Four-headed monster

[jeemak]

Re: Four-headed monster

"Effort and contest", defects that should never be absent, 1st game or most recent.

Whatever dude. Name me five key forwards who have put all of the things together over the last twenty years and averaged 1.8 goals a game.

I'm sure they're there.........and it will give someone for Marra to look up to.

[Sedat]

Re: Four-headed monster

It's obviously related to the (im)balance of our forward mix, but the issue is less about our tall forward magnets and more the fact that the collective group of our smaller high half-forward/pressure players inside F50 absolutely sucks compared to the competition. To say we need Charlie Clarke and Arty Jones to come on and fast is an understatement (I know Jones isn't really a small pressure forward). That is why VDM is one of the first magnets selected every week. And we have West as well - draw the line there (Cody is a jet but he's not a traditional small pressure forward).

As a comparison GWS on the weekend had Daniels, Thomas, McMullin and Darcy Jones all doing that VDM high half-forward unrewarded running/pressure forward role. Such is their glut of these types (who are all quick), they even had the luxury of using Bedford (who would walk into our team as the first picked for this role) as a run-with on Walsh and Cripps, and they absolutely torched Carlton on the turnover and also stopped their rebounders (Saad, Newman, etc..) from getting easy ball out of D50

[mjp]

Re: Four-headed monster

It's obviously related to the (im)balance of our forward mix, but the issue is less about our tall forward magnets and more the fact that the collective group of our smaller high half-forward/pressure players inside F50 absolutely sucks compared to the competition.

It so often seems when you go in with an extra small you don't have targets ahead of the footy and when you go in with that target you can't generate enough pressure.

It's tricky mate - how much of this comes down to the pressure the mids are under delivering inside 50, the pressure the backs are under exiting D50 and finding a midfield target who can run, backs getting HBR's etc.

I mean, I get what you are saying but as with all things selection what is perfect 1-week wont work at all the next and you will be left spinning magnets and hoping for 'something'.

The mix isn't terrible when Weightman plays but no doubt we are hurting due to your next point - two recently drafted forwards simply aren't ready/don't really look like being ready...

To say we need Charlie Clarke and Arty Jones to come on and fast is an understatement.

LOLs.

Pretty sure that isn't happening anytime soon.

[JanLorMill]

Re: Four-headed monster

I'm sure we tried this 4 headed monster in the 90s with Beveridge playing. Must be games with at least 4 of Ballantyne, Sexton, Grgic, Grant and Charles in our forward line.

[mjp]

Re: Four-headed monster

I'm sure we tried this 4 headed monster in the 90s with Beveridge playing. Must be games with at least 4 of Ballantyne, Sexton, Grgic, Grant and Charles in our forward line.

That's a monster of an altogether different variety!!

[mighty_west]

Re: Four-headed monster

I'm sure we tried this 4 headed monster in the 90s with Beveridge playing. Must be games with at least 4 of Ballantyne, Sexton, Grgic, Grant and Charles in our forward line.

JC was just manic, played cricket with and against him before he crossed to baseball, but only one quality forward there in Granty who was a superstar, the others well, good ordinary players would be one description, at least now we have three quality forwards with two still developing, but still would go with the three with Naughton playing the CHF roaming higher up the ground role and Lobb back (as that experiment is still working after two games).

[jazzadogs]

Re: Four-headed monster

So our two best games for the year, in my opinion, were Freo and Carlton.

Freo forward line: Lobb (3.1), Marra (3.1), Weightman (3.0), West (4.0), VDM, + others rotating (Bont kicked 3, English and Gallagher 2, Bramble, Treloar and Richards 1).

Carlton forward line: Marra (4.3), Darcy (1.2), Weightman (1.1), West (4.1). Plus goals from Bont, Williams, Dale, Poulter.

To me it is pretty undeniable that our side looks better with two talls. Jamarra plays better, and our smalls have more productive games.

How on earth do we manage this when Naughton is fit? Lobb being a serviceable CHB has been a godsend (and in a way only adds to the argument that Naughton should have been moved back previously because hell, if Lobb can make it work then Naughton could have!), but there's no room for another one back imo.

Do we push Naughton up to a true wing role?

I don't see any of Darcy, Marra or Naughton playing VFL...but how do we fit them all in to one side?

[josie]

Re: Four-headed monster

So our two best games for the year, in my opinion, were Freo and Carlton.

Freo forward line: Lobb (3.1), Marra (3.1), Weightman (3.0), West (4.0), VDM, + others rotating (Bont kicked 3, English and Gallagher 2, Bramble, Treloar and Richards 1).

Carlton forward line: Marra (4.3), Darcy (1.2), Weightman (1.1), West (4.1). Plus goals from Bont, Williams, Dale, Poulter.

To me it is pretty undeniable that our side looks better with two talls. Jamarra plays better, and our smalls have more productive games.

