View Full Version : How do you solve a problem like Buddy and Roughy?
Wahooti Fandango
3 May 2009, 14:08
It is almost inevitable that Buddy and Roughy will kick at least 3 a piece against us, but how can we prevent that from being 7 or 8? Fletcher being out is obviously not going to help. Ryder will have to spend his time when not in the ruck in the back line helping out the youngens. I realise that kelvin believes that one cannot ruck and play in defence, but what choice do we have? Hurley to play on Roughead and Pears on Buddy? Is McPhee an option after getting smashed by Brown? Maybe Hooker is a better option. It is better that we do not think about the midefiel battle.
AndyLesPaul
3 May 2009, 14:14
It is almost inevitable that Buddy and Roughy will kick at least 3 a piece against us, but how can we prevent that from being 7 or 8? Fletcher being out is obviously not going to help. Ryder will have to spend his time when not in the ruck in the back line helping out the youngens. I realise that kelvin believes that one cannot ruck and play in defence, but what choice do we have? Hurley to play on Roughead and Pears on Buddy? Is McPhee an option after getting smashed by Brown? Maybe Hooker is a better option. It is better that we do not think about the midefiel battle.
Hooker is an option on one of them,
Daniher or Hurley hopefully are back, and Pears was pretty good on Bradshaw
Too many options i say.
cawshezy
3 May 2009, 14:20
Hooker is an option on one of them,
Daniher or Hurley hopefully are back, and Pears was pretty good on Bradshaw
Too many options i say.
Yeh Pears played a good game bar Bradshaw kicking some goals late was really surprised to see he only had half a dozen stats
fishguts
3 May 2009, 14:25
A crowbar
This thread is not nearly as catchy as "How do you solve a problem like Maria?".
<George singing> How do you solve a problem like Maria? </George singing>
Strike Swiftly
3 May 2009, 15:33
a hot shot will eliminate one of them.
Wahooti Fandango
3 May 2009, 15:36
This thread is not nearly as catchy as "How do you solve a problem like Maria?".
<George singing> How do you solve a problem like Maria? </George singing>
The Sound of Music was my inspiration.
The Sound of Music was my inspiration.
Really, heh. I mean I have seen The Sound of Music and realised that is the original reference. I just didn't think a guy on a football forum would make such a reference.
Not that I'm questioning your manhood or anything. :p
Says the person who youtube'd The Sound of Music clip earlier to listen to the song again.
deathevocation
3 May 2009, 16:18
It's highly likely that all hell will break loose in Hawthorn's forward line this Friday night. Could be like round 20 1992.
fishguts
3 May 2009, 16:34
Again... a crowbar
centurion
3 May 2009, 17:07
If only we were connected with the mafia........
Flood.
I'll round up Hird, Lloyd, Fletch etc and some women. Someone build an ark.
thebigboy
3 May 2009, 17:47
A crowbar
Shotgun will work better
Strike Swiftly
3 May 2009, 17:59
Shotgun will work better
nah the hot shot is better.
I do agree with the crowbar on Roughhead. There is a high risk though of banging his face into shape though :D
I'd take 10 goals between the two
fishguts
3 May 2009, 18:13
"Let's go to the CQ
Let's go to the CQ
Na, Na, Na, Na, Na HEY
Na, Na, Na, Na, Na HEY"
thebigboy
3 May 2009, 20:06
nah the hot shot is better.
I do agree with the crowbar on Roughhead. There is a high risk though of banging his face into shape though :D
Banging his face into shape would take a month :D
I think we should flood. And play damned ugly football. I remember they did it to us in 2005 when they stank. And we only won by 3 points that day.
Bugger em. Id rather lose by 4 goals than 20!
If we play like we have been the past 3 weeks its gonna be humiliating to watch.
The Dustbin
3 May 2009, 20:39
We need to restrict and pressure their midfield supply. Hooker moves really well for his size, he may get Buddy and Pears Roughead.
