View Full Version : Centre Half Forward
To me this is the most important position on the field. Ideally the Centre Half Forward needs to me tall and mobile to make the aerial contests and be a tall leading option for the ball carriers up field. He needs to be good overhead. If he doesnt take the mark then bring the ball to ground for the crumbers. Players who meet this definition are McDougall, Gaspar and Gardiner.
But for Gods sake it is NOT David Haynes. Or Andrew Embley for that matter.
Does anyone notice that when we have either Haynes or Embley at CHF then we really struggle up forward and the ball rebounds out of the area quickly? This was particularly evident today. At the start of the last quarter Woosha sat McDougall on the bench. Roos got back into the game. McDougall came back on and we were able to win the game. I thought McDougall made a good debut. With another preseason under his belt and some works on the weights he could be very god for the club.
I would Trade/Delist Haynes. He is not only not tall enough for CHF but slow. Sure he is strong but he is too lazy to get to a contest. Dont even mention second efforts to me.
The CHF position for the Eagles is essential. The Player doesnt have to be a super star. Just get the ball to ground because we have some great little blokes running around.
GO EAGLES!
I have no question in my mind that CHF will be locked down by Doogs next season with Gardy and Gaspar in spurts. The kid looked real good today.
daddy_4_eyes
2 Sep 2002, 00:30
Originally posted by ONE EYE
I would Trade/Delist Haynes. He is not only not tall enough for CHF but slow. Sure he is strong but he is too lazy to get to a contest. Dont even mention second efforts to me.
Its funny, just last year and this preseason we were all praising Haynes and joking how he's our favourite. 22rd later and a lot of people are calling for his head. Deserves another year IMO, just like Hunter, Wooden and others got. Had they been delisted after early jitters we'd be missing 2 decent players.
With McDougall playing so well at CHF, it may finally release Gaspar to CHB. Now the only question remains, where do we play Gardi? Feels good to have so many options.
bunsen burner
2 Sep 2002, 11:12
I was at the game yesterday and was trying to work out who the big mobile guy at CHF was. I've only seen McDougal in a mug-shot picture where he looked like a skinny youth with a bad haircut (bleached as well). He provided a presence yesterday and looks good for the future.
We have a good developing mid-field, now we need some good developing key position players. Bring on McDougal and Gaspar!
I think the club will keep one of the following and trade the two others:
Embley
Haynes
Williams
All of them are HF flankers, unfortunately inconsistent flankers.
The problem with all three is their decision making. They all play on too quickly which often results in a turnover.
My pick for who will stay, David Haynes. Still has 1 more year on his contract and we wouldn't get anything if we traded him anyway. At least with Embley and Williams we would get something.
Originally posted by Visro
I think the club will keep one of the following and trade the two others:
Embley
Haynes
Williams
All of them are HF flankers, unfortunately inconsistent flankers.
The problem with all three is their decision making. They all play on too quickly which often results in a turnover.
My pick for who will stay, David Haynes. Still has 1 more year on his contract and we wouldn't get anything if we traded him anyway. At least with Embley and Williams we would get something.
Out of those three i would keep Williams, has a bit more skill than the other two and has a bit of experience. Would be a better player if he could get more opportunity. When he is in the side, he spends most of his time on the bench, one of my only gripes with Whoosha.
Voice of Reason
3 Sep 2002, 11:35
Originally posted by Visro
I think the club will keep one of the following and trade the two others:
Embley
Haynes
Williams
All of them are HF flankers, unfortunately inconsistent flankers.
The problem with all three is their decision making. They all play on too quickly which often results in a turnover.
My pick for who will stay, David Haynes. Still has 1 more year on his contract and we wouldn't get anything if we traded him anyway. At least with Embley and Williams we would get something.
I think that if the match committee think that a player is not good enough or doesn't have the improvement in them, they will delist that player anyway.
Obviously contracts come into it (is there anywhere we can see who is under contract and who not?).
My guess?
Embley - keep
Williams - trade
Haynes - keep if under contract, trade/delist if not.
TheRealBuzz
3 Sep 2002, 13:26
I'd keep Andrew Williams simply for his versatility.
