Which position for versatile Dogs?

Link

https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/10961...g&name=600x314

EVERY season certain players put their hand up for a new role.

And every season coaches are presented with an opportunity to try new things.

AFL.com.au’s reporters look at the players who could be presented with a new challenge in 2019 and make the call on that player's best position.

Western Bulldogs

Taylor Duryea: Used more as a forward later in his time at Hawthorn, the dual premiership defender has been training down back since arriving at Whitten Oval. Can provide leadership in a young defence that includes Aaron Naughton, Bailey Williams and Zaine Cordy. Will also link up with former teammate Matt Suckling.

Verdict: Small defender

Jackson Trengove: Spent 29 per cent of 2018 as a ruckman and that could increase with the departure of Jordan Roughead and Tom Campbell, and the injury concerns around Tom Boyd. With Tim English poised to claim the No.1 mantle, Trengove's flexibility would also allow him to partner Josh Schache as a marking option in Boyd's absence in attack after the majority of last season as a defender.

Verdict: Everywhere man who will pinch-hit in the ruck.

Ed Richards: His debut season consisted of two distinct halves. Spent his first 10 games as a dedicated half-back, before a genuine split between forward, midfield and defence to finish the year. Expect him to find a home on the wing this season as he builds his endurance base.

Verdict: Winger with exquisite ball use.

*Compiled by AFL reporter Mitch Cleary

If you were coach, what would you do?

I'm concerned about Trengove's ability forward but he's was our best ruckman last year so has to lay there with English.

I really like Richards on the wing and Duryea plays back for mine. JJ won't make round 1.

Not mentioned in the article: Williams - mid rotations. Wallis - mostly forward. Lloyd high forward resting deep forward, Gowers deep forward swapping with Lloyd.

Forget the OP, the title I was what I'm bumping.

To me today, I thought some guys looked really confused by the fact they're forced to play in numerous roles, including inside midfield where we already have plenty of depth.

The last few years watching Webb transition from HBF with a great left kick, to not an AFEL inside mid and lamenting in a forward pocket has been tough. Plus Boyd & Schache rucking. Today I thought many players looked a bit confused:

- Richards seems a little lost.
- Lippa wasn't impacting the game inside where his leg speed is exposed, but when put back to a role he can play well at half forward he got better.
- I'm not sure why we were told all preseason Williams was training with the mids. Has he played much midfield minutes? I'm not sure what's going on his head to be honest.
- McLean rose to the top tier of players last year in the midfield. Now we seem to shove him wherever, even if his output drops below zero.

Is the mandated multiple role playing thing still the right horse to be betting on? I understand the huge advantage to the coach on game day to have ultra flexible players. But like everything, there's a price to be paid for the policy.

Doesn't matter where Richards plays if he refuses to hold a single mark

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bulldogtragic

Forget the OP, the title I was what I'm bumping.

To me today, I thought some guys looked really confused by the fact they're forced to play in numerous roles, including inside midfield where we already have plenty of depth.

The last few years watching Webb transition from HBF with a great left kick, to not an AFEL inside mid and lamenting in a forward pocket has been tough. Plus Boyd & Schache rucking. Today I thought many players looked a bit confused:

- Richards seems a little lost.
- Lippa wasn't impacting the game inside where his leg speed is exposed, but when put back to a role he can play well at half forward he got better.
- I'm not sure why we were told all preseason Williams was training with the mids. Has he played much midfield minutes? I'm not sure what's going on his head to be honest.
- McLean rose to the top tier of players last year in the midfield. Now we seem to shove him wherever, even if his output drops below zero.

Is the mandated multiple role playing thing still the right horse to be betting on? I understand the huge advantage to the coach on game day to have ultra flexible players. But like everything, there's a price to be paid for the policy.

---

I'm all for a set structure with one or two swingmen. I'd rather have flexibility with tall play back or forward options and run an extra mid than have half the team playing out of position.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1eyedog

I'm all for a set structure with one or two swingmen. I'd rather have flexibility with tall play back or forward options and run an extra mid than have half the team playing out of position.

