Conca and Vicks

[telsor]

both are valuable .i haven't bagged tv and you shouldn't be bagging a young guy who has had less opportunities bc of an interrupted career
Especially that he is starting to show potential.

He's got a lot of potential, always has...but we can realistically only play one of them (without completely revamping our forward line in a potentially vital round 23 game), and Vickery has been the better player thus far, so he should get the nod.

Griff needs to realise more of his potential and dominate VFL games in order to become more than a depth/replacement player.

 

[MR]

Griff can clear the ball a hell of a long way when needed, and you have to admit we have been crying out for a contested mark around the ground. If I had to choose between the two it would be close but griff has more attributes, Vickery had some goals handed to him on a platter at stages this year. My biggest gripe with vickery is his defensive side of his game. I would trade him tomorrow but only for a decent draft pick.

Again, I'm not disputing Griffiths' contested marking nor the benefit it brings to our team, I am simply stating that Vickery is a more dangerous forward thus should be played ahead of Ben. I couldn't care less whether goals are handed on a platter to Vickery or not, fact of the matter is that Tyrone kicks goals and Griffiths doesn't. Ben just isn't a damaging player. He doesn't even kick as straight as Vickery.

Oh and come on, the whole attack on his defensive side of his game stuff is rubbish. Vickery isn't agile/fast enough to catch swarming half-back flanks but neither is any 200cm FF in the competition. As long as he is a presence (which he is) at ruck contests, then that is satisfactory.

 

[TigerTime88]

Did you watch last year? Vickery did exactly that up the wings, took some extremely good marks on the wings and in defense. Griffiths has been told to play this role because he's better at it, while Vickery is a better player out of the goal square.

Vickery has averaged 2 marks inside 50 per game and 1.9 goals per game.
Griffiths has averaged 1.2 marks inside 50 per game and 0.7 goals per game.
Both have won the same amount of hit outs, with Vickery doing it in 1 less game.

Argue as much as you want, Vickery is the better FF, Griffiths is the better CHF.

Griff takes most of his grabs up the ground. When we are stuffed form a get out kick he is taking 3-4 big marks per game when our ball movement is otherwise stuffed. Quote whatever stats your like, Vickery has played 80 odd games and has never shown he is a good contested mark unless he has a 1 on 1 well beat. Would much prefer we persisted with Griffiths.

In saying that I am not against playing all 3 either...I don't not like Vickery, I just think he doesn't have the same ability as Griffiths.

Griff had 48 champion data ranking points in the last term on the weekend, only behind Gordon (goal to put us ahead) and I think Anthony Miles aka the clearance king.

 

[NUFC Tiger]

Suspended from all competition

But it means he can train his arse off without the game day bumps to worry about

Thanks mate!

That's a shame, would have been good to keep him in touch while out of the seniors.

 

[bigange]

Short memories? Go watch some of his 2013 games again and he's down there plenty of times.

Probably the most accurate argument for not bringing Vickery back, nothing to do with Griffiths (and for the record I agree Griffiths should stay in the team). However, Jack has been spending a lot of time out of FF as well, and contributing a lot more because of it. The question is how it impacts our midfield rotation through the forward line.

All I'm saying is that from the past 2 games without Vickery, our talls have not impacted the scoreboard very much, and we've won because our midfield has kicked the goals. I'm all for spreading the load through the team but if we're relying on our midfield to score and they don't, then we have problems.

In an ideal world we should start with the following:
0-20m from goal - Vickery
20-40m from goal - Riewoldt
40-60m from goal - Griffiths

From there Vickery leads to one flank, Riewoldt to the other, Griffiths up the ground.
From there Riewoldt to the goal square, Griffiths to the flank, Vickery up the ground.
Reverse and repeat, push up as required.
Griffiths in defense/ruck, Riewoldt or Vickery on the wing, the other in forward 50.

If it's wet, 2 talls only.

How dare you make football sound so simple.

 

[Ralll]

i dont mind going back to 3 talls now we have our s**t together again, but with Vickery missing 4 Im not sure he should come in for such an important game, he might need a game to get going again.

Conca should be fine but I dont know whos place he will take, Lennons i guess.

 

[TigerImposter]

He's got a lot of potential, always has...but we can realistically only play one of them (without completely revamping our forward line in a potentially vital round 23 game), and Vickery has been the better player thus far, so he should get the nod.

Griff needs to realise more of his potential and dominate VFL games in order to become more than a depth/replacement player.

hes dominating afl games at a better rate than TV

 

[telsor]

hes dominating afl games at a better rate than TV

How so?

 

[Ancient Tiger]

How so?

Haven't seen Vickery kick any 65m+ goals. Usually gets cheapies 30m or closer to goal.
Vickery has taken less contested marks this year then Ben.
Neither had dominated but I feel Ben has played better this year and has more upside.

 

[TigerImposter]

How so?

