Remove this Banner Ad

Changes v Port Power est 1997

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

1990crow said:
Defensive running. Not tackling.
Click to expand...
It is an issue for him I agree.

But is his value as a contested inside player offensively and defensively greater than the lack of spread from a contest. How many inside players do have great defensive spread ability. Does Tom Mitchell?

Collingwood burnt us on the outside. I for one was getting stuck into CEY for this at the time. But looking back, is that more a failure of our outside mids than CEY? He did his job defensively by being our tackle leader. In hindsight he played his role as an inside defender quite well. Our outside guys failed to prevent Collingwood offensively spreading to move the ball.

I wouldn't say M Crouch is great at defensive spreading either.

Greenwood is



Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
 
Shaz2012 said:
Douglas still worries me to be honest. I know he is the talk of the town this week and questioning him will be highly unpopular. But I still feel he is very hot and cold. Came in off a full preseason, so he should have been good to go. Looking at his form this year:

Opponent D AF SC
CAR 28 115 132
GCS 21 113 124
SYD 17 71 63
COL 14 76 74
STK 22 93 114
ESS 13 38 50

Just going on AFL Fantasy or Supercoach here because it gives a single score, it suggests that he has only played well against the poor teams so far this year. His performances against Essendon, Sydney and Collingwood were average. The gap between his good games and bad games is significant. Would be interested to drag feenix67 into this because on the Crow Cast he has similar questions on Atkins on big vs small games. I am not hanging Douglas here, and I didnt feel feenix had hung Atkins yet either, but just noting that I still have my concerns. Douglas is a senior player so he doesnt have the luxury of seeing the upside in him.

Douglas has earnt the benefit of the doubt and the right to be a preferred player in the 22. But I still question which two players from Douglas, CEY and Greenwood should be in our best 22 come finals. If we are looking for a point of difference to the team we sent into the GF against the tigers last year. Well this could be one that might be looked at.
Click to expand...
His game against Josh Kennedy of Sydney was excellent.
 
Geoffa32 said:
It is an issue for him I agree.

But is his value as a contested inside player offensively and defensively greater than the lack of spread from a contest. How many inside players do have great defensive spread ability. Does Tom Mitchell?

Collingwood burnt us on the outside. I for one was getting stuck into CEY for this at the time. But looking back, is that more a failure of our outside mids than CEY? He did his job defensively by being our tackle leader. In hindsight he played his role as an inside defender quite well. Our outside guys failed to prevent Collingwood offensively spreading to move the ball.

I wouldn't say M Crouch is great at defensive spreading either.

Greenwood is



Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

No, i wouldn't say M Crouch isn't either; I would say however there is a limit of how many mids you are able to carry that can't.
 
Golumless said:
No, i wouldn't say M Crouch isn't either; I would say however there is a limit of how many mids you are able to carry that can't.
Click to expand...

I agree with this point, but I dont think the answer is a definitive no on Crouch, Greenwood and CEY in the same team. It wasn't a noticeable problem in the games they have played together so far. I would like to see it in action with all our players back. If they all play in the same team, it pushes Sloane and Gibbs to play more outside roles. They are great at defensive running. When they are at the coal face, they are not able to do that defensive running as much anyway. So we gain extra defensive running from our A-graders, who have great tanks by the way. For me the decision comes down to what kind of footy we get out of Sloane and Gibbs, and later Brad Crouch, when they are given more outside roles, with Greenwood, CEY and Crouch doing the bulk of the in and under stuff. If we are getting A-grade performances out of Sloane, Gibbs and B. Crouch even though they are not "on the ball" then I think there is a net benefit to the team. If they are playing, so-so, then we need to give them roles where they can play at their best. Gibbs and Sloane (and later Brad Crouch) need to be our match winners. Lets set ourselves up so they can do maximum damage. They are the ones with the genuine talent to be match winners for us. The defensive side of it and the contested side of it needs to be done so that our match winners and forwards can do their jobs.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Murphy v Gallucci is a closer call than some might think. Gallucci gets more of the ball but Murphy tackles more. Gallucci’s stats have been enhanced by spending time in the midfield when the game is over.

SMurphs form in the Twos was superior to Gallucci last year, IMHO, and he apparently played well in his comeback last week. I would like to see both players get around 10+ games this year.
 
Jack is Back said:
Murphy v Gallucci is a closer call than some might think. Gallucci gets more of the ball but Murphy tackles more. Gallucci’s stats have been enhanced by spending time in the midfield when the game is over.

SMurphs form in the Twos was superior to Gallucci last year, IMHO, and he apparently played well in his comeback last week. I would like to see both players get around 10+ games this year.
Click to expand...

He was extremely unlucky to be a victim of the Crows High Performance Unit. I don't think Gallucci would have got a look in based on his SANFL games. But since he has come in, I think he has matched what Murphy did in the opening two games. I think Gallucci stays in, but if he got injured and Murphy got back in, then I think the roles would stay reversed and Murphy would hold his spot.
 
Geoffa32 said:
Imagine a midfield/wing/flanker rotation of

M Crouch
B Crouch
Greenwood
Gibbs
Dougie
Sloaney
CEY
Knights
Seed
Smith
Laird

That is a very strong eleven man unit for mids, wings and flankers.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Add Milera to this group for 12 (rotating 2 through the bench), with groups of 5 forwards & 5 defenders (rotating 1 each off the bench)
EDIT - forgot to count Sauce for the midfield. Milera to play in place of Smith, knight to drop out when smith comes back (based on current form).

On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
1970crow said:
I think with Brouch back we'd still be better with CEY in the stoppage rotations. Sloane and Gibbs would push 2 of Dmac, Knight, Gooch or Rat from our outside rotations. I suppose with Milera back, one of those is already gone. But CEY stays for mine as long as his form warrants.
Click to expand...
Personally I think that makes us too inside. Plus I much prefer Sloane as an inside midfielder that also wins possessions via gut running, rather than an outside runner as he simply doesn't have the speed of the other outside players we have.

Then again, I don't really rate CEY as I find he's too fumbly, so I'm likely biased.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

AFC979810 said:
Of course the club is concerned by appearance. And so it should be.

We have a very obvious hamstring issue at the club. Whats to gain from coming out and further admitting our incompetence and fueling the fire? There's already been several national articles about it.

We have come out and said we are 'tweaking' our training regime to minimize hammy's. If the damage was done in the preseason (which is what I believe) then we our tweaks are just like shuffling deck chairs as the titanic sinks.
Click to expand...

"Tweaking" our training regime is probably a poor choice of words in this instance! :D
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Changes v Port Power est 1997

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top