If Pears and Hooker get taken to the cleaners, I have no idea what plan B will be. Maybe it could be, to not put McPhee on Lance.
Fletch being out is a massive loss. I hope Hurley comes up, will be a good experience for him.
lemon chicken
3 May 2009, 20:58
Our midfielder play predominately backward of the centre and never pass half forward and our half forwards dont go chasing easy kicks in the backline would be a start. Forwards have to stand up, time to let the passengers out. Monfries will most likely go to Hodge, should be interesting. I'd be happy with Hooker on Buddy.
OzBomber
3 May 2009, 21:10
Hurley on Roughy and Hooker on Buddy swapping with Paddy in the ruck.
Skeeta Olly
3 May 2009, 21:15
Hurt them going the other way.
Would love for both Daniher and Hurley to be match-fit. I feel Pears is suitable for either; Hurley would be best on Roughead for his body-work, and Daniher on Buddy for his pace and agility. The three of them could help each other out, in a perfect world. If one of Daniher or Hurley doesn't come up, Hooker to take Buddy.
Despite the probable loss coming, I'm pretty excited to see how our young backs (hoping that they all play) fair against the best in the business.
ningnangnong
4 May 2009, 00:19
Get all the players wives and distract them.
B-Bomber
4 May 2009, 02:34
If neither Hurley or Daniher come up for this game (Hurley should probably play at least a game for Bendigo, though Daniher could probably slot back in). Then I think we will need to go with Bellchambers in to do the rucking rotating through the forward line with Paddy and Hooker can stay back all game.
This also gives us the flexibility that we can send Ryder back and Hooker forward/ruck if the backline is getting smashed beyond what we expect it to.
BomberBuzz
4 May 2009, 10:38
well i dont think we can really tell who will do well.
We are just gonna have to wait and see how each does on the other opponent.
All we know is usually buddy n roughy (not so much) kill us each yr.
No point putting ryder down there or fletch (if fit). They get killed each yr.
Will be exciting to see any of the untried youngsters against the premier forwards
Hurley - Roughead, Pears - Franklin and McPhee to play spare man in defence.
Pears will need to work off buddy, but down the flanks. McPhee needs to play a defensive game (against what I believe he should be doing in the side) and be third man up all game. Hooker back up ruck, Ryder to ruck then rest at FF. We will need to have a great game from our mid group, I think we need Houli to come into the side and run from the HBF, he should take NLM's spot.
EVERLAST
4 May 2009, 22:07
I think we should flood. And play damned ugly football. I remember they did it to us in 2005 when they stank. And we only won by 3 points that day.
Bugger em. Id rather lose by 4 goals than 20!
If we play like we have been the past 3 weeks its gonna be humiliating to watch.
I agree with this - if we lose by under 4 goals - have to take that as a positive experience for our young brigade who would be almost used to seeing us become our worst enemy whenever we venture forward.
Lloyd up forward flying solo whilst Davey and Jetta crumb deep - Lucas playing wide out on the left wing and hopefully catch anything that falls his way and McPhee on the opposite wing doing as he pleases.
What I would give to have Welsh and McVeigh back right now marshalling the troops in the middle.
A crowbar
Again... a crowbar
I'm glad to see we're all on the same page :thumbsu::D
Colin D'Cops
5 May 2009, 00:08
http://images.6pr.com.au/2009/03/20/425209/Dennis6PR-Thumbnail-172x115.jpg
'And the floodgates are open...'
Slattery_20
5 May 2009, 09:37
We'll just use Hurley... damn... Daniher! no... Fletcher, nup, Ryder... in the ruck, Hooker... in the ruck... anyone over 6'3" !
That's 5 of our top 6 defensive options basiaclly out of the question
Bringing in BC will give us the option of freeing either Ryder or Hooker, at the expense of some mobility. We will need him dropping back into the hole if he's in the side.
The backline we put out there next week should (by rights) be the sort of backline that concedes massive bags to key forwards. Underweight, inexperienced, basically unknown in Hooker's case.
