Always Right Match Committee Round 18 v Sydney

[hujsh]

Re: Always Right Match Committee Round 18 v Sydney

With the SCG being a smaller ground could we get by with Darcy providing a couple of chop outs for English and dropping Lobb?

How much are we losing with Lobb's ruckwork? 10 or less hitouts? Surely Darcy's contribution can't be much less than that for whatever small amount of time we don't have English in the ruck. I don't even think Lobb is poor in the ruck but he's not in there long and we're not getting much from him as a forward so I'd be willing to give Darcy a go and let Lobb either have a rest or find touch in the VFL

[Mofra]

Re: Always Right Match Committee Round 18 v Sydney

How much are we losing with Lobb's ruckwork? 10 or less hitouts? Surely Darcy's contribution can't be much less than that for whatever small amount of time we don't have English in the ruck. I don't even think Lobb is poor in the ruck but he's not in there long and we're not getting much from him as a forward so I'd be willing to give Darcy a go and let Lobb either have a rest or find touch in the VFL

Lobb isn't 100% fit, which is largely our fault given his ankle issues during pre-season and the timing of his surgery.

I'd actually rest Lobb this week if we think it would help. His TOG% and running is excellent for a big man but if his ankle is hampering him, that advantage is muted. Darcy gets a crack against a defence which is organised, but short. Their second ruck is... McLean? Darcy will have a good 10cm+ on him as that chop-out ruck.

[mjp]

Re: Always Right Match Committee Round 18 v Sydney

Lobb isn't 100% fit, which is largely our fault given his ankle issues during pre-season and the timing of his surgery.

There's that. Then there's the part where with Jamarra and Aaron forward, we just don't need another tall in the forward line.

Can someone tell me WHEN having 3x talls up front benefitted us?

Injured or otherwise, I think he's spending half of his life (or more) trying to stay out of the way and I think it's a instruction.

[GVGjr]

Re: Always Right Match Committee Round 18 v Sydney

There's that. Then there's the part where with Jamarra and Aaron forward, we just don't need another tall in the forward line.

Can someone tell me WHEN having 3x talls up front benefitted us?

Injured or otherwise, I think he's spending half of his life (or more) trying to stay out of the way and I think it's a instruction.

That's an interesting take and you would have to wonder why we would do it by design?
To me part of his problem is that he keeps leading behind Marra and Naughton though and not into a more open positions that are available.
He was the number 1 forward target at Fremantle and now is the number 3 or 4 with us so perhaps accepting that he was always more of a structure player than someone who could kick 1.5 goals a game is what we should be accepting.

We should also remember that we seemed to have wanted to play 4 key forwards in the early part of the year.

Does the fact that Weightman also play as a marking forward add to the congestion?

[Bornadog]

Re: Always Right Match Committee Round 18 v Sydney

That's an interesting take and you would have to wonder why we would do it by design?
To me part of his problem is that he keeps leading behind Marra and Naughton though and not into a more open positions that are available.
He was the number 1 forward target at Fremantle and now is the number 3 or 4 with us so perhaps accepting that he was always more of a structure player than someone who could kick 1.5 goals a game is what we should be accepting.

We should also remember that we seemed to have wanted to play 4 key forwards in the early part of the year.

Does the fact that Weightman also play as a marking forward add to the congestion?

Lobb came in because we needed a second ruck. All supporters were very critical of Bevo playing Dunks, Hannan, Bruce, Bont etc as the second ruck to support Tim. Sweet is a pure tap ruck and useless for the rest of the game. He is the same in the VFL and that wasmn't working either.

Lobb doesn't need to kick many goals each week, he is there in the forward line to help take the focus off JUH and Naughton, however, I don't think we are using Lobb the best way. I would like to see him have a larger % in the ruck, but also he also needs to do more around the ground when rucking, because it ain't happening.

[Bulldog Joe]

Re: Always Right Match Committee Round 18 v Sydney

There's that. Then there's the part where with Jamarra and Aaron forward, we just don't need another tall in the forward line.

Can someone tell me WHEN having 3x talls up front benefitted us?

Injured or otherwise, I think he's spending half of his life (or more) trying to stay out of the way and I think it's a instruction.

The forward line was not the problem last week (although conversion certainly needed to be better)

They seem to have gelled (finally) in the last 2 games. Jamarra and Naughton plus the resting ruck seems OK to me.

Now the choice is Lobb or Darcy when/if Darcy gets some continuity.

[Sedat]

Re: Always Right Match Committee Round 18 v Sydney

A Bruce selection in the backline would have Sydney forwards salivating.

Wouldn't our key forwards be salivating at the prospect of lining up against a bit of a spud in Melican, an underdone Tom McCartin and a short-arse Dane Rampe who has been well off the pace from his usual level all season?

