cm franklin and the 193cm gunston forward.
i have little doubt that the idea in getting hale was to play him as a ruck/for and allow max bailey to play as the #1 ruck. injuries to date have prevented this.
hawthorns problem is where to play roughhead imo i reckon they will do a sydney play franklin roughead and gunston forward and change bailey and hale off the bench. one thing for sure no matter what they do or who plays where they will not lose structure who ever goes into the ruck.
i keep on hearing we have lots of ruck/for options well that is plain wrong. atm imo we have just one and that is vickery. derickx has shown if anything hes not up to it and mcbean physically is yrs away. they are the only other genuine option.
surely we want to develop a few of our so called key forwards as key forwards.
we actually have two options to do this griffiths and astbury. elton should be developed for the role at coburg for now.
what is so wrong in wanting at least 3 tall kpfs including vickery. why do we insist on asking our chf to play this very demanding role and play 30% of game time in the ruck. i will ask again what happens to our structure when he goes into the ruck. usually it leaves just jack. its a roundabout it really is.what happens when either riewoldt or vickery get hurt and miss 10 weeks play mcguane forward as a kpp lol. or how about we suddenly pul;l griffiths out of the backline .
we dont need griffiths to play chb we probably dont need either of griffiths or astbury to play back. we can afford to play and develop one of them at the least as a forward. id say its a must we do so if we want some decent depth and cover up forward.
the way it stands atm we have rance grimes mcintosh chaplin griffiths astbury and darrou. all being developed as defenders.
it leaves just riewoldt vickery who everyone wants to play chf and in the ruck. elton who is a junior and not ready, plus the hack mcguane. god help us if riewoldt gets hurt or even vickery . how many on here bemoaned the loss of vickery last yr and the subsequent loss of structure, yet it seems no one wants to see something done about it wheres the forward development for next yr and the one after.
the logical thing to do is play griffiths at chf. play vickery out of a pocket and let him give maric a decent break. why do we wish to lose our chf and structure when he goes into the ruck, why do we wish to place such a work load on a 22 yr old. it also leads to the question are we ever going to try and develop vickery as a #1 ruckman if not where does that leave our future #1 ruck stocks.
if its not griffiths to play chf we should be playing astbury there. we have grave needs to develop actual kpfs.
one reason why i was okay with us getting miller was the simple fact our young tall forwards were not physically ready to play they are now. surely people have to be concerned with just riewoldt elton and vickery as tall forwards it is a recipe for disaster.
-
Vickery??! Vickery's spot is not at risk. Until his form is an issue rather than his health, he is crucial to our team structure. We don't have another player who can cover him effectively in his role as CHF/2nd Ruck.
i constantly have issue with this thinking.
chf is almost the key [position on the ground yet we want to play a bloke there part time. no other team actually does this. they play two genuine kpfs and a tall player who is the second ruck.
to me vickery should start in a pocket, jack at ff, and griffiths/elton at chf. when ivan has a break vickery goes into the ruck, our structure is not lost. this then allows us to say bring a very good smaller marking player on to the ground whos excellent and quick on the lead like Aaron Edwards. its an ideal change up.
if vickery is to play chf we need to find a for/ruck
as for form well as far as i can see vickery has one half decent yr behind him form to me is very much an issue. from what ive seen elton to me already looks a better marking player.
Collingwood? FF CHF Dawes, Dawes pinch hits.
Adelaide? Tippet CHF FF and pinch hits (well used to haha)
Calrton had Hampton play CHF FF and pinch hit
Essendon and Ryder?
Hawks and Roughy?
