Analysis Our forward line - KPF depth?

[Itsmyshow]

Except that Hurley didn't create space in the fwd line, led to the pockets far too often, missed clutch goals and led early far too often. He was not a good fwd, but because of his amazing work rate he was able to impact on games. The other thing Hurley cannot do is take pack marks.

So Carlisle up fwd has him for everything bar work ethic, which can be trained somewhat into him. He also is learning the position and has had what 2 praccy match games where we were going through the motions to be judged on. His move may fail, but perhaps we should wait till seasons end to make judgement.

Not so much making judgement as an opinion.

I hope Jake dominates the forward 50, if he can work to good spots and become a contested marking beast, both he and JD will be a forward duo for the ages.

 

[Zephyr Effekt]

Carlisle has a knack of kicking some very un-conventional goals in every game he plays in the forward-line.

I can easily see Carlisle kicking 2-3 goals a game while having stats like 8 Disposals (4K - 4HB) + 2 Marks for a majority of games this season.

Once Carlisle learns to become that forward again who had 14 Disposals (9K - 5HB) + 12 Marks in his 2nd game of football, which i don't think will happen till the 2nd half of next season, he will become a very dangerous forward.

 

[Smokin]

Just got through the first quarter of the Tigers game.

Ambrose was easily the most active tall forward. Repeat efforts at ground level were good, worked hard to pressure at ground level, took a mark on the wing on the lead, should have been rewarded with mark/free kick directly in front 25m out, 5 or 6 touches in total and even provided a link on the opposition side of the circle at one stage.

Basically doing everything we want that third tall/midsized/leading forward to be doing.

Kicking action pretty bad but if that is his first 20 minutes in the big leagues I'd say what we need is right under our noses.

Punt Road is a postage stamp too. Would be even better suited to the open spaces of the G (and to a less extent Docklands).

I agree, I think Ambrose should be the one to be used.

But, I feel with so many ?? on the forward line, they wont go with a first gamer.

He does play the way that position should, is big and strong with a tank for days. Id persist.

 

[BrunoV]

I agree, I think Ambrose should be the one to be used.

But, I feel with so many ?? on the forward line, they wont go with a first gamer.

He does play the way that position should, is big and strong with a tank for days. Id persist.

Which is why I am furious that we wasted valuable practice match minutes on Steinberg and Hardingham but that is neither here nor there anymore.

Simply have to persist with the set up including Ambrose now, take the hits and work towards things starting to come together in 5 or so weeks time or at least until Bellchamber returns (and how I shudder at the thought of him playing alongside Carlisle and Daniher at the same time in 2014).

 

[Smokin]

I think Hardingham is an ok option, was actually a bit peeved he was used too much down back and not in the forward line where IMHO he is much better.

Part of me is hoping Bomber didnt want to expose much of the forward line tactics in the pre-season, as we have been working on this a lot over summer.

But, I think Steinberg was the first option, but after 2 games they went against it. I still think Steinberg can be ok, but he has to realise he is not there to be a power forward. Stop looking for body and get on your bike son

maybe he just doesnt have the tank to play it.

 

[BrunoV]

I think Hardingham is an ok option, was actually a bit peeved he was used too much down back and not in the forward line where IMHO he is much better.

Part of me is hoping Bomber didnt want to expose much of the forward line tactics in the pre-season, as we have been working on this a lot over summer.

But, I think Steinberg was the first option, but after 2 games they went against it. I still think Steinberg can be ok, but he has to realise he is not there to be a power forward. Stop looking for body and get on your bike son

maybe he just doesnt have the tank to play it.

If he thinks there is an advantage in hidden tactics he has genuinely lost the plot.

Everyone knows how Hawthorn's forwards play but they are disciplined, work hard and get the ball kicked to their advantage.

 

[Phone]

Except that Hurley didn't create space in the fwd line, led to the pockets far too often, missed clutch goals and led early far too often. He was not a good fwd, but because of his amazing work rate he was able to impact on games. The other thing Hurley cannot do is take pack marks.