 

[telsor]

Haven't seen Vickery kick any 65m+ goals. Usually gets cheapies 30m or closer to goal.
Vickery has taken less contested marks this year then Ben.
Neither had dominated but I feel Ben has played better this year and has more upside.

I just figure neither has 'Dominated'....Both still playing on potential/upside, with Vickery being somewhat better thus far.

 

[Ancient Tiger]

I just figure neither has 'Dominated'....Both still playing on potential/upside, with Vickery being somewhat better thus far.

Trouble with that way of looking at things is that Vickery was gifted many games at the start of his career which probably fast tracked his development. Griffiths first couple of years were injury riddled. He was made to try to develop in a team that was like a death sentence for player development (Coburg).
Even with that disadvantage, I think that Griffiths has been better THIS year than Vickery.

 

[tora tora tora]

For those who want to play 3 talls what do we get rid of?

1. A hard running half forward like Gordon?
2. A Petterd who offers elite defensive pressure to keep the ball in?
3. A midfielder meaning we have one less midfield rotation and probably don't have the luxury of playing dusty, lids and cotch up forward.

I'm with ya, 3 talls hasn't worked for us. I don't think it works for anyone.

Between injury and suspension we need Griff and Ty on our list. Good internal competition and Griff got the game to play in defence. Ty's got the ruck skills

 

[marcus12]

your comments are dumb and short sighted. griff needs to find his niche as a true chf, playing a role where hitting the scoreboard is not the be all and end all. get 1 or 2 a game whilst delivering it quick and very long do beat the double team whilst jack and vickers lead to opposing pockets. this pre season alot work needs to go into those 3 clicking. atm a 3 tall forward line isnt as effective as it should be cos we are 1 genuine crumber short to truely complement kpp talent we possess

Must be alot of dumb short sighted people on here because they seem to think that vickery is out and griff keeps his spot. i think the only dumb one here is you imo. Hes had more than enough time and griff is playing well. Griff all the way. Time for vickery to stay in the seconds and build some consistent form.

 

[Calcium Man]

I'm with ya, 3 talls hasn't worked for us. I don't think it works for anyone.

Between injury and suspension we need Griff and Ty on our list. Good internal competition and Griff got the game to play in defence. Ty's got the ruck skills

depends on the 3rd tall. Worked for Hawks with Franklin, Roughy and Gunston, Sydney with Franklin, Goodes and Tippet and West Coast with Darling, Kennedy and one of McGovern/Lycett/Cox/NicNat.

Jack can easily play that Gunston/Darling/Goodes role of a guy who is just clever, roams and tackles. Griff can play the Tippet/Roughy/Lycett role choping out in the ruck but probably roaming up field a bit more like Kennedy and Vickery can play closer to goal like Tippet.

All three are quick enough and good enough at ground level IMO to put tackling pressure on but they cannot let up and you need a real terrier like Ballentine/Mayne at their best just pressuring.

 

[Dr Awkward]

I would like to see Dea come in for Batchelor, I rate Dea higher and he's had good form in the VFL.

Conca comes back in I guess, although he hasn't been much good this year and it sends the wrong message. I would actually like to see Lennon stay in and given a full game but not sure if there is room. Don't think it's fair at all the judge him off 15 mins in the Adelaide game.

There is no way that Vickery should be ahead of Griffiths. Griffiths is an absolute weapon he has great prospects and is playing the best footy of his career the past couple of weeks. Vickery can come in if they think we need to load up on talls to counter Sydney.

 

[Dr Awkward]

Vickery's stats flatter him. Are there any stats that show when you're running to the wrong place and your direct opponent takes uncontested intercept marks?

Meanwhile Griffiths' stats don't do him justice, his booming kicks and contested grabs on the wing are gold. Plus he's got some decent composure in tough situations. Doesn't lose contests as often as Vickery.

 

[MR]

Haven't seen Vickery kick any 65m+ goals. Usually gets cheapies 30m or closer to goal.
Vickery has taken less contested marks this year then Ben.
Neither had dominated but I feel Ben has played better this year and has more upside.

I don't think the definition of dominating games is kicking 65m goals. Griffiths has in no way or form dominated at AFL level. He is the least damaging forward out of our three main tall options and this year has only been useful for taking marks in our defensive 50 and kicking the occasional goal.
Since Vickery came back from the VFL, he has been absolutely tearing up the opposition. I said it in a post before but he kicked 10 goals and took 20 marks in four games being the second fiddle forward.

This Griff-obsession is doing my head in. Vickery is such a more valuable player currently than Griffiths it's not even funny any more. I honestly can't think of any possible justification other than the possibility that Vickery might not be match fit, to play Griffiths ahead of him in Rd 23. Griffiths takes marks from kick-ins. Vickery kicks goals. I know who I'd prefer and who the coaching staff prefer.

Trouble with that way of looking at things is that Vickery was gifted many games at the start of his career which probably fast tracked his development. Griffiths first couple of years were injury riddled. He was made to try to develop in a team that was like a death sentence for player development (Coburg).
Even with that disadvantage, I think that Griffiths has been better THIS year than Vickery.