Saints and Kosi
Theres a lot of teams that have their second ruckman playing KP
collingwood won a premiership with dawes and cloke as permanent kpfs. leigh brown a kpp played second ruck and he was poor when in the ruck lets not kid ourselves here.
last yr without brown they played dawes second ruck but included tarrant and goldsack in their forward line to maintain structure.
adelaide - yep have used tippett as the second ruck. mainly because of no other option coming thru.
last yr though they did play both jacobs and josh jenkins as the third ruck/forward a significant amount of games. tippett will be a big loss to them.
carlton - when fit waite and henderson were locks for the key forward posts. they will now probably play casboult at chf sending henderson back. hampson plays as the third tall changing in the ruck with either warnock or kruezer. to top em off they have walker who is a genuine tall and a marking option of a different type.i say when fit because both waite and henderson played just 11 games each last yr of course hampson was likely to be asked to pick up the slack.
essendon - do i really have to answer this see carlton its a similar scenario. one thing you can bank on when ryder goes in the ruck the other ruckman goes forward. his role is for/ruck and all that implies.
this yr their tall forward options are carlisle daniher, gumbleton, hurley, crameri with ryder hille and even bellchambers resting forward.
stkilda - agree have relied on kosi to play in the ruck and leave riewoldt by himself.though in 09 they did structure up with kosi and riewoldt as the key forwards with gardiner and steven king in the ruck. with gardiner going forward to make a third tall option. they lost king for good during 2010 and gardiner in the first gf.
where are they heading. well quality aside they have gone with wilkes and riewoldt last yr with kosi as third tallfor/ruck. leaving mcevoy to play 1st ruck. they have added to thjis by getting tom lee.
hawks - agree last yr they played roughie as the second ruck robbing themselves imo. still even with him in the ruck they had the 196cm franklin and the 193cm gunston forward.
i have little doubt that the idea in getting hale was to play him as a ruck/for and allow max bailey to play as the #1 ruck. injuries to date have prevented this.
hawthorns problem is where to play roughhead imo i reckon they will do a sydney play franklin roughead and gunston forward and change bailey and hale off the bench. one thing for sure no matter what they do or who plays where they will not lose structure who ever goes into the ruck.
i keep on hearing we have lots of ruck/for options well that is plain wrong. atm imo we have just one and that is vickery. derickx has shown if anything hes not up to it and mcbean physically is yrs away. they are the only other genuine option.
surely we want to develop a few of our so called key forwards as key forwards.
we actually have two options to do this griffiths and astbury. elton should be developed for the role at coburg for now.
what is so wrong in wanting at least 3 tall kpfs including vickery. why do we insist on asking our chf to play this very demanding role and play 30% of game time in the ruck. i will ask again what happens to our structure when he goes into the ruck. usually it leaves just jack. its a roundabout it really is.what happens when either riewoldt or vickery get hurt and miss 10 weeks play mcguane forward as a kpp lol. or how about we suddenly pul;l griffiths out of the backline .
we dont need griffiths to play chb we probably dont need either of griffiths or astbury to play back. we can afford to play and develop one of them at the least as a forward. id say its a must we do so if we want some decent depth and cover up forward.
the way it stands atm we have rance grimes mcintosh chaplin griffiths astbury and darrou. all being developed as defenders.
it leaves just riewoldt vickery who everyone wants to play chf and in the ruck. elton who is a junior and not ready, plus the hack mcguane. god help us if riewoldt gets hurt or even vickery . how many on here bemoaned the loss of vickery last yr and the subsequent loss of structure, yet it seems no one wants to see something done about it wheres the forward development for next yr and the one after.
the logical thing to do is play griffiths at chf. play vickery out of a pocket and let him give maric a decent break. why do we wish to lose our chf and structure when he goes into the ruck, why do we wish to place such a work load on a 22 yr old. it also leads to the question are we ever going to try and develop vickery as a #1 ruckman if not where does that leave our future #1 ruck stocks.
if its not griffiths to play chf we should be playing astbury there. we have grave needs to develop actual kpfs.
one reason why i was okay with us getting miller was the simple fact our young tall forwards were not physically ready to play they are now. surely people have to be concerned with just riewoldt elton and vickery as tall forwards it is a recipe for disaster.
