View Full Version : Roughie down back
As some may be aware, for a long time I have put forward, that roughie should go back. My reasoning was, that premiership teams have a mighty defence built around quality kp defenders. We have Croad, and we have Brown as a small/mid defender, but do not have another quality defender to negate a quality opposition forward. Gilham is useful, partly due to his disposal, but not yet reliable in negating quality forwards.
If we're to win a premiership soon, we need to find this player, and this player needs to step up soon.
I believe it's Roughead, due to having played his 2nd year down back, and having built up the strength, speed and endurance to fit the position. All he needs in the experience, which needs to be given if he is to fill the void.
I welcome any other suggestions, or feedback.
hodge-910111213
2 Mar 2008, 16:25
I still don't know where my head stands, but my heart wants Roughie in the goalsquare.
So Blase, I agree with everything you say in your post, but thats just where my heart says I want him, much like how I still wish Hodge was our captain.
PatientHawk
2 Mar 2008, 17:20
I still don't know where my head stands, but my heart wants Roughie in the goalsquare.
So Blase, I agree with everything you say in your post, but thats just where my heart says I want him, much like how I still wish Hodge was our captain.
Ditto to all that you said.
But all the best to Mitchell also.
We do need to find places for Dowler and Thorp (forward positions).
Is Renouf still a possiblity down back somewhere?
I am still sad over the Muston injury.
Untill Thorp has proven him self as an AFL standard forward, I do not want to see Roughead in defence.
Fat Tony
2 Mar 2008, 17:34
If things get tough in defence send him there otherwise stay forward
View Poll Results: Roughy forward or back Forward http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/images/polls/bar2-l.gifhttp://www.bigfooty.com/forum/images/polls/bar2.gifhttp://www.bigfooty.com/forum/images/polls/bar2-r.gif 5074.63%Defender http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/images/polls/bar3-l.gifhttp://www.bigfooty.com/forum/images/polls/bar3.gifhttp://www.bigfooty.com/forum/images/polls/bar3-r.gif 1725.37%Voters: 67. You have already voted on this poll
the results speak for itself leave him up forward he creates a contest in a pack situation!!!
With the wealth of talented players I think we have the luxury now that we can switch and swap players roles on the field.
Perhaps if our matchups aren't quite balancing, we have the ability to rotate players from defense to offense - in Roughie's case - depending on teams or opposition players!
I don't really agree with rotating players from defence to attack. I believe that quality defences have been built having the players mature and experience in the position. This enables the players down back to coordinate well,and basically instictively know how to position themselves, spoiland judge when to mark.
And to say the only reason you want to see him in the goal square just to see him kick a couple of goals, rather thangoing back and neutralising an opponents attack, is rather short sited. At the end of the I'd much rather watch us win a flag than see Roughead kick a bag occasionally.
croady_fan24
5 Mar 2008, 22:20
I disagree. I rather have Roughie up at forward.
Brown Blood
5 Mar 2008, 22:27
We tried him back and it didn't work out that well - I also think he was quite successful playing forward last year.
Having him and buddy in the forward line make it very hard for opposition teams to man them both up and makes it harder to double man them effectively.
He also is a big guy that will be able to bring the ball down to our crumbers like cyril & stokes.
I would only play him back if croad was unavailable and we needed someone for a BIG slow forward.
Wavos2008
6 Mar 2008, 00:22
As some may be aware, for a long time I have put forward, that roughie should go back. My reasoning was, that premiership teams have a mighty defence built around quality kp defenders.
I welcome any other suggestions, or feedback.
Good stuff :thumbsu:
i like the thoughts, i know its a while back but early last yr when roughie was at box hill he really did dominate from defence and look extremely impressive. ive noticed he likes to run in a straight line, and turning back toward the goals is certainly not one of his stronger points.
Whilst he has shown he can provide a strong target up forward, i think fixing him in defence will certainly improve the spine. He seems to be very flashy in the forward line-id say handy whilst not dominating all before him, fades in and out of games very quickly. In defence he is a much more consistant figure, and will provide some relief to croad, who we are really stuffed without.
Obviously he is one of our utilities, much like croad is and in certain circumstances will be called upon to go forward and provide an option should he be sent to defence at some stage this year. Has been groomed perfectly by the coaching staff and will be a key player in our quest for that premiership cup.
When we see thorp or dowler given some more exposure this year at some stage, i hope its forward coz thats where they've played most of their footy, and also playing them in the forward line will allow less of that throwing the kids in the deep end stuff, The obvious forward to send back will most likely be rough, so im sure we'll see this later in the season.
