Opinion Pick your Round 1 side

[Claude Balls]

There seems to be a pretty clear majority on here now (which I agree with).

Lang, Bews and Cocky are in.

Murdoch is out.

Simpson or McIntosh, whatever your personal favourite is.

Walker a temptation but ultimately too big a risk in terms of forward pressure and limiting Hawthorn's rebound.

But there aren't that many meat trays so the club will no doubt pull a shifty.

 

[thegerman]

One game but not considered good enough to play in any of the AFL NAB games. I cannot see him being picked. Moreover since Hawkins and Clarke and only just beginning to gel together I do not see the wisdom in throwing in a third tall forward into the mix in Round 1. With 4 tall defenders (over 190cm) two ruckmen and three KPF we would be top heavy and Hawthorn would laugh as they chipped the ball around our slow monsters. If Walker was being considered for Round 1 I am sure he would have been given a run already.

He couldn't play nab as he was injured. Had a virus that stopped all training for a few weeks. So he was given a VFL game as they were unsure how he'd go without much training.


http://footyprophet.com/walker-virus-makes-successful-return/

 

[dazbroncos]

He couldn't play nab as he was injured. Had a virus that stopped all training for a few weeks. So he was given a VFL game as they were unsure how he'd go without much training.


http://footyprophet.com/walker-virus-makes-successful-return/

If Walker trains well over the next 10 days, I would not rule him out.

The smoke and mirrors will really start if he does not play the VFL game on the Sat before the Easter Monday game.

I, and the Hawks, will be closely watching.

Go Catters

 

[Claude Balls]

One game but not considered good enough to play in any of the AFL NAB games. I cannot see him being picked. Moreover since Hawkins and Clarke and only just beginning to gel together I do not see the wisdom in throwing in a third tall forward into the mix in Round 1. With 4 tall defenders (over 190cm) two ruckmen and three KPF we would be top heavy and Hawthorn would laugh as they chipped the ball around our slow monsters. If Walker was being considered for Round 1 I am sure he would have been given a run already.

He had a virus ya turkey. As if they don't consider the guy who kicked three goals in our last final "good enough" to get a run in preseason games.

 

[Mningasimisonda]

There seems to be a pretty clear majority on here now (which I agree with).

Lang, Bews and Cocky are in.

Murdoch is out.

Simpson or McIntosh, whatever your personal favourite is.

Walker a temptation but ultimately too big a risk in terms of forward pressure and limiting Hawthorn's rebound.

But there aren't that many meet trays so the club will no doubt pull a shifty.

Seems about right. Murdoch has a history of being damaging against the hawks, but feels like ages since I saw him play a great game. Anyone know what's going on there?

 

[Pollywaffle]

Murdoch has a history of being damaging against the hawks

A fairer representation would be he has a history of underperformance against most other teams.

 

[Partridge]

Funny how they dumped that Taylor Hunt superstar though and I personally think THunts first 42 games were superior to Murdoch's.

There were a lot of players I would have gotten rid of before Hunt. He'll probably go fine at Richmond too.

 

[SJ]

Funny how they dumped that Taylor Hunt superstar though and I personally think THunts first 42 games were superior to Murdoch's.

Taylor Hunt was basically a lock in the Geelong team between his third to his fifth season of footy.

 

[Partridge]

Anyone who wants Clark at CHF -want to remember when Geelong had Ablett and Stoneham as their 2 key forwards - that was a pretty good combination - but it wasnt enough against the Eagles - because Geelong would get killed in the ruck and around the ground

Well we didn't have Ablett and Stoneham as our two key forwards for long, as Ablett didn't play full forward until 1993. In the time span of 1993-1996 (Ablett's last season at senior level), our head to head record against them was 4-3, and Ablett and Stoneham played together in only 3 of them (for 2 wins and 1 loss). The only time in that period we lost to the Eagles (with both playing) was Round 14, 1994. Although Stoneham was certainly quiet, Ablett kicked 4, and Barnes (18 touches, 25 hitouts) definitely eclipsed their ruckman in Ryan Turnbull (6 disposals, 16 hitouts).

It might be they were simply a more even team across the board. We didn't lose because of who our key forwards were. Indeed in the final round of 1993, and again early in 1995, we recorded great wins over them with significant contributions from Ablett and Stoneham (in 1993 - 25 touches, 6 marks, 4 goals), and Brownless (in 1995 - 23 touches, 8 marks, 2 goals).

 

[Footy Smarts]

The team looks pretty settled really. We just need 2 to go out from the team on the weekend. For me it's Murdoch and Gregson that miss out.