You realise thats the second time youve answered that question ahah
-
Vickery??! Vickery's spot is not at risk. Until his form is an issue rather than his health, he is crucial to our team structure. We don't have another player who can cover him effectively in his role as CHF/2nd Ruck.
i constantly have issue with this thinking.
chf is almost the key [position on the ground yet we want to play a bloke there part time. no other team actually does this. they play two genuine kpfs and a tall player who is the second ruck.
to me vickery should start in a pocket, jack at ff, and griffiths/elton at chf. when ivan has a break vickery goes into the ruck, our structure is not lost. this then allows us to say bring a very good smaller marking player on to the ground whos excellent and quick on the lead like Aaron Edwards. its an ideal change up.
if vickery is to play chf we need to find a for/ruck
as for form well as far as i can see vickery has one half decent yr behind him form to me is very much an issue. from what ive seen elton to me already looks a better marking player.
Collingwood? FF CHF Dawes, Dawes pinch hits.
Adelaide? Tippet CHF FF and pinch hits (well used to haha)
Calrton had Hampton play CHF FF and pinch hit
Essendon and Ryder?
Hawks and Roughy?
Saints and Kosi
Theres a lot of teams that have their second ruckman playing KP
collingwood won a premiership with dawes and cloke as permanent kpfs. leigh brown a kpp played second ruck and he was poor when in the ruck lets not kid ourselves here.
last yr without brown they played dawes second ruck but included tarrant and goldsack in their forward line to maintain structure.
adelaide - yep have used tippett as the second ruck. mainly because of no other option coming thru.
last yr though they did play both jacobs and josh jenkins as the third ruck/forward a significant amount of games. tippett will be a big loss to them.
carlton - when fit waite and henderson were locks for the key forward posts. they will now probably play casboult at chf sending henderson back. hampson plays as the third tall changing in the ruck with either warnock or kruezer. to top em off they have walker who is a genuine tall and a marking option of a different type.i say when fit because both waite and henderson played just 11 games each last yr of course hampson was likely to be asked to pick up the slack.
essendon - do i really have to answer this see carlton its a similar scenario. one thing you can bank on when ryder goes in the ruck the other ruckman goes forward. his role is for/ruck and all that implies.
this yr their tall forward options are carlisle daniher, gumbleton, hurley, crameri with ryder hille and even bellchambers resting forward.
stkilda - agree have relied on kosi to play in the ruck and leave riewoldt by himself.though in 09 they did structure up with kosi and riewoldt as the key forwards with gardiner and steven king in the ruck. with gardiner going forward to make a third tall option. they lost king for good during 2010 and gardiner in the first gf.
where are they heading. well quality aside they have gone with wilkes and riewoldt last yr with kosi as third tallfor/ruck. leaving mcevoy to play 1st ruck. they have added to thjis by getting tom lee.
hawks - agree last yr they played roughie as the second ruck robbing themselves imo. still even with him in the ruck they had the 196cm franklin and the 193cm gunston forward.
i have little doubt that the idea in getting hale was to play him as a ruck/for and allow max bailey to play as the #1 ruck. injuries to date have prevented this.
hawthorns problem is where to play roughhead imo i reckon they will do a sydney play franklin roughead and gunston forward and change bailey and hale off the bench. one thing for sure no matter what they do or who plays where they will not lose structure who ever goes into the ruck.
i keep on hearing we have lots of ruck/for options well that is plain wrong. atm imo we have just one and that is vickery. derickx has shown if anything hes not up to it and mcbean physically is yrs away. they are the only other genuine option.
surely we want to develop a few of our so called key forwards as key forwards.
we actually have two options to do this griffiths and astbury. elton should be developed for the role at coburg for now.
what is so wrong in wanting at least 3 tall kpfs including vickery. why do we insist on asking our chf to play this very demanding role and play 30% of game time in the ruck. i will ask again what happens to our structure when he goes into the ruck. usually it leaves just jack. its a roundabout it really is.what happens when either riewoldt or vickery get hurt and miss 10 weeks play mcguane forward as a kpp lol. or how about we suddenly pul;l griffiths out of the backline .