Don't really think that was his problem. I think it was pretty clear that as a whole the team planned to kick the ball into the pocket. I guess one possible reason for this being that if the mark isn't taken by the Essendon player, there's a chance the ball is punched out by the other player, giving the team a chance to set up their press.

 

[Pevers-Legend]

Don't really think that was his problem. I think it was pretty clear that as a whole the team planned to kick the ball into the pocket. I guess one possible reason for this being that if the mark isn't taken by the Essendon player, there's a chance the ball is punched out by the other player, giving the team a chance to set up their press.

Then why was Davey always leading front and centre?

 

[Phone]

Then why was Davey always leading front and centre?

can't resist that davey charm

obviously the plan isn't always do (x). I just don't think Hurley was acting out of order.

 

[Pevers-Legend]

can't resist that davey charm

obviously the plan isn't always do (x). I just don't think Hurley was acting out of order.

Fair enough. I think he simply didn't lead to the right areas like most of our fwds (IMO JD will proove this over the course of the year).

 

[yaco55]

I'm not so sure about that. It seems to me that against the tigers we were running into their extra man once we hit half forward and as a result we were trying to go over the top to a more even contest. That might have worked if we had some sort of forward pressure happening, and in fact the first four forward entries that happened in the first few minutes resulted in boundary throw ins in the pocket. That's not a bad result if you have your stoppages sorted. I actually had the feeling that if we were a little sharper we could have kicked four goals to nothing early on which would have given the day a different flavour.
Last year we had huge numbers of forward entries but with a comparatively poor conversion rate due to the lack of marks taken. This forward line has more marking potential replacing Hurley with JC. I guess TBC and JD are somewhat like for like. If we could repeat last years first half of the year forward system then i believe we would kick more goals this year. I remember that as the season progressed Hurley was getting more space and lots of opportunities but just couldn't hang on to the mark! Something we were doing must have been right.
Is it possible that bombing it long was the result of a defensive press by the opposition pushing out from the 50? If so, then we almost had it cracked last year, but just lacked the marking power. After all what the hell is the opposition going to do as plan B in that scenario? That sort of defensive press is the last option against an opponent you are treating with the utmost respect. That stands to reason because we were beating everyone at that point.

Your first sentence and your last paragraph answers my question ; A - four boundary throw ins - That means we were going to the flanks and pockets - And I can't remember a clean Richmond spoil ala Fletcher, where the ball was punched 40 metres away. Bb - Defensive press with opposition pushing out of their defensive 50 - This occurred because kicking from defensive 50 was slow and predictable, allowing this to happen - Move the ball quickly by hand and foot doesn't give the opposition time to push up. And according to yesterdays training report the team practised moving on quickly from the mark, even turning half way to dispose of the ball.

 

[yaco55]

You really think Gumby had that sort of tank? After almost never completing a preseason over his entire career? Granted, it was the player we wanted him to be... I see what you are saying in general, but i do think the sort of player that can play that role effectively is by definition a top shelf player. Licka can do it if he stays on the park. Goddard can do it. But it is that sort of level player that you need. Ambrose making the team as that style of player is a pipe dream at this point in time...

Gumby's tank was a myth - It was never displayed in a game.

 

[yaco55]

So in an inauspicious start with midfielders either out or rusty, in a forward line that hasn't had match day experience, 5 goals in 2 games is a problem? Which incidentally is on track for a 55 goal season? (Not that i expect him to get that!).
The thing is, if you think Carlisle cannot get 40 goals this year then you are essentially saying that his move to the forward line has been and will a big mistake. There is no doubt that to justify the move we need him to get a couple of goals a game and that means 40 odd for the year.
I really don't understand why anyone would doubt he is capable of that? He is a massive unit, a booming kick and is one of the best contested marks in the comp! What does 1 and 1 equal people?!

5 goals and one from a mark. This is unsustainable for a key forward. He needs to mark the ball.

 

[2one2]

5 goals and one from a mark. This is unsustainable for a key forward. He needs to mark the ball.

