Do we play another tall forward?

[Rocco Jones]

I was going to reply to a few comments in the Gilbee injury thread about playing another tall but I didn't want to (continue to) railroad discussion. A few posters were talking about how most sides play at least one more tall forward than we do.

I am not a fan of us playing Cordy, Minson and Roughead in the same side. I don't think you are automatically top heavy because you play a certain amount of guys over a certain height, I think it depends on their mobility and quality. For example Buddy doesn't count towards being 'top heavy'. I definitely believe another tall forward would benefit the side just that it would be a massive risk due to the lack of quality and mobility of our talls.

Roughead, Minson and Cordy combo would mean one of them plays forward all game with another one spending the majority of the game there as well. My issue is less with Cordy's ability to play forward but it being combined with Roughy/Minson being alongside him for hte majority of time.

Roughy and Minson have different styles but at the core of them is being a 1st ruck and IMO that means they are a poor combo/not being worth the sum of their parts.

[GVGjr]

Re: Do we play another tall forward?

I agree with you Rocco. Playing 3 players that are primarily ruckman who pinch hit as forwards isn't a good mix for us. Even playing 2 of them can be an issue against some sides.
If one of them was a Paddy Ryder or Ports Jackson Trengove who are both more capable of playing in the back line forward line and taking a spell in the ruck then having the 3rd tall wouldn't be an issue but the 3 players we have don't give us that type of flexibility.

It's going to be a challenge to slot them all into the line-up.

[BulldogBelle]

Re: Do we play another tall forward?

If we look at the make up of the forward line rather than the individuals within it, we definately need another tall up there. A FF (or deep forward in modern speak) that will play the way Gia is, but allows more forgiveness when the ball comes in - ie can compete for the high trajectory rushed inside 50. Either Cordy or Panos, depending on structure.

[SlimPickens]

Re: Do we play another tall forward?

If we look at the make up of the forward line rather than the individuals within it, we definately need another tall up there. A FF (or deep forward in modern speak) that will play the way Gia is, but allows more forgiveness when the ball comes in - ie can compete for the high trajectory rushed inside 50. Either Cordy or Panos, depending on structure.

I think you've kind of touched on it, the delivery in to our forward line needs to be addressed. Liam Jones kick to Gia against wce showed how it needs to be done. Too many times we bombed it on top of someone's head (mainly Jones and Gia), if we can effectively kick the ball to our advantage it doesn't matter if they're tall or short we will get enough opportunities to mark the ball in our forward line.As tall relief in the forward line I think we need to get more out of our resting talls whether that be Minson,Roughy or Cordy. I'd still stick with Jones and a resting ruckman as our tall options up forward, we have a chance to stretch St Kilda next week as their defense is on the short side.

[Rocco Jones]

Re: Do we play another tall forward?

If we look at the make up of the forward line rather than the individuals within it, we definately need another tall up there. A FF (or deep forward in modern speak) that will play the way Gia is, but allows more forgiveness when the ball comes in - ie can compete for the high trajectory rushed inside 50. Either Cordy or Panos, depending on structure.

If we HAVE to go in with an extra tall I would definitely drop one of Minson/Roughy for Cordy. Ayce as our 2nd ruckman would give us greater flexibility to plany another tall.

ATM Roughy/Minson spend about 60% combined TOG up forward which is a massive liability IMO. Cordy could play as a modern 2nd ruck allowing Minson to spend pretty much all his time in the ruck.

A lot of posters who want an extra tall are seemingly ignoring the cost, an extra runner. Just not worth it when your talls aren't decent.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Do we play another tall forward?

At the moment we don,t have the luxury of an in form tall forward , at the moment we have Jones and Dickson and then after that all midfielders with Minson and Roughead rotating through BUT while both Minson and Roughhead are doing a serviceable job but they are just not making enough impact up forward , between them against Adelaide they had 6 contested possessions, 1 mark inside 50, 0 contested marks , 1 goal

If Minson and Roughead can make more of an impact on games and average a goal a game till the end of the season then that will balance out the lack of an extra tall forward

.

[jeemak]

Re: Do we play another tall forward?

I'm for bringing in Cordy, and keeping Roughead and Minson in the side.

Thinking along the lines of seeing how it goes for a half, with a pure runner as the sub (such as Sherman, coming in for Smith). If it looks like we've lost too much run then we sub Cordy or Roughead off (or Minson if he's not playing well, of course) and changing our structure.

We desperately need a second, genuine tall playing up forward to give Jones a hand until he gains sufficient fitness and learns to run to the right spots, not to mention make up for our innability to deliver the ball foward cleanly.

Cordy to me seems like the only player we have on the list that has shown recent form in the two's, and is tall enough to stretch defenses alongside Jones and Grant. Instead of viewing the prospect of taking him in to this week as a weakness we should see how it works out for us as a strength.

[Ghost Dog]

Re: Do we play another tall forward?

I don't really know enough about St Kilda to comment, but I can't believe that posters think we are not a chance against them. I watched the Port Adelaide and they are just a good honest team Port - nothing fancy.
If we play for four quarters like we did against the crows in our best two, they will find it very hard to counter the likes of Jones, Dahlhaus, Gia and Brian.

