Best 22 2011

[Dunn - Well Done]

That position died about 10 years ago.

Tall FP = FF

I wont even respond.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

Then don't.

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

Then don't.

Do you even play footy mate

 

[Ben the Gooner]

Yeah mate, because Ammos or local league footy is exactly the same as AFL standard.

Name a FF who doesn't lead in the AFL.

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

Yeah mate, because Ammos or local league footy is exactly the same as AFL standard.

Name a FF who doesn't lead in the AFL.

I dont play ammos or local footy mate

Yeh i cant mate, thats because they all do and ruckmen that will need to spend 95% TOG next year, wont be able to play fullforward and ruck all day.

who you play footy for?

 

[Ben the Gooner]

I dont play ammos or local footy mate

Yeh i cant mate, thats because they all do and ruckmen that will need to spend 95% TOG next year, wont be able to play fullforward and ruck all day.

who you play footy for?

Exactly.

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

Further case towards my argument every full forward is required to lead a playing resting as a deep forward pocket in the goal square doesnt and will be able to run at the ~95% TOG needed by a ruck next year. What will Hurley be doing when Ryder and Hille are down there he will be leading, they will be a tall target deep forward, sure if they think they can lead to get a ball go for it. But playing as a pure full forward leading all day when your there and than following up in the ruck will not work next year.

You look at the best combo of the ruck/forward last year and look no further pass the premiers. Jolly and Brown did it perfectly. Jolly played around mid 70% TOG and Brown played 80% TOG because he spent more time forward. What do you think Jolly was doing for a quarter of the game last year - resting on the bench right (next year he wont be able to). What im saying is you can play more as a pure fullforward around mid 70% TOG but when your required to play ~95 than i cant see it happening and more actual resting will be required.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

There is no such thing as a resting FF at AFL level.

 

[The House]

There is no such thing as a resting FF at AFL level.

this is true, however there is still room for a tall resting fp. The afl's constant changing of rules that no one needs changed = positional roles and structures will continually evolve much quicker than they have in past years....

....who knows exactly how this new interchange rule will eventually pan out, but if one thing is fairly certain, it is that ruckmen are more likely to be effected before anyone else.

I think the first path coaches go down will be to play both ruckmen substantially more minutes than previously, and a large part of that will be to have them as a resting fp, playing largely out of the square.....the obvious advantage percieved by coaches being that the midfield rotations take less of a hit from the new sub rule.


If i was a guessing man i'd suggest through various innovators, injury, and luck, that different coaches will mix it up from time to time, but come finals when the pressure and intensity more often require players to go long inside 50 with the "random" ball, the ruckman will be most effectively used when resting, by spending a lot of time between 5-20m out, whilst doing little running.

This does not preclude the role of a primarily leading full forward working with a chf.

This whole senario of the sub rule will i think be intersting in a way, but quite frankly has come far too early in the piece, if it needed to come at all, considering that high rotations had pretty much come to the point where they couldn't have increased much more, if anything at all anyway (in other words it was just coming to the point where we the public start to see various coaches trying to find new ways to make the most of the 2010 rules, and they go and change it will no real need whatsoever).

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

Very well said House.

I agree about the sub rule - no need for it. I actually didnt see that many injuries late which could be affected by the increase speed of the game. The reason the rule was brought in was because Kerr, Gibson and Riewoldt all did hammys in a row and serious ones, but after that not enough serious injuries came about to tell me they need to reduce the speed of the game.

 

[The House]

exactly....just another example of the rules committe justifying their existance by putting forward suggested changes that were in no way required, and the afl trying to look innovative by implimenting them.

Here's an innovative thought for those at the afl......how about when considering a game changing rule change such as this, at very least trial it at some level of footy for a period of time first.

Despite the afl's spin, there is not one of the 16 clubs that support or want this change.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

If you have a player just sitting 5-20m out, their man will run off them no problem and do some serious damage.

This isn't lower grade football.

 

[The House]

If you have a player just sitting 5-20m out, their man will run off them no problem and do some serious damage.

This isn't lower grade football.

Well aware of what grade of footy we're discussing (even though the exact same tactics are usually used in most decent divisions of suburban footy when you put a resting ruckman forward)....and i didn't mean he would just be sitting there, i was more getting at him having a lower workrate in this role than the ff and chf.

Nonetheless if i was coach, and you wanted to put a running defender on a giant like Hille or Ryder, i'd be more than happy to roll the dice most times as i think it would work in my favour more often than not.