---

When you are getting done, you have to move players around.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bornadog

When you are getting done, you have to move players around.

---

Like on to Higgins? Or any other midfielder that needs shutting down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bulldogtragic

Like on to Higgins? Or any other midfielder that needs shutting down.

---

Who can do that role?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bornadog

Who can do that role?

---

Wallis & Libba have tagged at AFL level before, Dunkley could too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bornadog

Who can do that role?

---

I reckon Libba could.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chef

I reckon Libba could.

---

He seemed to cope alright tagging Kennedy in the Grand Final.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bornadog

When you are getting done, you have to move players around.

---

There are players in our team who obviously don't understand their role or are incapable of playing that role in the way that the coaches want. Whether its hubris from the coaches (we won a premiership so you must listen to us) or we are looking at a job that is only half done (and my dear old dad always told me never to show an idiot a job that is half done)

The fact of the matter is I am getting sick of watching us ship players out (Stringer, Roughhead, Dalhaus) who can actually play the game and replacing them with players half as talented (Because the coaches don't know how to handle them when it is actually the coaches' job to bring together different groups of people and get them to play as a team, anyone can sack them, that's no great acheivment-getting them to play at their maximum is the true art to coaching)

It's not the job of a coach to make life as simple as possible for themselves. It's getting the best out of a disparate group of players and if Bevo cant figure that out and we cant get him to see it then he has a short term future as a coach, not a long one.

Stringer done his hammy. Dodged a bullet by getting him out. Not professional enough. Roughy, I get it. Great clubman. Keep Stringer? Insanity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ghost Dog

Stringer done his hammy. Dodged a bullet by getting him out. Not professional enough. Roughy, I get it. Great clubman. Keep Stringer? Insanity.

---

Yep, it was never going to work

At what stage does learning how to play other positions stop and players play the position they are suited to?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by azabob

At what stage does learning how to play other positions stop and players play the position they are suited to?

---

Now. If Judy, the gun accounts manager, just had her 6th unfair dismissal claim since the boss made her HR manager to make the management team more flexible... Well, it would never have got passed one claim before the boss pulled their head out of their arse.

Why can't most of our players be outstanding in one area? The SAS and commandos don't make their members enrol in the bugle program. Van Gogh wasn't told to make clay vases. Beethoven wasn't told to get better as an inside harmonica player. No one turned up to a Nick Cave gig and hoped he'd be doing the entire set playing the keytar.

I understand flexibility. But the sport is counted in wins and losses. I don't see this policy helping the wins column, but I do see it playing a role in the losses column. To be really honest we are half pregnant with the policy. We have 7 or so inside mids playing which is impacted other areas of the ground. It's too many. So dial it back to normal levels and develop players into roles that accord to their strengthes, or back the policy in and trade Macrae, McLean and/or Dunkley. Why have these guys clogging the forward line. If the policy is right, we have too many flexible players who have value on the table table. They're worth more in trade than output. I don't agree with the policy, but if it's no going to change then other discussions need to be had.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bulldogtragic

Now. If Judy, the gun accounts manager, just had her 6th unfair dismissal claim since the boss made her HR manager to make the management team more flexible... Well, it would never have got passed one claim before the boss pulled their head out of their arse.

Why can't most of our players be outstanding in one area? The SAS and commandos don't make their members enrol in the bugle program. Van Gogh wasn't told to make clay vases. Beethoven wasn't told to get better as an inside harmonica player. No one turned up to a Nick Cave gig and hoped he'd be doing the entire set playing the keytar.

I understand flexibility. But the sport is counted in wins and losses. I don't see this policy helping the wins column, but I do see it playing a role in the losses column. To be really honest we are half pregnant with the policy. We have 7 or so inside mids playing which is impacted other areas of the ground. It's too many. So dial it back to normal levels and develop players into roles that accord to their strengthes, or back the policy in and trade Macrae, McLean and/or Dunkley. Why have these guys clogging the forward line. If the policy is right, we have too many flexible players who have value on the table table. They're worth more in trade than output. I don't agree with the policy, but if it's no going to change then other discussions need to be had.

