Strategy What are we going to do about centre half forward?

[Jon Douglas]

Wow Partridge - we are usually on the same page about most things but you could not have read carefully what I wrote.

1. I did mention Bartel at CHF as another option !

2. I never said it would enhance Blicavs marking if it was wet ! I said both would be about as effective as each other - probably few overhead marks. Both average 2.3 per game this season but Blitz has played a heap less game time. Blitz given the nature of his position can find open space a bit easier than Brown at CHF and I agree that Brown has better hands but on a wet day I do not think this difference will make much difference.

3. Blitz was on for what - one quarter last week - Brown nearly 3/4. So the tackling stats you provide really do not provide much support for Brown s a tackler. In fact over the 3 games, where Blicavs has been a sub for all 3 games, he has an average of 2 tackles and Brown 1.3 ! Not that even 3 games is enough time to rate players - but remember you were happy to use 1 game. Blitz has played not even a combined total of 1 game in time and Brown has played nearly 2.7 games total. So if we use a limited sample s you have done Blitz is a fair way ahead on the tackle count per minutes played.

Just no argument I reckon that Blitz looks a bit quicker and harder than Brown - at the ball. So for me he is likely to have more tackles than Brown and at worst as many as Brown would have.

4. Its just my view that Brown would not have got much confidence out of playing the way he did last week and that was partially due to the poor conditions he played in. I am guessing if played another game like last week in the wet his confidence would not improve. If he comes back in on a dry day and takes a few grabs and uses his very good kicking skills he may bag a few goals and that would increase his confidence. We shall have to agree to differ on this point.

It seems to me then you did not read my post just simply glossed over it and had an emotional reaction or you simply failed to comprehend what was written. But please re-read it and then tell me how the hell did you come to the points you made about things that I did not write or infer.

I ended with I want Brown back so he gets a fair go at CHF - just sometimes like picking bowlers for certain pitch conditions - and this is one of the situations. Brown was poor last week - for the time he was out there Blicavs was ok. He offers more options to us and I think both would be at best average at CHF in wet conditions. But Blicavs offers more in run, height, body strength, probably in tackling and harassing and in being able to pinch hit in the ruck. So for this ONE week, given that rain and wind is predicted, Blicavs offers as much at CHF probably as Brown.

I don't mind a discussion but I do get a bit tired of answering posts that do not reflect what I wrote.

 

[Partridge]

why?

Because it seems every time it's had the most impact for us it has been. Stokes in Round 2 last year v North, Caddy in the Prelim are two huge examples I can think of. If the modern game is about run, surely you want someone coming on who can provide that. Someone who can slot straight into the midfield rotations seems to be what Geelong at least have been doing for a fair while.

Who should the sub be then?

 

[Partridge]

2. I never said it would enhance Blicavs marking if it was wet ! I said both would be about as effective as each other - probably few overhead marks. Both average 2.3 per game this season but Blitz has played a heap less game time. Blitz given the nature of his position can find open space a bit easier than Brown at CHF and I agree that Brown has better hands but on a wet day I do not think this difference will make much difference.

That's the bit that I query. There seems to be an assumption that where Vardy, Brown and Walker are finding out how difficult a position it is, he's going to find CHF easy. That's where we disagree. I also have doubts on whether the match committee are going to suddenly switch him from the wing - where he's played all season.

3. Blitz was on for what - one quarter last week - Brown nearly 3/4. So the tackling stats you provide really do not provide much support for Brown s a tackler. In fact over the 3 games, where Blicavs has been a sub for all 3 games, he has an average of 2 tackles and Brown 1.3 ! Not that even 3 games is enough time to rate players - but remember you were happy to use 1 game. Blitz has played not even a combined total of 1 game in time and Brown has played nearly 2.7 games total. So if we use a limited sample s you have done Blitz is a fair way ahead on the tackle count per minutes played.

Just no argument I reckon that Blitz looks a bit quicker and harder than Brown - at the ball. So for me he is likely to have more tackles than Brown and at worst as many as Brown would have.

As you say below, we agree to disagree.

4. Its just my view that Brown would not have got much confidence out of playing the way he did last week and that was partially due to the poor conditions he played in. I am guessing if played another game like last week in the wet his confidence would not improve. If he comes back in on a dry day and takes a few grabs and uses his very good kicking skills he may bag a few goals and that would increase his confidence. We shall have to agree to differ on this point.