Walker's a tough one. His performances are fully deserving of a spot but we really can't play him up forward along side Clark and Hawkins. The only way he plays is if Clark rucks for a big chunk of the game and that's changing a whole lot up at the last moment. I'd probably let him know that he's very unlucky but it's too late in the piece to change the structures up for round 1. I think round 3 against Gold Coast would be a great time to look at going in with Hawkins and Walker with Clark playing a bit more of a mobile tall perhaps with Stanley too. Give Walker a few games in a row then rather than changing everything for round 1 now.

 

[steady2]

He had a virus ya turkey. As if they don't consider the guy who kicked three goals in our last final "good enough" to get a run in preseason games.

What's with the 'turkey' comment? Unable to discuss in a civil manner? My comment stands, he was not considered for any of the NAB games and hence will find it difficult to push his way past Mitch Clarke who has been a raging success, unless you are another claiming that we go with three KPF's.

 

[steady2]

He couldn't play nab as he was injured. Had a virus that stopped all training for a few weeks. So he was given a VFL game as they were unsure how he'd go without much training./

...and I seriously doubt that he will suddenly make an appearance either as a KP forward or a third tall. I am a big fan of Walker and have been plugging him for a long time, but three talls in the forward line, especially since the Hawkins/Clarke combination has been so successful is fraught with problems.

I would love to see Clarke as a #1 ruck and Walker at CHF but I think the team is close to settled at the moment, the only questions are over Murdoch/Smedts/Lang.

 

[Partridge]

What's with the 'turkey' comment? Unable to discuss in a civil manner? My comment stands, he was not considered for any of the NAB games and hence will find it difficult to push his way past Mitch Clarke who has been a raging success, unless you are another claiming that we go with three KPF's.

I know some do, but I'm far from convinced. The last thing I'd want to be against Hawthorn is too big.

 

[Goggin Our Best]

Casboult didn't play GOB…

Long odds on Clark starting in the ruck….he will do some rucking, but he will be predominantly in the forward 50….

Thats how much i rate Carlton - i dont know their players
Simpson just cant get to some marking contests - hes extremely tall - thats about it

 

[TEDDY24INC]

I havent read the thread - bar the last 3 posts - but i would be playing Clark in the ruck - the times hes gone in there hes looked great - the back handed taps - plus hes so mobile and he can mark around the ground

There was a kick in in the last qtr yesterday - Casboult took the mark - Simpson just cant get to the contests - Clark would have out marked Casboult

These dinosaur - half crippled bean poles - have been a disaster for Geelong in the ruck - Hale is honest - yet Geelong make him look like a blooody superstar

The ideal situation going forward - would be Clark and Stanley in the ruck - wont that be a joy - 2 mobile athletic blokes who can actually keep up and beat the opposition

Anyone who wants Clark at CHF -want to remember when Geelong had Ablett and Stoneham as their 2 key forwards - that was a pretty good combination - but it wasnt enough against the Eagles - because Geelong would get killed in the ruck and around the ground

Against Hawthorn it is super important to get possession - because when theve got it - with their elite kicking skills - and their pidddly 12 metre short passing - its hard to get off them - id back Hawkins in ( looks in great touch ) and have Clark in the ruck to give Geelong 1st possession - which is essential against Hawthorn

Strange comment as Stoneham or Ablett would not play ruck, also Barnes was clearly better than the eagles ruckmen of that era - Harding and Hines...

 

[Hood007]

FB: Rivers - Lonergan - Bews
HB: Mackie - Taylor - Enright
C: Motlop - Caddy - Duncan
HF: Cockatoo - Clark - SJ
FF: Stokes - Hawkins - Bartel
R: Simpson - Guthrie - Selwood
I: Horlin-Smith - Blicavs - Kelly - Murdoch
E: Lang - Smedts - McIntosh

I think it's a toss up between Murdoch, Lang & Smedts for the last spot.

 

[Goggin Our Best]

Strange comment as Stoneham or Ablett would not play ruck, also Barnes was clearly better than the eagles ruckmen of that era - Harding and Hines...

No what i went by that - was the pairing of Ablett and Stoneham ( 2 top notch players )- wasnt enough to beat the Eagles - and i think its the same with Hawkins and Clark as the 2 key forwards - wont be enough to beat Hawthorn - Geelong are dead set hopeless in the ruck - as much as youd like to have Clark at CHF - id have him in the ruck.

And by the way - youve got either a very poor memory - or you didnt watch the 94 GF - or the 94 finals series - Hines had a very modest career - but his 94 finals series - culminating in his 94GF - he played like a worldbeater - absolutely destroyed Barnes

 

[Lana]

Can't remember where I saw it on the board but last year McIntosh and Simpson played in the team together 10 times.
I was looking into the relative game time and hitouts like i did for 2008 and 2009.