It annoys me that he has never been given a chance to play down back this year. Being very quick and strong overhead he would be ideal to play on blokes like Brad Johnson who cut us up this year.
Not sure about Embers and Haynes. Hard to call.
Gaspar is still my choice for CHF, btw. McDougall is a better player out of the goal-square. The good thing about having these two blokes up forward is that they're also good ruckman and give the side a huge advantage at throw-ins around the forward line. Macca showed that on Sunday with a beautiful tap to Cuzz that set-up a goal.
daddy_4_eyes
3 Sep 2002, 15:56
I'd keep both Williams and Embley. Even if they're not in our best 22 they are great backup to have. Premiership teams need to have players outside their best 22 that can step up in case of injuries and not look out of place. Haynes on the other hand is worth persisting with. He has shown he can play, only he needs is a bit of time.
Id keep WIlliams and Embley too. I think theyve done enought to deserve more time. I think you'll see a big improvement in them next year.
GoEagles
3 Sep 2002, 16:19
I dont know if we should have Haynes & Williams - IMO one should be traded back to Victoria. How about Williams for Steven Armstrong from Melbourne?
I agree with Visro when he said "I think the club will keep one of the following and trade the two others:
Embley
Haynes
Williams
All of them are HF flankers, unfortunately inconsistent flankers.
The problem with all three is their decision making. They all play on too quickly which often results in a turnover. "
The difference between Haynes and Hunter, Wooden, Fletcher, Humm, Embley, Gaspar and Chambers is that Haynes does not play with the same passion. (We also need to see a bit more of it from Darren Glass).
I would trade Haynes and Williams but keep Embley. I dont quite understand why Williams is on the outer. But if he is then better to get someone the Club has confidence in.
GO EAGLES
bunsen burner
4 Sep 2002, 00:00
Originally posted by GoEagles
How about Williams for Steven Armstrong from Melbourne?
I don't think Melbourne share the same view.
Just for the record, I want to say that players such as Embley, Williams and Hayes are tradeable, but not for anyone any good. They are only good enough for another second rate player, or to be part of a bigger deal. I've heard people mention straight swaps for players of the ilk of Chick and Armstrong. Not a chance, stop dreaming. All other team's followers seem to over rate their 2nd tier players. Eagles fans aren't any different.
larrikin
4 Sep 2002, 00:08
Originally posted by bunsen burner
I don't think Melbourne share the same view.
Just for the record, I want to say that players such as Embley, Williams and Hayes are tradeable, but not for anyone any good. They are only good enough for another second rate player, or to be part of a bigger deal. I've heard people mention straight swaps for players of the ilk of Chick and Armstrong. Not a chance, stop dreaming. All other team's followers seem to over rate their 2nd tier players. Eagles fans aren't any different.
Good point.
The only way the Eagles will get anything worthwhile for Williams/ Embley/ Haynes etc is to package them together with either draft picks (something the Eagles may be able to afford to do with the number of quality young players - especially big guys who's value doubles in the draft) or other players.
To get a Chick or a Headland we will need to give up significantly more than any of these players, and I don't know if the club is willing to trade the callibre of player required.
Voice of Reason
4 Sep 2002, 00:20
Originally posted by bunsen burner
I don't think Melbourne share the same view.
Just for the record, I want to say that players such as Embley, Williams and Hayes are tradeable, but not for anyone any good. They are only good enough for another second rate player, or to be part of a bigger deal. I've heard people mention straight swaps for players of the ilk of Chick and Armstrong. Not a chance, stop dreaming. All other team's followers seem to over rate their 2nd tier players. Eagles fans aren't any different.
I reckon Hawthorn would look at Williams plus a draft pick for Chick, if he's that desperate to come back to WA, or Mick at Collingwood (if they have anyone we're interested in).
bunsen burner
4 Sep 2002, 00:48
Originally posted by Voice of Reason
I reckon Hawthorn would look at Williams plus a draft pick for Chick, if he's that desperate to come back to WA, or Mick at Collingwood (if they have anyone we're interested in). Same.
These players have potential, but they are good enough to be used in straight swaps for the players who are being mentioned. They would have to be packaged with a decent draft pick as well.