Fair enough. My reasoning is I think whoever the incumbent CHF is needs as many games as possible to get continuity and confidence. I can't see how dropping them from one week to another due to the conditions is going to help them get that.

It seems to me then you did not read my post just simply glossed over it and had an emotional reaction or you simply failed to comprehend what was written. But please re-read it and then tell me how the hell did you come to the points you made about things that I did not write or infer.

I don't get emotional on here. I prefer to have the players best suited to particular positions based on the evidence we have so far. We have a small amount of evidence - very small - that Brown can play CHF. We have zero - none - that Blicavs can.

I ended with I want Brown back so he gets a fair go at CHF - just sometimes like picking bowlers for certain pitch conditions - and this is one of the situations. Brown was poor last week - for the time he was out there Blicavs was ok. He offers more options to us and I think both would be at best average at CHF in wet conditions. But Blicavs offers more in run, height, body strength, probably in tackling and harassing and in being able to pinch hit in the ruck. So for this ONE week, given that rain and wind is predicted, Blicavs offers as much at CHF probably as Brown.

Fair enough. See above, I think CHF is a very tough position to learn to play and I don't see Blicavs being within a postcode of being ready for it. We agree to differ.

 

[meto]

I'm amazed at the logic with Caddy, Varcoe has 13 possessions, Caddy had 18 possessions instead of the expected 25+ and you want to toss the subs vest ?
Ask Joel Selwood who he'd like and prefer with him at the coalface, I think we'd all know the answer to that!
Caddy on the bench would weaken the team midfield.

We all bang on about big blokes take longer to develop, and that's generally the rule unless you're Jack Darling. Josh Walker came from a long way back in comparison to him, obviously maturity and development time was needed more so for Josh.
Possibly we'll now see the fruits of that development.
I think if Walker dominates again and M Brown fails to provide the performance the club hopes for then I see Brown's career in jeopardy, they may chose to replace him as early as the following week.

 

[you pick one]

Gee guys.

This is not a bagging thread.


What have we come up with?
Nothing more than Brown gets a game or 2 more and the other option is Walker?

Lucky we aren't the MC.
If their thinking was that shallow I'd be a bit peeved.

(not a crack at Walker!! I reckon they'd have more options)

I give you the only other alternative available in post number 30,it's Walker or that.

 

[Partridge]

I'm amazed at the logic with Caddy, Varcoe has 13 possessions, Caddy had 18 possessions instead of the expected 25+ and you want to toss the subs vest ?
Ask Joel Selwood who he'd like and prefer with him at the coalface, I think we'd all know the answer to that!
Caddy on the bench would weaken the team midfield.

We all bang on about big blokes take longer to develop, and that's generally the rule unless you're Jack Darling. Josh Walker came from a long way back in comparison to him, obviously maturity and development time was needed more so for Josh.
Possibly we'll now see the fruits of that development.
I think if Walker dominates again and M Brown fails to provide the performance the club hopes for then I see Brown's career in jeopardy, they may chose to replace him as early as the following week.

Yep. The position gets ROTATED. Almost exclusively between younger midfielders. Why not Caddy?

In actuality, his stats of 16 possessions (not 18) is a lot closer to his average than 25+ is. He's averaging 17.7 touches a game for us this year, and has recorded 25 touches in a game for us precisely 0 times. He's promising, and looks better this year, but he's not there yet. Seeing as GHS had the vest against Brisbane, and Blicavs has had it twice, I don't see why Caddy can't do it for a week.

 

[cynical]

If we look at what GFC have done re selections I think we can get a fair idea of who they are trying to develop and who they think is their best fit in the early part of the 2014.

So what does that mean ? It means they saw Brown as the best CHF option when Vardy went down. They also selected Blicavs when we had two rucks in the team. This means they see a future in Blicavs and want to develop him ASAP into a decent senior player by giving him a lot of exposure in senior games. Who would have thought GFC would select Simpson, HMc and Blicvs in the same team ? Not me.

Now I have written whoever we selected to take over from Vardy should get a decent run at the CHF position - as whoever it would be would be an inexperienced footballer. So I would normally have said stick with Brown for 2-3 more games but on this one occasion, because of the weather forecast of being wet and windy - which negates his marking power - I would go with makeshift CHF this week. If the club wants to persist with two big rucks and Blicavs in the same team - then given the predicted conditions - take Blicavs away from the sub position and put a smaller crumber type player in that role. To keep Blicavs in the team which the club seems to want to do - play him at CHF this week.