In the games they played together
Simpson average 18.3 hitouts in 62% gametime (subbed off 4 times)
McIntosh averaged 18 hitouts in 80.7% gametime

But the more interesting thing was that we won 8 out of 10 matches that they both played in. 9 of these matches happened before round 12.

Anyway so how is this relevant to a round 1 team. I don't think that we will be able to match them on the outside with fast rebounding skillful play
so lets turn it into a slog, high congestion(have the extra player be another on baller) hack into our forward line and back Hawkins and Clark to do the right thing.

FB Rivers Lonergan Bews
HB Enright Taylor Mackie
C Duncan Kelly Motlop
HF Stokes Clark Caddy
FF Johnson Hawkins Murdoch(taking over Varoce's role when the other team has a rebound 50)
Fol Simpson(subbed off just after 3QT) Selwood Bartel
Int McIntosh Horlin-Smith Guthrie
Sub Blicavs

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

He had a virus ya turkey. As if they don't consider the guy who kicked three goals in our last final "good enough" to get a run in preseason games.

Our recruiting in the offseason kind of suggests otherwise. He played in the VFL match against Collingwood a week earlier, didn't he?

 

[00VicWard001]

What's with the 'turkey' comment? Unable to discuss in a civil manner? My comment stands, he was not considered for any of the NAB games and hence will find it difficult to push his way past Mitch Clarke who has been a raging success, unless you are another claiming that we go with three KPF's.

Two of the NAB cup games featured Hawkins, Clark and Kersten. So they were definitely trialling three big forwards. Kersten wasn't bringing anything to the table and was send back to VFL - but it does show that the MC are looking at this option as their Plan A (trialling it twice in a row). So an in form Kersten would have kept his spot in that forward line. Obviously Kersten and Walker are different - but they are not too different.

Walker doesn't have to push past Mitch Clark. He just has to take Kersten's spot - and do the role the Kersten was expected to do.

 

[Jon Douglas]

Wont happen just yet but if Walker comes in and does ok he may end up at CHF and Clark in the ruck. Clark taps well, uses his body in the ruck well, he tackles, harasses opposition players at clearance contests, shepherds and can take mark around the ground - as well as being pretty quick for a guy his size. There is a lot to like about him going into the first ruck position.

So if Walker can clunk a few, split a few packs, run all day and be willing to spoil, chase and tackle - do all the 1 %ers - then this move could work out.

Walker will be no Clark at CHF - but if he is 75 % as effective and Clark makes our midfield 25 % better - then that would be a huge win for us.

Then we await to see if Stanley can add anything to the team.

 

[Claude Balls]

What's with the 'turkey' comment? Unable to discuss in a civil manner? My comment stands, he was not considered for any of the NAB games and hence will find it difficult to push his way past Mitch Clarke who has been a raging success, unless you are another claiming that we go with three KPF's.

Was just chanelling a bit of Steve Brule steady, didn't mean any offence.

With respect to your initial comment, i don't think it does stand. You said he wasnt considered "good enough for any of the AFL NAB games". He wasnt considered for a single NAB game because he was ill for two weeks and couldnt train. Not because he wasnt good enough. No one is 'not good enough' for a NAB game.

 

[David the Cat]

Walker is definitely a smoky for Round 1… I like the idea of 3 falls against the Hawks. Will keep Frawley, Lake and Gibson guessing….and I would suggest, reaching to match ours overhead….

 

[catempire]

#threetallsmentum

 

[thegerman]

Wont happen just yet but if Walker comes in and does ok he may end up at CHF and Clark in the ruck. Clark taps well, uses his body in the ruck well, he tackles, harasses opposition players at clearance contests, shepherds and can take mark around the ground - as well as being pretty quick for a guy his size. There is a lot to like about him going into the first ruck position.

So if Walker can clunk a few, split a few packs, run all day and be willing to spoil, chase and tackle - do all the 1 %ers - then this move could work out.

Walker will be no Clark at CHF - but if he is 75 % as effective and Clark makes our midfield 25 % better - then that would be a huge win for us.

Then we await to see if Stanley can add anything to the team.

I guess that the main point to these discussions is can Clark handle playing in the ruck for prolonged periods?

I agree that this would be our best lineup, with Walker in the squad, but could Clark keep up with such a long time out of the game.

He did train prior to the draft, getting back into fitness. So perhaps he could.

Does this mean we could run with one in the ruck, I.e. Simpson or McIntosh, Clark backing up and forward, walker forward, and blitz the sub? That's some height.