Either ways, as i detailed earlier there will be a fair bit of everything tried at different times as coaches work out how best to utilise the sub rule, so i guess as supporters we have the luxury of sitting back and seeing how it all unfolds.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

Remember the game against WCE where Embley played full back on Neagle and kicked 3 goals? If Hille and Ryder's instructions are to ease off while up forward, get used to that sort of thing happening. Teams would love to sit a Sam Fisher, Jarrod Waite, Brian Lake type player on a resting ruckman if he wasn't going to do much work.

Either way, I reckon this is a moot point, because I think Ryder will be our starting FF who spends 5 mins a quarter in the ruck.

 

[ghostdog]

...I wonder what effect, if any, the new limits on rotations will have. Perhaps we will see players resting at ff more.

 

[eth-dog]

Pears looks as though he won't start the season. If that's the cas I would have a team like:
Fletcher-Hooker-McVeigh
Stanton-Hurley-Heppell
Jetta-Watson-Colyer
Zaharakis-Gumbleton-Winderlich
Davey-Ryder-Williams
Hille-Slattery-Howlett
Monfries-Myers-Melksham
(Dempsey)

Bellchambers-NLM-Prismall

I honestly struggled to leave players like Reimers, Prismall and NLM out of that side. I honestly just did the HF line like that because I wanted to put the three longest names in one line. Gus would probably be there, Winders on the wing, Jetta HF, Zaka on ball and Slatts on the bench. I put him there as he looked good as a tagger at the end of the season. But yeah, it looks a good side

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

If you have a player just sitting 5-20m out, their man will run off them no problem and do some serious damage.

This isn't lower grade football.

I wouldve thought that it goes without saying that your opposition player is going to run off everynow and again. Also the same with leading for Ryder it goes without saying if hes the only forward infront of windelrich bursting down down the wing\HFF than he will have to lead. Those things go without saying. Its going to happen everynow and again but its going to be of a much less occurence if hes the deep forward dragging his defender to the goal square, not to many defenders are going to want to leave him down there by running off especially avg 3rd talls which he will be getting. But as i said its going to happen but on a much less occurence.

Obviously you would know

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

...I wonder what effect, if any, the new limits on rotations will have. Perhaps we will see players resting at ff more.

Yeh but you cant rest at fullforward because your required to lead and jump into packs for marks which takes it out of you more than anything else.

Hurley will be our fullforward, although he may be a chance down back with Pears missing. Even than i think Hirdy has the intelligence to see his forward capabilities and give him a go in a position where he can win a game off his own boot - will struggle to do that down back. If he doesnt work at that well up forward given the full season than sure move him back.

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

Remember the game against WCE where Embley played full back on Neagle and kicked 3 goals? If Hille and Ryder's instructions are to ease off while up forward, get used to that sort of thing happening. Teams would love to sit a Sam Fisher, Jarrod Waite, Brian Lake type player on a resting ruckman if he wasn't going to do much work.

Either way, I reckon this is a moot point, because I think Ryder will be our starting FF who spends 5 mins a quarter in the ruck.

So theres about 120 mins a game of footy. So your saying Hille will be rucking for 100 mins of the game. Considering he only played 90 mins on avg last year i dont think that will happen some how. Also hes getting older and older - also didnt he have some minor surgery with Gumby and Pears or have i got him mistaken with someone else. Having minor problems in pre season already. People think Hille is 25 but his robust nature of game will make him drop off quicker than usual with rucks.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

Yeah, because Hille's always struggled to run out games.

 

[The House]

Remember the game against WCE where Embley played full back on Neagle and kicked 3 goals? If Hille and Ryder's instructions are to ease off while up forward, get used to that sort of thing happening. Teams would love to sit a Sam Fisher, Jarrod Waite, Brian Lake type player on a resting ruckman if he wasn't going to do much work.

Either way, I reckon this is a moot point, because I think Ryder will be our starting FF who spends 5 mins a quarter in the ruck.

I agree it will happen, but no doubt resting ruckmen will be aiming to keep them honest by catching them on the hop and doubling back for the kick over the top to space.

and if teams want to play players like Lake on what is essentially our forward pocket, then obviously it means either the ff or chf will most likely get their 3rd best defender.

As i said, i am looking forward to watching the new strategies/set ups that this rule will bring, yet at the same time would prefer they left it how it already was for a number of reasons.

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

Yeah, because Hille's always struggled to run out games.

Cant remember him playing 85% in the ruck and than playing as a leading fullforward like your saying before.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

Who said anything about playing him forward?

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

Who said anything about playing him forward?

So whos playing full forward when Ryder gos to the ruck and Hurley isnt there. Please dont tell me Williams or Hardingham.

 

[yaco55]

Hille usually only plays around 75% game time.

Usually, he was brought onto the ground at the 7 minute mark and played out the quarter.