Consumed
6 Mar 2008, 02:31
While I prefer Roughhead to play forward, he seems best suited to Full Forward, playing out of the square. I think Thorp may be a better CHF than Roughead, I also think that Thorp would be a better CHB than Roughhead.
The fact that Thorp can play both ends effectively, the question is "Do we want a great CHF, or a great CHB?"
The dilemma of course, is that our forward options far outweigh our key back options. Roughhead, Boyle, Franklin, Dowler and Thorp are options up forward. Croad, Gilham and Dawson are really our only key back options.
As much as I would love to see Thorp turn into the next Carey at CHF, it is really a flight of fancy considering we really need a genuine classy key back to take our team to the next level.
We've already got Croad to play on the big guys, and Roughie wouldn't be quick/mobile enough to play on the guys like Reiwoldt. I'm not against him playing back, but I just don't see who he'd play on.
Trickstar
6 Mar 2008, 08:23
Leave him forward, we know he can kick a bagful when he gets the chance. Having him and Buddy up forward as well as Williams and Boyle gives a lot of dilema's for the opposition. They need two agile defenders for Williams and Buddy but then they can both beat them in the air, then they need another two tall defenders for Boyle and Roughie - not many teams have a number of tall defenders. Add in Rioli, Osborne, Crawford and Hodge spending more time down forward and I think it is pretty impressive forward line.
Our defence did well last year and I don't believe Gilham had any bagfull of goals kicked on him last year. If Croad or Gilly go down injured then I think it will be a matter of re-assing, Jacobs, Cougar and Murphy can all come into consideration as well as Thorp (but yet to see him do anything except for a couple of kicks in one game) I hope all this hype about him and Dowler is justified.
Its simple really...I hope...
Over the next few years, as Thorp and Dowler develop as we hope they will, our forward and back structures will probably look something like:
B: Brown Dowler Gilham
HB: Ladson Croad Ellis
HF: Franklin Thorp Lewis
F: Williams Roughead Rioli
As much as Roughead down back will strengthen the backline immensely, can you imagine a defense trying to stop that forward line!? If Dowler develops the way we hope he does (he has played quite a bit down back at BH) then he will be able to fill that KPP in the back half leaving Roughie to monster the opposition up forward.
The great thing about the way guys like Dowler, Thorp and Roughie have been developed is that they can play both ends. So if it is not working, a simple swap to move Dowler up forward and Roughie down back wouldn't be too hard to make.
The future is bright at HFC!
phreeze77
6 Mar 2008, 09:43
He has pretty much lost hope of being a defender when that spud lynch from wce kicked 6 on him at the mcg.
He plays the loose man in defence well though .. i remember one game for box hill .. he played CHB and had 30 touches and roamed forward to kick 4 goals as well. Sort of like Paul Roos style CHB.. not accountable but his opponent isnt either so is caught out chasing him around the oval.
Personally I like him up forward ... but he needs the ball put up on top of his head so he can jump at it and use his frame.
In saying that our forward structure means he will only pull down 1 contested mark as we have too many forwards in our 50 at any one time and defenders peel off to block off space.
C4[2]Yo`DooR
6 Mar 2008, 10:11
Its simple really...I hope...
Over the next few years, as Thorp and Dowler develop as we hope they will, our forward and back structures will probably look something like:
B: Brown Dowler Gilham
HB: Ladson Croad Ellis
HF: Franklin Thorp Lewis
F: Williams Roughead Rioli
Whilst I like outside the square thinking - having seen him as a junior, I don't think Beau Dowler will ever make it as a FB or even a defender for that matter.
Needs to be played as a forward.
philhawk
6 Mar 2008, 10:22
Yo`DooR;10254388']Whilst I like outside the square thinking - having seen him as a junior, I don't think Beau Dowler will ever make it as a FB or even a defender for that matter.
Needs to be played as a forward.
Agreed.
Of all our forwards, the only ones capable of being converted into a CHB, I believe, are Thorp and Roughie.
But I reckon Thorp's too good to throw down back.
Sorry, but that means Roughie has to fill the void.
Either that, or we draft more KPP's in the draft next year/stick with Zac.
chrismew
6 Mar 2008, 10:33
I love Roughie as a forward, but I think we need to play him down back.
Our back line is pretty light on, with Gilham, Brown, Jacobs, Dew, (and maybe Dawson), and we need a big body such as Roughie to play on the bigger forwards like Rocca etc, and also to relieve the pressure on Croad.
With Thorp coming through and looking to be a very likely prospect, we can afford to play Roughie at CHB.
C4[2]Yo`DooR
6 Mar 2008, 10:37
Agreed.
Of all our forwards, the only ones capable of being converted into a CHB, I believe, are Thorp and Roughie.