Then, weather permitting, get Brown back in and let him play some more senior footy when conditions suit him better. Hopefully he will build up confidence and experience.

But right now if the weather is wet and footy slippery I di not see Brown being any more effective marker of the ball than Blitz. Blitz probably attacks the ball more and is just as likely to lay a tackle as Brown. He will certainly add some more run to the side than Brown and can pinch hit in the ruck when required. So he really offers more than Brown when marking overhead is unlikely (Brown is also a far better kick than Blitz).

But this decision fits best for what GFC want to do. Keep in Simpson, HMac and Blicavs in the same team. Its get Simpson and HMac more match fitness, it could allow us to nullify one of WC's strengths (their ruck division) and also provides Blitz with another senior game. It does not make Brown play in conditions that do not suit him presently and decrease his confidence by the possibility of another poor performance in wet conditions like last week.

If Brown then plays for another 3 senior games (in better marking conditions) and plays well - all good and well. If he fails then at least he has had a decent run at CHF.

I think he is far more suited to being the third tall forward but with Vardy out that option disappeared somewhat (and with Kersten's injury as well).

Maybe they will go back to Jimmy being a CHF for week game as he does contest well and can mark as well as anyone in these type of conditions. We just do not want to go in too tall in a wet game IMO.

Better off playing Brown in the wet though, he has to be able to adapt his game. No point throwing him in and out.

Walker would be better suited but as we should easily account for the Eagles I think it's better to stick with the more talented player.

I think Blicavs is getting a decent run because of all the injuries and because of the fitness issues of the 2 big guys.

 

[vinum coupe]

They are the only real options right now.

I get the feeling people are annoyed or angry that we don't have a star centre half forward in waiting. Hate to break the suspense, but we don't. We have on our list three contenders for one position, and all are very inexperienced. None are established players yet. Brown on 13 games, Walker on 10 games, and Vardy on 21 games who's out for the year. There's a possibility that even if they make changes we're not going to get any improvement in output. So whoever they choose, I hope they give them a few games in a row, and a lot more than 3.

Agree that it's a very good thing we're not the match committee. Otherwise we'll have a different CHF every week, and by the end of the season be no closer to finding a long term solution.

And that's the problem.
I never expected Vardy to star this year. I just hoped he'd develop and be a good player next year.
Now that development is back another year.

We need Brown or Walker to contribute this year and both be good next year.
Then we'll be getting somewhere.

 

[Partridge]

And that's the problem.
I never expected Vardy to star this year. I just hoped he'd develop and be a good player next year.
Now that development is back another year.

We need Brown or Walker to contribute this year and both be good next year.
Then we'll be getting somewhere.

Precisely. All we can reasonably ask for is gradual development and improvement. I'd argue so far Brown and Walker are at least as good as they were at the end of last year, and probably are both better. Just need to see that continue.

 

[goyoucatters]

Agree that it's a very good thing we're not the match committee. Otherwise we'll have a different CHF every week, and by the end of the season be no closer to finding a long term solution.

The Australian cricket team had a fair crack at this approach to selection policy for a couple of years recently. Right up until the last six months or so, really.

We all saw how it went for them.

More importantly, we saw how it went when they finally packed it in.

 

[meto]

Yep. The position gets ROTATED. Almost exclusively between younger midfielders. Why not Caddy?

In actuality, his stats of 16 possessions (not 18) is a lot closer to his average than 25+ is. He's averaging 17.7 touches a game for us this year, and has recorded 25 touches in a game for us precisely 0 times. He's promising, and looks better this year, but he's not there yet. Seeing as GHS had the vest against Brisbane, and Blicavs has had it twice, I don't see why Caddy can't do it for a week.

Well why wouldn't a guy who only touched it 13 times get the damn thing?....as I said his stats are far better even when he's criticised, and whose backing up Joel with a bit of muscle if not Caddy?
"Don't through the baby out with the bath water" at this early stage, you've got to back him in.

 

[vinum coupe]

Don't worry Meto, they won't sub Caddy.
It will be someone like Murdoch or GHS.