We shall see.
Gold Member
5 May 2009, 10:21
Great article the OP has written in todays HUN...
Hawk duo a puzzle for Bombers
http://www.theage.com.au/news/rfnews/hawk-duo-a-puzzle-for-bombers/2009/05/04/1241289101768.html
I wonder what Jesse Hogan's login name is? :rolleyes:
MinerBoy
5 May 2009, 13:49
Your boys really need to make sure the ball spends a large % of the time in your own forward line i.e. smash us in the midfield.
If not, I don't think there is a lot you can do. At least one will kick 5+ this week if our midfield is on song.
Bugger that..Line In The Sand #2.
MinerBoy
5 May 2009, 16:48
Bugger that..Line In The Sand #2.
Would be fun to watch, although neither side can afford players taking an enforced holiday.
Who goes Ok for you blokes these days?
Pevers-Legend
5 May 2009, 16:58
McPhee to play as loose man and help out Pears and Daniher/Hurley/Hooker on the other player.
Let's just play the loose man, tag Hodge with Monfries and hope like hell that Watson, Lonergan and Hocking play blinders to deny first use of the ball.
Then our quicker guys will hurt the hawks who aren't overly fast when compared to us.
Of course if we apply no midfield pressure- we will be pummeled.
But funnily enough, after a disappointing loss - I reckon they will respond positively.
Let's hope our duo Soctty and Lloydy wind back the clock.
fishguts
5 May 2009, 17:01
Hmm, I posted this on BB, but I saw a subtle (or not so subtle) hint that Myers is at this stage the planned match-up for Franklin.
For specifics, he said 2 players will have the ride of their lives.
They were Tayte Pears and David Myers.
Pevers-Legend
5 May 2009, 17:20
Hmm, I posted this on BB, but I saw a subtle (or not so subtle) hint that Myers is at this stage the planned match-up for Franklin.
For specifics, he said 2 players will have the ride of their lives.
They were Tayte Pears and David Myers.
I just posted an article about Lucas being dropped and Knights said as much.
Myers on Franklin? Surely not? Although he probably is tall enough - is he strong enough?
BringBackCransberg
5 May 2009, 18:58
McPhee to play as loose man and help out Pears and Daniher/Hurley/Hooker on the other player.
Let's just play the loose man, tag Hodge with Monfries and hope like hell that Watson, Lonergan and Hocking play blinders to deny first use of the ball.
Then our quicker guys will hurt the hawks who aren't overly fast when compared to us.
Of course if we apply no midfield pressure- we will be pummeled.
This is the best plan, I think. Except have McPhee focus on helping whoever is playing on Roughead (Franklin is out of sorts for Franklin, and Roughead is on fire for anyone). If we really restrict Roughhead the pressure on an out-of-sorts Franklin will either push him into a brilliant or a terrible game -- a risk we have to take. So Pears on Roughead with support from McPhee.
Dempsey to step up another gear. He has shown plenty of times this year that he is willing to put his body on the line, and has quite a good leap and overhead mark. I'd have him on Franklin alone, playing off him (to avoid Franklin's muscle), matching his fancy footwork and speed, and hoping for the best. I admit that it's unlikely, especially given Knights' comments, and Dempsey's roles this year, but I'd love to see it. Also, if we put the focus on Roughead and thus make Franklin the focus of the Hawks' I50s, then Dempsey will be in the thick of the action, providing the run off half back we're going to need to win.
(And afl.com.au said today that Daniher and Hurley are both playing VFL.)
borrow a tactic from william wallace (braveheart) and tar one of the F50's. Then win the toss.. send them in and fire the flaming arrow.. :rolleyes:
Probably the easiest solution and I think a couple of other teams will thank us as well...