But I reckon Thorp's too good to throw down back.
Sorry, but that means Roughie has to fill the void.
Either that, or we draft more KPP's in the draft next year/stick with Zac.
hmmm dont know ...
If you cast your mind back to the Championships of 2005 (the year before he was drafted) - Thorp played a dominant role as a CHB - using his agillity.
Given that it's now a vital position on the ground - I don't think he would be "wasted" there at all.
But of course I dont know who your CHF is currently - but a future position there would be beckoning for Mitch (one would think).
Agreed.
Of all our forwards, the only ones capable of being converted into a CHB, I believe, are Thorp and Roughie.
But I reckon Thorp's too good to throw down back.
Sorry, but that means Roughie has to fill the void.
Either that, or we draft more KPP's in the draft next year/stick with Zac.
Perhaps you should let the HFC coaches know that then? Because at BH, Dowler has played alot down back, while Thorp has spent most of his time up forward.
C4[2]Yo`DooR
6 Mar 2008, 10:43
Perhaps you should let the HFC coaches know that then? Because at BH, Dowler has played alot down back, while Thorp has spent most of his time up forward.
Incidently, how did BH fare last season ? :p
Mitchell Madness
6 Mar 2008, 10:46
HE is a good solid player, wherever he is... We need a nother tall in defence, and he may be the answer, however, he is also a gun at the 2nd efforts in attack (last season, many times he would be at the bottom of a pack after a spilt mark, get up with the ball, shrug a tackle or two, and kicka goal
Noel Gallagher
6 Mar 2008, 11:22
Can't believe people keeping persisting on this ridicoulous suggestion. Roughy played down back in his first two seasons as part of his apprenticeship. All of a sudden the Justin Leppitch comparisons sprung up and people are suddenly confused as to what position he should play!
For starters Roughie is nowhere near as athletic as Leppitch was. He is not as mobile and and has the turning circle of a truck! Since coming to the Hawks, he has put on a stack of muscle and his build is now a very similar say a Fraser Gehrig.
He moves thinks and plays like a power forward and and that is his future position. His break out game was against Carlton where he dominated the square and sent fear through every Carlton defenders mind. He has the classic makings of being the power forward he have been crying out for so long so why the hell would we want to put him down back now??
The last time we tried this experiement was with Trent Croad. Granted we had very little forward options at the time but the reality soon sunk in that Croad was and always will be a great CHB not CHF.
Same principle with Roughie, guys, time to wake up and smell the Jarrah!
Consumed
6 Mar 2008, 11:25
If both Thorp and Dowler come on and can play well at AFL level, then Hawthorn would be one of the luckiest teams going around. The odds in the league of all KPP drafted going on to have good careers would be against us.
It is quite rare to have this happen, Dawson might take longer than normal and this is the case with most ruckmen (& Dawson is almost that), but for both of Dowler and Thorp to develop is kind of hard to imagine.
Yo`DooR;10254609']Incidently, how did BH fare last season ? :p
About the same as Carlton, bringing up the rear
While I prefer Roughhead to play forward, he seems best suited to Full Forward, playing out of the square. I think Thorp may be a better CHF than Roughead, I also think that Thorp would be a better CHB than Roughhead.
The fact that Thorp can play both ends effectively, the question is "Do we want a great CHF, or a great CHB?"
The dilemma of course, is that our forward options far outweigh our key back options. Roughhead, Boyle, Franklin, Dowler and Thorp are options up forward. Croad, Gilham and Dawson are really our only key back options.
As much as I would love to see Thorp turn into the next Carey at CHF, it is really a flight of fancy considering we really need a genuine classy key back to take our team to the next level.
you do appear to be consuming something.
too often there is a romantic notion of positions, that is basically created from media commentary hype, and old football thinking.
i too have grown in the era of contest after contest, and quick long kicks, which i still love, but i think that positions on the ground are no longer the same as they were. i don't really see any difference between fb and chb. i don't really see that croad's only position is at fb, nor do i with glass or scarlett. in other words, fb and chb these days is more about whether you have certain attributes to fill either position; because the class players that can play these postions don't really get pigeonholed in either. as i've mentioned before, the attributes that you need to fill these positions are mainly physical: speed, strength and endurance. once you have these, then other things like judgement and reading the play come into the equation, which are mostly gained through experience and not purely talent. the talented aspect of having a player that is suitable with those physical attributes are quite rare. afterall it isn't often you see a hulking beast that can run around a lot.