You can't blame Coburg for Griffiths' absolute awfulness last year. McBean didn't struggle to kick goals, why does Griffiths get conveniently covered up. He was almost dropped to Coburg seconds, so bad was his form last year. Richmond were in their right minds by not gifting Griffiths games when we were vying for finals.

You may think that Griffiths has been better than Vickery, but I'm sure the coaching staff think differently.

 

[partycorolla]

Lennon will be out. Not ready, if he stays in will get the Nick name fumbles.

He came in and did well against Melb.... just had a jittery 10 minutes.... also setup the goal that sealed the match....

Don't buy not ready, also not going to get any more ready by not playing at the level and who better to play against than the Saints. He's a first round draft pick, he now needs game time....

However, if he isn't in the best 22 players we can pick this week, don't pick him.

 

[Madtiger2006]

People going on about vickers easy goals. He's the one who gets in the position to make them easy. He's ahead of Griffiths still and both should be in the team together

 

[docko911]

Both Vickery and Griffiths should be in the team together.

There is a slight risk but it is only going to be an issue if the team is lazy. Griffiths has improved since they were last played together and Vickery's new found aggression will only make him more useful in creating a foil for Jack.

Jack and Vickery need to control the forward 50, while Griffiths can roam the field and deliver it to them from anywhere up to 100m out.

Our forward line could be the most dangerous in the AFL when you throw Deledio, Dusty, Sheds, Gordon, Petterd, Cotchin rotating through.

 

[partycorolla]

I cant see it happening. Vickery, Grif, and Jack are a world away from the only combination like it... Tippet, Buddy, Goodes.
In fact that comparison alone shows a) how hard it is to make it work, b) how far off Vickery and Grif are as a dual combination with Jack talent-wise

Fact is he (Vickery) gets probably 10 opportunities + each match and clunks 70% of them. Given how well our mids play tall in the forward half, and the chaos they provide with a bit of pace, adding Vickery is like adding treacle to the forward line. He cant kick more than 40m, so he promotes long, hopeless bombs that he hasn't the ability to hold onto, and cant provide the slightest defensive pressure to hold the ball in once he's spilled the mark... hell, he doesn't even split packs and bring the ball to ground to our advantage.. Vickery is just too inconsistent, does precious little in packs, precious little below the knees and gets 1-3 lucky goals PURELY on the basis of being a tall playing deep getting good delivery. Griffiths may have some improvement required, but at least he's got improvement in him. I reckon we've seen the best of Ty and he's not going to get any better. I'm well and truly done with him.

Loving all the selective memories people have on here about TV and Griff. It's like everybody has memories that last about 2 weeks. Lets just imagine that stats were even a tiny bit important. TV has Griff covered as a forward and competes just as well as a ruck. Kicks more goals, takes more marks inside 50 and has been successfully paired with JR before (best combo by goals in the comp not that many years ago). Griff has played 2 good games.... in his career. They happen to be his last 2....

TV getting good delivery???? Have you watched us since DH has coached. Our delivery is normally terrible. Our gameplan was 'kick it to JR' and he'll mark it for 3 years.... Our delivery inside 50 is one factor that has held us back in large parts.... TV can put pressure on as well, remember him running down Rowe in round 2 for a goal? No, well fair enough it was a while ago. The problem with TV is that when he is not 'on' his intensity drops off and he becomes useless. His best is far better than anything Griff has shown us thus far, without a shadow of a doubt. His worst is equal to Griff's worst (Nth Melb type game).... and quite simply is not AFL standard. As for not kicking more than 40 metres.... well that's just a ludicrous comment.... go and watch some games. Can kick goals from 50 not probs. His action is nowhere near as good as Griff's or as long but then, neither is anyone in the league!!! Griff helped cost us a game against Melb with his kicking for goal (along with Grigg) so he's not the messiah everyone is making him out to be.... not yet.

IMO they can play all three of them without many problems. Griff is better than TV at providing an option up the ground and TV is better at providing an I50 target. Having the 3 of them could stretch undersized defences (such as Sydney's). TV can put ground level pressure on his opponent but little against the smaller backs.... that's where Titch, Lloyd/Gordo and resting mids have to do the job.... It won't work against every team or on every ground but for some games and teams it could work very well. With the interchange bench likely going back to 4, Ivvy could rest on the bench while the mids rotate off and forward.... Certainly a plan going forward in my opinion.... I'd be trying it against the Swans.

 

[JAKLAUGHING]

Ty is ahead of griff....only just. .. ..once griff starts kicking goals....look out!

 

[Bojangles17]

Sydney are a tall side I'd bring in tv for sure , he always kicks goals and was impacting ea game up until his suspension. Griff can stay, he s agile enough to be versatile and even be thrown back if req

 

[Bojangles17]

Conca should return this week , with de lids and Martin spending bulk of time forward we need ball winners in the middle, conca wins ball , he gets in on that