He will - he's not going to stagnate or regress IMO. He has a great football brain and will get the hang of it - pun intended - soon.

How about some ******* patience guys? We are onto a really good thing here. Leave it lay

 

[Pevers-Legend]

5 goals and one from a mark. This is unsustainable for a key forward. He needs to mark the ball.

Can you tell Buddy and Roughead that.

 

[hurlygurdy]

5 goals and one from a mark. This is unsustainable for a key forward. He needs to mark the ball.

I agree that he needs to get goals from marking the ball. On the flip side there is no doubt that if he is to be a successful forward then he also needs to get goals in other ways. So given that we know he is "buckets", i'd far rather see an intuitive ability to get goals in other ways at this point in time.

 

[Stiggitupem]

I'd like to see both Carlisle & Hurley up forward. Hurley effectively Crameri's replacement. At least until Bellchambers comes back.

Pears, Fletch Hooker down back. Hardingham / Steinberg as support.

 

[Essendonia]

I'd like to see both Carlisle & Hurley up forward. Hurley effectively Crameri's replacement. At least until Bellchambers comes back.

Pears, Fletch Hooker down back. Hardingham / Steinberg as support.

Ha ha, I'd like to see both Carlisle and Hurley down back, permanently! See your angle, though it would presumably turn a solid defence into one a bit more susceptible. And we all know a good defence is the best attack, right?

 

[eth-dog]

Defence>Attack. That's why I'd prefer Hurley/Hooker/Carlisle in defence

 

[Big Fresh]

Really hope we can get Kristian Jaksch from GWS at the end of the year. Could solve a lot of problems and doesn't seem too unrealistic.

 

[Whispering_Jack]

Defence>Attack. That's why I'd prefer Hurley/Hooker/Carlisle in defence

Ross Lyon (4 GF's, no wins) says hi! TBH though, I agree that defence is very important and is probably more important than attack, but you must have some balance. We need a weapon of sorts up forward so having those three great players back leaves us with nothing in the forward line, that is unsustainable and we woudln't score enough to win games with that set up.

 

[eth-dog]

Really hope we can get Kristian Jaksch from GWS at the end of the year. Could solve a lot of problems and doesn't seem too unrealistic.

Jaksch is a good player, but the one from GWS would have to be Tomlinson. He's already showed the workrate of Hurley as well as good hands and a pretty good kick. With Patton/Cameron/Boyd, could be on the way out

Ross Lyon (4 GF's, no wins) says hi! TBH though, I agree that defence is very important and is probably more important than attack, but you must have some balance. We need a weapon of sorts up forward so having those three great players back leaves us with nothing in the forward line, that is unsustainable and we woudln't score enough to win games with that set up.

If you get the defensive gameplan and defense set you can bank on it and work on your forward line. If you instill the discipline first you know that it'll stay there, if you go the reverse, the defence may always be suspect.

 

[Whispering_Jack]

Jaksch is a good player, but the one from GWS would have to be Tomlinson. He's already showed the workrate of Hurley as well as good hands and a pretty good kick. With Patton/Cameron/Boyd, could be on the way out

If you get the defensive gameplan and defense set you can bank on it and work on your forward line. If you instill the discipline first you know that it'll stay there, if you go the reverse, the defence may always be suspect.

I'm not saying focus on offence first and then work on defence, I am just saying stacking our back line with those three players would cost us too much offensively to be worth it.

 

[Smokin]

If he thinks there is an advantage in hidden tactics he has genuinely lost the plot.

Everyone knows how Hawthorn's forwards play but they are disciplined, work hard and get the ball kicked to their advantage.

Not so much hidden tactics, but not using the forward line as he would during the season.

I have no doubt we will see more of Watson, Ryder (even without Tbell), Goddard, Chapman deeper etc in the season proper.

 

[eth-dog]

I'm not saying focus on offence first and then work on defence, I am just saying stacking our back line with those three players would cost us too much offensively to be worth it.

I disagree. If we get a solid KPF it'll be fine