we dont need griffiths to play chb we probably dont need either of griffiths or astbury to play back. we can afford to play and develop one of them at the least as a forward. id say its a must we do so if we want some decent depth and cover up forward.
the way it stands atm we have rance grimes mcintosh chaplin griffiths astbury and darrou. all being developed as defenders.
it leaves just riewoldt vickery who everyone wants to play chf and in the ruck. elton who is a junior and not ready, plus the hack mcguane. god help us if riewoldt gets hurt or even vickery . how many on here bemoaned the loss of vickery last yr and the subsequent loss of structure, yet it seems no one wants to see something done about it wheres the forward development for next yr and the one after.
the logical thing to do is play griffiths at chf. play vickery out of a pocket and let him give maric a decent break. why do we wish to lose our chf and structure when he goes into the ruck, why do we wish to place such a work load on a 22 yr old. it also leads to the question are we ever going to try and develop vickery as a #1 ruckman if not where does that leave our future #1 ruck stocks.
if its not griffiths to play chf we should be playing astbury there. we have grave needs to develop actual kpfs.
one reason why i was okay with us getting miller was the simple fact our young tall forwards were not physically ready to play they are now. surely people have to be concerned with just riewoldt elton and vickery as tall forwards it is a recipe for disaster.
You realise thats the second time youve answered that question ahah
(http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT8PORB27CuT0e4eIuFCtgeXmmN3zQPLgcqhkJcWQpDj6l0yo_L)
-
:lol :rollin
-
Seems like Astbury is the forgotten man in this whole conversation. Personally I think he is a better KPF than a KPD. He was given Richo's number for a reason. I've heard rumours that they may be moving him forward this year. I hope they are true. He's a leader more than a chaser and he has the height and build to make a perfect CHF.
Oh and dwaino...
(http://i52.tinypic.com/33k39lw.gif)
-
Vickery??! Vickery's spot is not at risk. Until his form is an issue rather than his health, he is crucial to our team structure. We don't have another player who can cover him effectively in his role as CHF/2nd Ruck.
i constantly have issue with this thinking.
chf is almost the key [position on the ground yet we want to play a bloke there part time. no other team actually does this. they play two genuine kpfs and a tall player who is the second ruck.
to me vickery should start in a pocket, jack at ff, and griffiths/elton at chf. when ivan has a break vickery goes into the ruck, our structure is not lost. this then allows us to say bring a very good smaller marking player on to the ground whos excellent and quick on the lead like Aaron Edwards. its an ideal change up.
if vickery is to play chf we need to find a for/ruck
as for form well as far as i can see vickery has one half decent yr behind him form to me is very much an issue. from what ive seen elton to me already looks a better marking player.
Collingwood? FF CHF Dawes, Dawes pinch hits.
Adelaide? Tippet CHF FF and pinch hits (well used to haha)
Calrton had Hampton play CHF FF and pinch hit
Essendon and Ryder?
Hawks and Roughy?
Saints and Kosi
Theres a lot of teams that have their second ruckman playing KP
collingwood won a premiership with dawes and cloke as permanent kpfs. leigh brown a kpp played second ruck and he was poor when in the ruck lets not kid ourselves here.
last yr without brown they played dawes second ruck but included tarrant and goldsack in their forward line to maintain structure.
adelaide - yep have used tippett as the second ruck. mainly because of no other option coming thru.
last yr though they did play both jacobs and josh jenkins as the third ruck/forward a significant amount of games. tippett will be a big loss to them.
carlton - when fit waite and henderson were locks for the key forward posts. they will now probably play casboult at chf sending henderson back. hampson plays as the third tall changing in the ruck with either warnock or kruezer. to top em off they have walker who is a genuine tall and a marking option of a different type.i say when fit because both waite and henderson played just 11 games each last yr of course hampson was likely to be asked to pick up the slack.