 

[Partridge]

Well why wouldn't a guy who only touched it 13 times get the damn thing?....as I said his stats are far better even when he's criticised, and whose backing up Joel with a bit of muscle if not Caddy?
"Don't through the baby out with the bath water" at this early stage, you've got to back him in.

I never said it can't be Varcoe. Agree completely and wouldn't be the worst option. My point is the sub role should be rotated between the younger midfielders. As Blicavs has already had it twice and Horlin-Smith once (and GHS has earned another full game by playing very well against Collingwood) I'd opt for someone else this week. Be it Varcoe or Caddy or another option. Although it is amusing how apparently Caddy is now above the sub's vest. Love to know why.

Who is backing up Selwood? The entire midfield and playing group. Don't know if you watched Saturday night but he didn't need much assistance to dominate.

 

[Partridge]

Don't worry Meto, they won't sub Caddy.
It will be someone like Murdoch or GHS.

No way should it be GHS. Murdoch wouldn't be the worst option.

 

[vinum coupe]

I won't be surprised if GHS goes out to be honest.
Unless they change structures and drop a tall.

 

[sarah.13]

I won't be surprised if GHS goes out to be honest.
Unless they change structures and drop a tall.

Wouldn't surprise if GHS and Guthrie shared tagging duties on Priddis actually

 

[meto]

Don't worry Meto, they won't sub Caddy.
It will be someone like Murdoch or GHS.

Oh gee thanks!....one guy marks and kicks goals and the other got 22 possessions and is on the way up....Great!!

Thanks for that!

 

[bulletproof]

I won't be surprised if GHS goes out to be honest.
Unless they change structures and drop a tall.

Would be an error to drop GHS on a wet track, sure ball handler and good stoppage player.

Drop a tall.

 

[Partridge]

Would be an error to drop GHS on a wet track, sure ball handler and good stoppage player.

Drop a tall.

Yep, the exact same attributes that made Bartel such a tremendous wet weather player too.

 

[vinum coupe]

Would be an error to drop GHS on a wet track, sure ball handler and good stoppage player.

Drop a tall.

Has anyone looked at the match ups yet?

i.e. number of WC tall forwards vs our backs.

If we match up then I assume you are suggesting a ruck?

 

[vinum coupe]

Scrap that, just saw the other thread

 

[bulletproof]

Has anyone looked at the match ups yet?

i.e. number of WC tall forwards vs our backs.

If we match up then I assume you are suggesting a ruck?

Play Blitz up forward and drop Brown, or Rivers and play Mackie on a tall.

 

[Partridge]

Has anyone looked at the match ups yet?

i.e. number of WC tall forwards vs our backs.

If we match up then I assume you are suggesting a ruck?

There's a difference of course - a gulf in fact - between what we think they'll do, and what they'll actually do. For starters some players simply aren't going to be dropped, so there's no point thinking about it. Seeing that Taylor Hunt at the very least is available, you'd think a straight swap for Sheringham is a near certainty. Once you get past that change it's all speculation because there's no player demanding to come in (assuming Enright is missing again), and no obvious spot to fill. 7 hours of ideas though!

 

[catempire]

Did Stoneham ever produce a blood nutted progeny? What about Menschy? Chopper Handley? Come on father-sons!

 

[Cursed Cat]

Interesting thread; I'm not sure how vital a CHF even is in the modern game; if it's Nick Riewoldt then sure you build a forward line around him - but Geelong has performed fine over the past couple of years with only one true KF (sometimes Pods, sometimes Hawkins). As long as there's a player or two such as Bartel who can take a grab then I'm not sure we'd be losing too much with only Hawkins in the F50 (a la 2nd half of the 2011 GF).

Having said that, I'm happy for the MC to persist with Brown for a few more games; if he's good enough then the gap between his best and worst form will narrow given more exposure/experience.
As it stands he's played one good game and two poor games; I think by round 10-11 we should have a good idea of how much we can expect him to contribute at CHF in 2014; if that output is insufficient then at least we've eliminated him from the equation. If his output is adequate or better - great!

If Kersten was fit and available I'd be very keen to get a look at him up forward, I nominated him pre-season ahead of Vardy/Brown/Walker as the bloke I'd like to see given a run at CHF, particularly given his contract situation : he'd signed a 1-year deal and was obviously backing himself to perform well; I like that kind of confidence and I think he has the talent to back it up. Now unfortunately his career in the hoops is a bit up in the air.