[Bornadog]

Re: Do we play another tall forward?

I'm for bringing in Cordy, and keeping Roughead and Minson in the side.

Thinking along the lines of seeing how it goes for a half, with a pure runner as the sub (such as Sherman, coming in for Smith). If it looks like we've lost too much run then we sub Cordy or Roughead off (or Minson if he's not playing well, of course) and changing our structure.

We desperately need a second, genuine tall playing up forward to give Jones a hand until he gains sufficient fitness and learns to run to the right spots, not to mention make up for our innability to deliver the ball foward cleanly.

Cordy to me seems like the only player we have on the list that has shown recent form in the two's, and is tall enough to stretch defenses alongside Jones and Grant. Instead of viewing the prospect of taking him in to this week as a weakness we should see how it works out for us as a strength.

I went to the Hawks/Geelong match yesterday and the Hawks had Buddy, Roughead and at times Hale in the forward line. Geelong had Pods, Hawkins up there. Maybe we don't have that calibre but we need to start developing someone, whether its Cordy, Hill or Campbell as pure forwards and forget about rucking.

At times yesterday there were 36 players in the forward 50 or both teams with a full press happening. We are now playing a similar style and can protect the forwards without having to have mobile big men having to chase the opposition backman running the ball out.

Jones is playing too deep and is getting smashed at the moment. He is not a FF and I believe better suited to CHF.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Do we play another tall forward?

I'm in the don't play all 3 corner.

I am however all for Cordy getting an opportunity this week. But at the expense of Minson or Roughead. Either aren't doing enough at the moment, so it wouldn't bother me which we dropped.

We have 2 glaring weaknesses, firstly the delivery forward of centre and secondly ability to hold the ball in our forward 50.

I guess if you improve the disposal going forward it will help lock the ball in, but it's just getting rebounded too easily at the moment. Having 2 ruckmen down there at all times won't help this at all.

It's a bit disappointing though because we should be able to have this luxary. We have Grant + Jones who are quick talls who should be able to apply pressure ocne the ball hits the deck. They just don't do it consistently enough at the moment. West Coast get away with it because Darling chases all day as does Kennedy (when fit)

[LostDoggy]

Re: Do we play another tall forward?

I'm on the fence with Minnow -- it was one bad game, which everyone is entitled to have now and then. Having said that, if this becomes a trend, he would be valuable-ish trade bait so we would be smart to cash in while there is still some currency, especially if Roughie + Cordy's output = Roughie + Minnow's output. It's not like we're going to challenge in the next 3 years either, so we may as well put more development into younger rucks, get a cheap mature-age back-up via the rookie draft, and maybe get some value out of Minnow swapping him for a second-round draft pick or a surplus young runner somewhere (looking at you, GC).

But of course, the ideal situation would be for Minnow to prove us all wrong and go on a blistering run of form for the next 15 weeks.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Do we play another tall forward?

Any thought of Cordy coming into the side needs to be tempered with the fact that at AFL level his rucking skills are sub-staqndard and in this regard both Minson and Roughead are ahead of him. Cordy is easily outmanoevered in man on man in ruck duels.

People are missing the point that Minson contributed to our third quarter charge significantly on Saturday though his work at centre bounces which was a vast improvement on his efforts the week before

[Bornadog]

Re: Do we play another tall forward?

Any thought of Cordy coming into the side needs to be tempered with the fact that at AFL level his rucking skills are sub-staqndard and in this regard both Minson and Roughead are ahead of him. Cordy is easily outmanoevered in man on man in ruck duels.

People are missing the point that Minson contributed to our third quarter charge significantly on Saturday though his work at centre bounces which was a vast improvement on his efforts the week before

What I am saying is Cordy comes in purely as a FF and forget about rucking.

[Mofra]

Re: Do we play another tall forward?

Any thought of Cordy coming into the side needs to be tempered with the fact that at AFL level his rucking skills are sub-staqndard and in this regard both Minson and Roughead are ahead of him. Cordy is easily outmanoevered in man on man in ruck duels.

Definately yes last year, but he seems to have imporved substantially over the summer and form wise he may well earn a call-up.

[Nuggety Back Pocket]

Re: Do we play another tall forward?

Any thought of Cordy coming into the side needs to be tempered with the fact that at AFL level his rucking skills are sub-staqndard and in this regard both Minson and Roughead are ahead of him. Cordy is easily outmanoevered in man on man in ruck duels.

People are missing the point that Minson contributed to our third quarter charge significantly on Saturday though his work at centre bounces which was a vast improvement on his efforts the week before

I still maintain that we lack a General on the forward line that others will look up to and follow. That was the advantage of having a Johnno, Aker or Barry Hall to provide the maturity and experience. Reluctantly given our current set up I would still like to see Robert Murphy at CHF to provide some direction and class. Jones because of his marking strength but inferior kicking looks a better option at FF. Minson survives because of his greater experience and strength leaving Roughead in front of Cordy as your second ruck option. The other alternative would be to try Cordy at CHF. We apart from Lake lack marking power consistently around the ground which might be a good enough reason to elevate Cordy.