If our mids dominate (and Sydney's midfield group as a collective have been poor all season against the decent teams), it shouldn't get into Sydney's F50 enough for them to mortally damage us on the scoreboard.

[GVGjr]

Re: Always Right Match Committee Round 18 v Sydney

Lobb came in because we needed a second ruck. All supporters were very critical of Bevo playing Dunks, Hannan, Bruce, Bont etc as the second ruck to support Tim. Sweet is a pure tap ruck and useless for the rest of the game. He is the same in the VFL and that wasmn't working either.

Lobb doesn't need to kick many goals each week, he is there in the forward line to help take the focus off JUH and Naughton, however, I don't think we are using Lobb the best way. I would like to see him have a larger % in the ruck, but also he also needs to do more around the ground when rucking, because it ain't happening.

Playing Dunkley, Khamis and Hannan etc as the 2nd ruck was just silly and it didn't give us much.
Bruce was a reasonable but far from ideal option. I know you've been a big fan of his ability to crash packs.

If I'm reading this correctly we chased the number 1 key forward at Freo so that could provide a 5 minute chop outs for English?
It's certainly not what we said after we recruited him.

There were plenty of other part time ruck options we could have added if we wanted someone to sacrifice their games.

[Bornadog]

Re: Always Right Match Committee Round 18 v Sydney

Bruce was a reasonable but far from ideal option. I know you've been a big fan of his ability to crash packs.

Not true - I mentioned that once and poster Stevo keeps trying to take the piss which I don't find amusing.

If I'm reading this correctly we chased the number 1 key forward at Freo so that could provide a 5 minute chop outs for English?
It's certainly not what we said after we recruited him.


There were plenty of other part time ruck options we could have added if we wanted someone to sacrifice their games.

Everything I read, except what Power said, was Lobb came in as a second ruck/Fwd. It shouldn't be for 5 minutes.

[westbulldog]

Re: Always Right Match Committee Round 18 v Sydney

Wouldn't our key forwards be salivating at the prospect of lining up against a bit of a spud in Melican, an underdone Tom McCartin and a short-arse Dane Rampe who has been well off the pace from his usual level all season?

If our mids dominate (and Sydney's midfield group as a collective have been poor all season against the decent teams), it shouldn't get into Sydney's F50 enough for them to mortally damage us on the scoreboard.

I didn't mention Sydney backs at all Whilst you may be right I don't think Bruce is up to any role on the backline. When we tried him there he was pathetic.

[Sedat]

Re: Always Right Match Committee Round 18 v Sydney

I didn't mention Sydney backs at all Whilst you may be right I don't think Bruce is up to any role on the backline. When we tried him there he was pathetic.

If our mids dominate (as they should) and we control the territory battle, I could live with Sedat Sir down back (so long as he isn't getting out-marked by Chad Morrison in the goal square)

[mjp]

Re: Always Right Match Committee Round 18 v Sydney

The forward line was not the problem last week (although conversion certainly needed to be better)

I don't agree completely.

We were +6 for inside 50's yet most people seem to think we were lucky to get within 2-goals.

Naughton and Weightman kicked 4-each. So they played well.
Jamarra was our consensus 'best' player - he actually wasn't btw but no argument that on balance he played well.

We are getting it in. Our balance still isn't right.

[Mofra]

Re: Always Right Match Committee Round 18 v Sydney

There's that. Then there's the part where with Jamarra and Aaron forward, we just don't need another tall in the forward line.

Can someone tell me WHEN having 3x talls up front benefitted us?

Injured or otherwise, I think he's spending half of his life (or more) trying to stay out of the way and I think it's a instruction.

I don't have an issue with our talls splitting the defenders.
If we go back 12-18 months ago, we had Naughton & Marra flying for the same ball multiple times per game. I haven't seen that this year.

[Mofra]

Re: Always Right Match Committee Round 18 v Sydney

If our mids dominate (as they should) and we control the territory battle, I could live with Sedat Sir down back (so long as he isn't getting out-marked by Chad Morrison in the goal square)

Username checks out

[Mofra]

Re: Always Right Match Committee Round 18 v Sydney

Playing Dunkley, Khamis and Hannan etc as the 2nd ruck was just silly and it didn't give us much.
Bruce was a reasonable but far from ideal option. I know you've been a big fan of his ability to crash packs.

If I'm reading this correctly we chased the number 1 key forward at Freo so that could provide a 5 minute chop outs for English?
It's certainly not what we said after we recruited him.

There were plenty of other part time ruck options we could have added if we wanted someone to sacrifice their games.

We did chase others. And missed out. Soldo the obvious one.