essendon - do i really have to answer this see carlton its a similar scenario. one thing you can bank on when ryder goes in the ruck the other ruckman goes forward. his role is for/ruck and all that implies.
this yr their tall forward options are carlisle daniher, gumbleton, hurley, crameri with ryder hille and even bellchambers resting forward.
stkilda - agree have relied on kosi to play in the ruck and leave riewoldt by himself.though in 09 they did structure up with kosi and riewoldt as the key forwards with gardiner and steven king in the ruck. with gardiner going forward to make a third tall option. they lost king for good during 2010 and gardiner in the first gf.
where are they heading. well quality aside they have gone with wilkes and riewoldt last yr with kosi as third tallfor/ruck. leaving mcevoy to play 1st ruck. they have added to thjis by getting tom lee.
hawks - agree last yr they played roughie as the second ruck robbing themselves imo. still even with him in the ruck they had the 196cm franklin and the 193cm gunston forward.
i have little doubt that the idea in getting hale was to play him as a ruck/for and allow max bailey to play as the #1 ruck. injuries to date have prevented this.
hawthorns problem is where to play roughhead imo i reckon they will do a sydney play franklin roughead and gunston forward and change bailey and hale off the bench. one thing for sure no matter what they do or who plays where they will not lose structure who ever goes into the ruck.
i keep on hearing we have lots of ruck/for options well that is plain wrong. atm imo we have just one and that is vickery. derickx has shown if anything hes not up to it and mcbean physically is yrs away. they are the only other genuine option.
surely we want to develop a few of our so called key forwards as key forwards.
we actually have two options to do this griffiths and astbury. elton should be developed for the role at coburg for now.
what is so wrong in wanting at least 3 tall kpfs including vickery. why do we insist on asking our chf to play this very demanding role and play 30% of game time in the ruck. i will ask again what happens to our structure when he goes into the ruck. usually it leaves just jack. its a roundabout it really is.what happens when either riewoldt or vickery get hurt and miss 10 weeks play mcguane forward as a kpp lol. or how about we suddenly pul;l griffiths out of the backline .
we dont need griffiths to play chb we probably dont need either of griffiths or astbury to play back. we can afford to play and develop one of them at the least as a forward. id say its a must we do so if we want some decent depth and cover up forward.
the way it stands atm we have rance grimes mcintosh chaplin griffiths astbury and darrou. all being developed as defenders.
it leaves just riewoldt vickery who everyone wants to play chf and in the ruck. elton who is a junior and not ready, plus the hack mcguane. god help us if riewoldt gets hurt or even vickery . how many on here bemoaned the loss of vickery last yr and the subsequent loss of structure, yet it seems no one wants to see something done about it wheres the forward development for next yr and the one after.
the logical thing to do is play griffiths at chf. play vickery out of a pocket and let him give maric a decent break. why do we wish to lose our chf and structure when he goes into the ruck, why do we wish to place such a work load on a 22 yr old. it also leads to the question are we ever going to try and develop vickery as a #1 ruckman if not where does that leave our future #1 ruck stocks.
if its not griffiths to play chf we should be playing astbury there. we have grave needs to develop actual kpfs.
one reason why i was okay with us getting miller was the simple fact our young tall forwards were not physically ready to play they are now. surely people have to be concerned with just riewoldt elton and vickery as tall forwards it is a recipe for disaster.
So what your saying is they use players in the best place they think they can fit. Which sticks to the structure the coaches are trying to implement..
IMO Richmond dont play anyone at CHF but play 2 targeted forwards, i'm not sure what makes you think they play someone at CHF. Am i missing something at the game because they both line up deep and spread from there. Lining up at the edge of the square are running players such as Edwards and Jake.
I'd love some clarification on the whole CHF thinking
-
They both may line up deep but TV definitely spends more time leading up the ground as the hitup target, Jack stays closer to goal a lot more. What claw is trying to get at (i think) is we need somebody who can be a better leadup/hitup target man. For me, this guy needs to be a running machine that can work over his opponent up the ground with multiple running patterns. Whether TV is the right man for this role, who knows? but this type of player is crucial to our fwd structure and might stop us bombing it inside 50 90% of the time. I'd like to see Griff and Elton be given stints in this role at some stage.