---

Saint Nick could just turn up and stand there and the crowd would go wild.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by azabob

At what stage does learning how to play other positions stop and players play the position they are suited to?

---

Which players do you feel are in the wrong position?

Like to see Dureya played forward when he gets back from injury. Think he and Lloyd would work well together. Most he has ever kicked in a season is 6 ( checked ) but kicked a ripper earlier on and at least has the experience to stick to a plan / some smarts about the way he plays. Total speculation on my part.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bornadog

Which players do you feel are in the wrong position?

---

Richards forward of the ball for a start. He, and JJ, are the best run & carry players on our list. We need to play Richards to his strengths especially so early in his career. If he's not playing back, he can play as one of our wing rotations.

Wally on ball had the largest clearance diffrential against him in the competition last year, but was one of our top 3 forwards in the second half of last year. Dunkley was a mediocre forward but posted elite midfield numbers in the back half of last year. Wallis started the season on ball, Dunkley forward. Madness.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mofra

Richards forward of the ball for a start. He, and JJ, are the best run & carry players on our list. We need to play Richards to his strengths especially so early in his career. If he's not playing back, he can play as one of our wing rotations.

Wally on ball had the largest clearance differential against him in the competition last year, but was one of our top 3 forwards in the second half of last year. Dunkley was a mediocre forward but posted elite midfield numbers in the back half of last year. Wallis started the season on ball, Dunkley forward. Madness.

---

How many guys do you want on the HBF. Richards is a 19 year old learning his craft. Many players start on the backline then get moved. eg Hahn, Griffen early on.

* Wally and the rest of the mids play on ball and resting forward.

* Dunkley has shown he is better mid, so now spending more time there. He started with us as a forward, got some mid time last year due to injury, but now getting alot more mid time as he is proving to be good at it.

I don't understand why people are getting upset about a few players playing a role in order to try and find a goal kicker. We just don't have goal kickers (as you have pointed out). Naughton has gone forward because we lost Boyd and Schache is not yet up to it.

I don't believe moving players around is the difference between winning and losing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bornadog

I don't understand why people are getting upset about a few players playing a role in order to try and find a goal kicker. We just don't have goal kickers (as you have pointed out). Naughton has gone forward because we lost Boyd and Schache is not yet up to it.

I don't believe moving players around is the difference between winning and losing.

---

Are people upset or just questioning the logic? I think it's the latter

Easton Wood was moved forward but shuffled back when he didn't fire so I don't see why people can't question why we wouldn't return Richards to the back half knowing he goes very well there

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bornadog

How many guys do you want on the HBF. Richards is a 19 year old learning his craft. Many players start on the backline then get moved. eg Hahn, Griffen early on.

---

You missed this bit?

Quote:

---

If he's not playing back, he can play as one of our wing rotations.

---

I actually prefer him on a wing because he delivers into the 50 so well, even though he was drafted as a rebounding defender.

We need to play players to their strengths. Naughton being tried forward is good, but it's hardly taking away from his competitive advantage which is contested marking.
Dunkley's ability to win the contested ball is fantastic, something he gets less chance to do forward of the ball.

Wallys played predominantly on ball in the first 6 or so rounds, now is playing far more forward where he played well last year. My point is we abandoned something that was working and yes all these little things do add up during a game to affect the results. If they didn't, why bother even having coaches and gameplans?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ghost Dog

Like to see Dureya played forward when he gets back from injury. Think he and Lloyd would work well together. Most he has ever kicked in a season is 6 ( checked ) but kicked a ripper earlier on and at least has the experience to stick to a plan / some smarts about the way he plays. Total speculation on my part.

---

GD Dureya was played there in his last season at Hawthorn with limited success. Seems to love those long goals running up the ground coming off the backline.