How on earth do we manage this when Naughton is fit? Lobb being a serviceable CHB has been a godsend (and in a way only adds to the argument that Naughton should have been moved back previously because hell, if Lobb can make it work then Naughton could have!), but there's no room for another one back imo.

Do we push Naughton up to a true wing role?

I don't see any of Darcy, Marra or Naughton playing VFL...but how do we fit them all in to one side?

Exactly what I was thinking after tonight, well yesterday now. Naughts further up ground eg on wing makes sense. Also if one of Marra or Darcy (or English) is having a horrid day or is injured then Naughts could move to F50 and we bring on a speedy sub.

[azabob]

Re: Four-headed monster

So our two best games for the year, in my opinion, were Freo and Carlton.

Freo forward line: Lobb (3.1), Marra (3.1), Weightman (3.0), West (4.0), VDM, + others rotating (Bont kicked 3, English and Gallagher 2, Bramble, Treloar and Richards 1).

Carlton forward line: Marra (4.3), Darcy (1.2), Weightman (1.1), West (4.1). Plus goals from Bont, Williams, Dale, Poulter.

To me it is pretty undeniable that our side looks better with two talls. Jamarra plays better, and our smalls have more productive games.

How on earth do we manage this when Naughton is fit? Lobb being a serviceable CHB has been a godsend (and in a way only adds to the argument that Naughton should have been moved back previously because hell, if Lobb can make it work then Naughton could have!), but there's no room for another one back imo.

Do we push Naughton up to a true wing role?

I don't see any of Darcy, Marra or Naughton playing VFL...but how do we fit them all in to one side?

After the north game Beveridge pondered the exact same thing. Yesterday again will push the match committee to ponder all scenarios.

English also needs to be added into the pool for discussion.

[Bornadog]

Re: Four-headed monster

After the north game Beveridge pondered the exact same thing. Yesterday again will push the match committee to ponder all scenarios.

English also needs to be added into the pool for discussion.

What discussion do you want for English?

[azabob]

Re: Four-headed monster

What discussion do you want for English?

If we only go with two tall forwards should English be our automatic number one ruck or should it be a horses for courses?

[GVGjr]

Re: Four-headed monster

So our two best games for the year, in my opinion, were Freo and Carlton.

Freo forward line: Lobb (3.1), Marra (3.1), Weightman (3.0), West (4.0), VDM, + others rotating (Bont kicked 3, English and Gallagher 2, Bramble, Treloar and Richards 1).

Carlton forward line: Marra (4.3), Darcy (1.2), Weightman (1.1), West (4.1). Plus goals from Bont, Williams, Dale, Poulter.

To me it is pretty undeniable that our side looks better with two talls. Jamarra plays better, and our smalls have more productive games.

How on earth do we manage this when Naughton is fit? Lobb being a serviceable CHB has been a godsend (and in a way only adds to the argument that Naughton should have been moved back previously because hell, if Lobb can make it work then Naughton could have!), but there's no room for another one back imo.

Do we push Naughton up to a true wing role?

I don't see any of Darcy, Marra or Naughton playing VFL...but how do we fit them all in to one side?

So you are applying to be the chair of our match committee?
You have presented strong evidence and facts that we have some challenges with our forward line set-up if we go into games with what we regard our 3 best talls to be and we certainly shouldn't be going into many games with a 4 talls set-up.

We possibly could go in with 3 if one of them is prepared to play more of a defensive role and not jump for as many marks when other forwards are in the mix. O'Donnell had that role against Harris Andrews for part of the game against Brisbane.

[Bornadog]

Re: Four-headed monster

If we only go with two tall forwards should English be our automatic number one ruck or should it be a horses for courses?

I thought he played a great game last night. He was aggressive, although HTA's down We don't have another first ruck. Darcy not ready

[GVGjr]

Re: Four-headed monster

I thought he played a great game last night. He was aggressive, although HTA's down We don't have another first ruck. Darcy not ready

Not sure it was a great game but he was very effective against two competitive opposition rucks. He also modified the way he dealt with the centre square contests, which was something he worked on with Lachie Smith during the week, and he pushed back and helped out the defenders. To me it was more of a good team-orientated performance from English and I hope he continues on like it for the balance of the season.

Have to agree that Darcy isn't quite ready as a ruck man but I'd suggest he will be a lot better at that next year.

[jazzadogs]

Re: Four-headed monster

If we only go with two tall forwards should English be our automatic number one ruck or should it be a horses for courses?

He can be in the discussion for sure but I think he has too many AFL qualities. Perhaps there are weeks where Darcy takes more of the load, even a 50/50 split rather than 70/30.

For the record, yesterday Darcy attended 25 ruck contests including 6 CBA (5 hitouts, 4 clearances) while English attended 86 (24 CBA, 32 hitouts, 2 clearances). I thought Darcy was really important when he was in the ruck. But would I want to see him playing higher minutes there...not at this stage of his career.