Other than that.. we don't solve it.. we just get slaughtered.. errgghhh its giving me shudders just thinking about it..
hawks_time
5 May 2009, 19:44
Shotgun will work better
Shotgun? (Sorry, tried as hard to find the gun action but couldn't find a pic of it...you get the gist though)
http://images.slatterymedia.com/images/thumbs/main/172399.jpg
The coaches will work it out this alleged problem, and that reminds me of an old saying that all Dons should keep in mind: "What we anticipate seldom occurs, what we least expect generally happens"
AndyLesPaul
5 May 2009, 20:24
Shotgun? (Sorry, tried as hard to find the gun action but couldn't find a pic of it...you get the gist though)
http://images.slatterymedia.com/images/thumbs/main/172399.jpg
Thats what i was thinking :P
It would work better though ;)
MarkJohnson#1
6 May 2009, 00:16
Any chance we could get Mark Yeates out of retirement? ;)
Colin D'Cops
6 May 2009, 09:18
Tayte on Rough. - Hook on Buddy.
AndyLesPaul
6 May 2009, 21:07
Tayte on Rough. - Hook on Buddy.
Liking that.
http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,6611775,00.jpg
We dont really need to worry about Buddy :D
NLM - Buddy even
OzBomber
6 May 2009, 21:09
NLM - Buddy even
Don't you ever mention that mention that match up again! :thumbsd:
Buddy will kick 23.26 on NLM.
People would still say he had a good match cause he was hard at the ball though!
RuckRyder
6 May 2009, 21:27
I have no confidence we can contain them. Just hoping they kick less then 5 each.
People would still say he had a good match cause he was hard at the ball though!Oh FFS Spikey, you know nothing. It's because he took the game on.
:p
Luckily it doesn't matter if he succeeded in taking the game on! It's the effort that counts
AndyLesPaul
6 May 2009, 22:25
Don't you ever mention that mention that match up again! :thumbsd:
Buddy will kick 23.26 on NLM.
lol, i have a feeling that in a current state, NLM would own him, but assist in other goals.
Lol
Hooker on Buddy.
BuddyTwoThree
7 May 2009, 03:31
lol, i have a feeling that in a current state, NLM would own him, but assist in other goals.
Lol
Hooker on Buddy.
That would be a novel approach...
Do you think you could find a hooker that has the stamina to go with Buddy all night though??
Rough head on Hooker or Hooker on Roughead seem the more likely matchups. Could get a bit messy though.
Hooker switching between the twin towers could be even messier
Ben the Gooner
7 May 2009, 09:11
*whistles innocently (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun)*
Would be fun to watch, although neither side can afford players taking an enforced holiday.
Who goes Ok for you blokes these days?
We've still got McPhee playing...and young Neagle (much like his Dad!) doesn't mind getting on the angry pills.
That would be a novel approach...
Do you think you could find one that has the stamina to go with Buddy all night though??
Rough head on Hooker or Hooker on Roughead seem the more likely matchups. Could get a bit messy though.
Hooker switching between the twin towers could be even messier
I'd say Pears would get Roughy.
Bellchambers to come in so Ryder/Hooker can take Buddy and provide a chop out.
Was listening on SEN earlier...McPhee is putting his hand up for the Buddy job.
stay true
7 May 2009, 17:50
Our midfielders have a fair job on their hands. Can't afford to let Mitchell, Sewell and the like to get an easy touch.
And hope Roughead and Franklin don't kick straight lol.
bomberstomake8
7 May 2009, 17:56
Was listening on SEN earlier...McPhee is putting his hand up for the Buddy job.
yeah i heard that too, not liking the sound of that, no disrespect to mcphee but he is way too short and doesnt have a big enough leap to cope with buddy.
i fear the only match up for buddy we have is hooker or ryder.
pears is probably the ideal match up for roughhead, he can match him for strength speed and ability. i am confident that pears could keep him relatively quiet.
buddy on the other hand i fear is going to get near the 10 goal mark this week. hopefully hooker is ready to step up
stay true
7 May 2009, 18:02
I don't think McPhee on Franklin is THAT bad an idea. Paul Bower played on him last week and pretty much beat him. Kept him to 2.1 and 14 possesions (most of which were up the ground).