-
Yep thats what ive been saying Vickery is the leading forward, not CHF. Jack to me is such an all round player, he leads well, he jumps well and he crumbs well. i just think we need to fix the role McGuane and Miller were playing. ie the player that blocks and clears the spece for the other 2
-
They both may line up deep but TV definitely spends more time leading up the ground as the hitup target, Jack stays closer to goal a lot more. What claw is trying to get at (i think) is we need somebody who can be a better leadup/hitup target man. For me, this guy needs to be a running machine that can work over his opponent up the ground with multiple running patterns. Whether TV is the right man for this role, who knows? but this type of player is crucial to our fwd structure and might stop us bombing it inside 50 90% of the time. I'd like to see Griff and Elton be given stints in this role at some stage.
I think Jay Schulz can play that role + add 3 goals a game. But I guess Ben Nason and Mitch Farmer are doing a good job so it doesn't really matter
Yep thats what ive been saying Vickery is the leading forward, not CHF. Jack to me is such an all round player, he leads well, he jumps well and he crumbs well. i just think we need to fix the role McGuane and Miller were playing. ie the player that blocks and clears the spece for the other 2
How about a 3rd tall who actually has an impact. A smart hit up forward that can convert and doesn't get in the better players way. I think I just described Aaron Edwards..............4 years ago
-
Yep thats what ive been saying Vickery is the leading forward, not CHF. Jack to me is such an all round player, he leads well, he jumps well and he crumbs well. i just think we need to fix the role McGuane and Miller were playing. ie the player that blocks and clears the spece for the other 2
I dont think we're on the same page re leading player/chf. For mine TV plays CHF at times, probably a 50/50 split. IMO the modern day CHF is the Cloke/Darling/Kennedy type that burn opponents with long leads up the wings opening up space behind them. TV's role is to do this in a 50/50 split with the third tall, the rest of his time he sits deep with jack and plays as a dual leading FF or FP with Jack inside 50 and Miller/A.Edwards would be the hitup target up the ground
-
Agree. We do play blokes at CHF, they're just poo at it
-
Agree. We do play blokes at CHF, they're just poo at it
yep, and the moment you find a dominator that can control the ball from the key distance of 60-90 out, you start having better delivery inside 50 making jacks job easier, right now we are bombing it in deep from 60-90 out bc we dont have a strong CHF regularly plucking them at that range.
-
They both may line up deep but TV definitely spends more time leading up the ground as the hitup target, Jack stays closer to goal a lot more. What claw is trying to get at (i think) is we need somebody who can be a better leadup/hitup target man. For me, this guy needs to be a running machine that can work over his opponent up the ground with multiple running patterns. Whether TV is the right man for this role, who knows? but this type of player is crucial to our fwd structure and might stop us bombing it inside 50 90% of the time. I'd like to see Griff and Elton be given stints in this role at some stage.
I think Jay Schulz can play that role + add 3 goals a game. But I guess Ben Nason and Mitch Farmer are doing a good job so it doesn't really matter
Yep thats what ive been saying Vickery is the leading forward, not CHF. Jack to me is such an all round player, he leads well, he jumps well and he crumbs well. i just think we need to fix the role McGuane and Miller were playing. ie the player that blocks and clears the spece for the other 2
How about a 3rd tall who actually has an impact. A smart hit up forward that can convert and doesn't get in the better players way. I think I just described Aaron Edwards..............4 years ago
When i say blocking player it doesnt mean i think they're not an option if the ball comes in their direction. But i do see there role predominantly to clear and block.
Its like having the 3rd wide receiver in NFL. He's the 3rd one looked at as the play unfolds. But is used to block and confuse cornerbacks as the better wide receiver runs his pattern.