roughead is a strong guy with good speed, good hands off the ground, and appeared to have pretty good endurance last year, that i would've expected improved over the pre-season. besides that, on the old theory of 'can't kick for goal, send him to the backline', it does have some merit, because Rough gets the jitters in front of the goals despite having a long raking kick that could be very useful when spotting long targets with low punts out of defence.
and if i haven't mentioned it, the main reason i think we need another quality defender, it's not to have rebound, but more to quell the opposition forwards so that we always have a chance of winning.
and with the mention of thorp, whilst i agree he appears to have the look of a player capable of filling either forward or back, at this stage he really has none of the physical attributes that are required to anchor down back - strong but not quite mature, and his speed and endurance have been hampered due to his hip injury. think down the track he could do it, but right now, when we want to win a premiership very soon, roughead's the one and only.
imagine the backline:
- Croad, Roughead playing on the kp forwards nullifying. - Gilham playing loose-man and on 3rd kp
- Brown on medium/small forward
- fill the rest with guerra, ladson, birchall, ellis, hodge, dew, murphy
that defence would be mean. i think that defence would be comparable to premiership teams' of the past, rather than the mishmash of zoning that every team does rather than solidarity.
teams that have a strong defence win premierships. it's as simple as that.
Neville Bartos
12 Mar 2008, 22:25
Roughead is a gun. Play him as a forward, if we need him to go back he can.
Thorp better be as good as Carey considering all the bloody hype over this guy. How many games has he played? 1? Until I see him tear the opposition apart i'm not going to get too excited
hawks_legends
12 Mar 2008, 22:29
Hmm..I'm not sure. I think we should try him down back because with the retirement of Jacobs we are a backman down eventhough Jacobs didn't play alot we've still lost a handy backman. So, it's worth a try. I don't think Roughy did that well up forward during the NAB Cup, thats just my opinion and I would like to see him down back but also kicking a few goals.
That's deliberate
12 Mar 2008, 23:13
The only bloke in the side that can take a contested pack mark up forward and we want to play him in defence?...not for me.
If you're looking anywhere this year it will haved to be Boyle...1 trick pony that does very very very little up forward....put him at full back and keep him there..
We need a quick forward line that keeps the ball in, contests, and creates and converts opportunities.
Ruffy up forward...Boyle down back or at Box Hill.
Noneedforaname
12 Mar 2008, 23:57
Roughy played down back in his first two seasons as part of his apprenticeship.
Nope. Roughie played forward as part of his apprenticeship. ;)
Yes, I like Roughie forward, but I reckon I could like the idea of him playing down back even more.
He knows enough about the enemy now that he can return to where he will be needed most in the future. Its a skill he is going to have to acquire, even if only to cover the possibility of a croad injury for example. Thats not to say we dont throw him forward to raise hell every now and again.
Shoot. We cant just sit back and hope these other guys just come along. Until they do, they should be putting Roughie heavily into the mix to cover our arses. I see a much better chance of the other young guns coming up trumps to replace Roughie forward than something happening down back. Co-incidently, depth wise, our stocks down back just grew a little thinnner today. These things happen, and we shouldnt be waiting for something else to happen and possibly get caught short.
Ahhh. Im getting excited. Keep it simple and imagine a situation very much like Browny. How long did he float round the forward line before he found his niche down back? He was looking a pretty handy Forward Flank or pocket for a while, but perish that thought now.
Throw him back Al. You know it makes sense.
hawkstars
13 Mar 2008, 08:02
Untill Thorp has proven him self as an AFL standard forward, I do not want to see Roughead in defence.
Yep simple as that. When one of the forwards Thorp/Dowler push for his position then it is time for Roughie to go back. Unless he has a monster year and kicks over 60
70% against
30% for
this is a pretty poor reflection of hawk fans intelligence.:(
but then i suppose it's a strong reflection of the chance of finding people that are sensible on this site.
having said that, if i were to put something of the like on the afl board, i'd expect to find something of the like, possibly worse hopefully.:o
Roughie
14 Mar 2008, 17:48
70% against
30% for
this is a pretty poor reflection of hawk fans intelligence.:(
but then i suppose it's a strong reflection of the chance of finding people that are sensible on this site.
having said that, if i were to put something of the like on the afl board, i'd expect to find something of the like, possibly worse hopefully.:o
Just because the majority do not agree with you, does not mean by any stretch of the imagination they are wrong.
Brown Blood
14 Mar 2008, 17:56
70% against
30% for
this is a pretty poor reflection of hawk fans intelligence.:(
Or perhaps your own - you should never have a poll when you don't know what the result is likely to be :)
but then i suppose it's a strong reflection of the chance of finding people that are sensible on this site.
If you think like that run the poll on other hawk forums - I would be surprised if the results were significantly different.