McPhee and Bower aren't that disimilar in size/weight.
ghostdog
7 May 2009, 18:34
McPhee on Franklin doesn't bode well after McPhee on Brown. I reckon one of the more mobile backs needs to help out McPhee, double-team Franklin who hopefully won't hit form against us... then run as fast as they can back to Campbell or Rioli or whoever's next in line to kick a bag. That ought to stop them.
Pears on Roughead will be good, if only for Pears' development.
I don't think McPhee on Franklin is THAT bad an idea. Paul Bower played on him last week and pretty much beat him. Kept him to 2.1 and 14 possesions (most of which were up the ground).
McPhee and Bower aren't that disimilar in size/weight.Bower also had Jarrad Waite floating across to help him out. I'd argue that Bower/Waite beat Buddy.
Consumed
7 May 2009, 20:27
yeah i heard that too, not liking the sound of that, no disrespect to mcphee but he is way too short and doesnt have a big enough leap to cope with buddy.
i fear the only match up for buddy we have is hooker or ryder.
pears is probably the ideal match up for roughhead, he can match him for strength speed and ability. i am confident that pears could keep him relatively quiet.
buddy on the other hand i fear is going to get near the 10 goal mark this week. hopefully hooker is ready to step up
You obviously have two players named Pears on the list then?
Strength? No.
Speed? Maybe.
Ability? Potential maybe. Tomorrow night? Not likely.
fishguts
7 May 2009, 20:40
You obviously have two players named Pears on the list then?
Strength? No.
Speed? Maybe.
Ability? Potential maybe. Tomorrow night? Not likely.
He beat Pavlich and beat Bradshaw for 31/2 quarters. Don't under-estimate this kid.
AndyLesPaul
7 May 2009, 20:41
You obviously have two players named Pears on the list then?
Strength? No.
Speed? Maybe.
Ability? Potential maybe. Tomorrow night? Not likely.
We'll see won't we.
stay true
7 May 2009, 20:49
Bower also had Jarrad Waite floating across to help him out. I'd argue that Bower/Waite beat Buddy.
Yeah fair point, forgot to mention it. The leap/strength Bower gave away was nulified by Waite.:thumbsu:
I know we have a habit of playing big forwards into form (Franklin), but Roughead is the real worry for us. Pears has a huge job on his hands and I hope he can build on last weeks performance on Bradshaw.
Dang..15 1/2 quarters you say fishguts? Almost two games on both....
AndyLesPaul
7 May 2009, 22:25
Dang..15 1/2 quarters you say fishguts? Almost two games on both....
whats your point?
i don't think mcphee put his hand up at all - he was asked if he would take the job. he could hardly say no like a wuss. of course he was going to say yeah i'd take the challenge if the coach put me there etc like any bloke would.
i'm also getting the impression myers will line up on franklin with mcphee on a hbf for support. myers is similar in size to bower who did a good job. for such a big man franklin actually isn't that dominant overhead - he gets a lot of possession/goals from ground level. i'd be happy for myers to start there and see how he goes - franklin will be way too quick/agile for hooker and to a lesser extent pears. pears did well on bradshaw so will most likely be playing full back opposed to roughead.
even if buddy/roughy are well defended, mark williams will probably bob up and kick 6! with no daniher who goes to him? probably slattery but i'm concerned about the pace off the mark...
Ben the Gooner
8 May 2009, 09:09
I've got a sneaking suspicion that our ruck duo will be Bellchambers and Hooker.
The coaches will work it out this alleged problem, and that reminds me of an old saying that all Dons should keep in mind: "What we anticipate seldom occurs, what we least expect generally happens"
I would like to think there were many other Bomber supporters who went to the game with the same mindset as mine. And consider that the contrarian view can prove quite lucrative, especially at the $5.15 offered last night against the hawks, in this, the year of our silver anniversary. :D