Player Watch Jeremy Howe

Remove this Banner Ad

loki04 said:
He'd likely developed into an AA fwd too if left there, plus had better support and delivery then when he was 18 and 19 playing as the sole KPF in a side who couldnt get the ball in with any speed or skill or accuracy.

We expected miracles of a kid those seasons then rubber stamped him defunct when really he was up and down. had a few 5 goal games as well as quiet games.
Click to expand...

I think he had one five-goal game in his debut season, his highest tally was 3 after that.

I have no doubt he could be developed more as a forward, and would have been serviceable in the role, but I witnessed too many games in which he seemed lost at sea to say that he would ever be a 'likely' AA forward. He might have, but I'm not sure it ever seemed more probable than not.

My own view is that he already looks more accomplished and comfortable in defence than he ever did in the forward line. He looks like he owns his space, looks like he can read the play so much better, and I think that his athleticism after a few injury-ravaged years will continue to show itself.
 
JB1975 said:
I think he had one five-goal game in his debut season, his highest tally was 3 after that.

I have no doubt he could be developed more as a forward, and would have been serviceable in the role, but I witnessed too many games in which he seemed lost at sea to say that he would ever be a 'likely' AA forward. He might have, but I'm not sure it ever seemed more probable than not.

My own view is that he already looks more accomplished and comfortable in defence than he ever did in the forward line. He looks like he owns his space, looks like he can read the play so much better, and I think that his athleticism after a few injury-ravaged years will continue to show itself.
Click to expand...

Yes because of the way we often moved the ball slow and allowed uber floods and he was a skinny 18/19, many young KPF have poor timing and leading patterns but given time they learn them.

He's every bit as talented as Daniher was at the same age.


I have no doubts if given the time and support he would of turned into a premier KPF.
 
loki04 said:
Yes because of the way we often moved the ball slow and allowed uber floods and he was a skinny 18/19, many young KPF have poor timing and leading patterns but given time they learn them.

He's every bit as talented as Daniher was at the same age.


I have no doubts if given the time and support he would of turned into a premier KPF.
Click to expand...

You don't need to sell me on Moore's talent, overall, but I'm quite happy to see that talent deployed in defence.

Some people seem to feel that moving him to defence is a kind of demotion, that the club have 'given up' on him: you used the term 'defunct'. I see his move and the position he now plays in more positive terms. He won't just punch the ball away or intercept, but he's the sort of player who can switch us from defence to offence in an instant and set up our plays from the back half. He's the sort of player who can help build repeat entries into the forward 50, which in itself can be so important in opening up scoring opportunities.

In short, I agree that he's talented and don't see his position in defence as the slightest waste of that talent.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

JB1975 said:
You don't need to sell me on Moore's talent, overall, but I'm quite happy to see that talent deployed in defence.

Some people seem to feel that moving him to defence is a kind of demotion, that the club have 'given up' on him: you used the term 'defunct'. I see his move and the position he now plays in more positive terms. He won't just punch the ball away or intercept, but he's the sort of player who can switch us from defence to offence in an instant and set up our plays from the back half. He's the sort of player who can help build repeat entries into the forward 50, which in itself can be so important in opening up scoring opportunities.

In short, I agree that he's talented and don't see his position in defence as the slightest waste of that talent.
Click to expand...

My issue is that its harder to find a premier tall GOAL kicking fwd then a quality CHB or arrange a player to be an intercept defender (Howe and Langdon both play the role well despite being only 190cmish).
 
loki04 said:
My issue is that its harder to find a premier tall GOAL kicking fwd then a quality CHB or arrange a player to be an intercept defender (Howe and Langdon both play the role well despite being only 190cmish).
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with that as a general proposition, but whether Moore would ever have been a 'premier' (i.e. AA or elite) goal kicker is one issue. Another issue is that I don't see Moore's role as simply mirroring the roles played by Langdon and Howe.

But I suppose we agree to disagree.
 
JB1975 said:
I don't disagree with that as a general proposition, but whether Moore would ever have been a 'premier' (i.e. AA or elite) goal kicker is one issue. Another issue is that I don't see Moore's role as simply mirroring the roles played by Langdon and Howe.

But I suppose we agree to disagree.
Click to expand...

No im not saying he mirrors their role, his role is akin to Ben Reid in his best defender years. Im saying you can create the same effect with other strategies.

And yes we will agree to disagree on Moore's potential as a forward.
 
Last edited:
loki04 said:
He ducked his head and ran away from the contest all night. Was one of the softest displays I can remember from a pies player in a long time.
Click to expand...
There were those two shockers in the air, but Treloar was in there scrapping for ground balls. Meanwhile Sidebottom, Pendles and Beams were playing their usual style, which is to sit just off the contest in order to pounce on balls that bobbled out. I've got no issue with their style, it's just that it you can't have all of them doing it. It left us unbalanced around the contest. Really need Beams to smash in whilst Adams is in the stands and it's time for Pendles to become a wingman.
 
JB1975 said:
I think he had one five-goal game in his debut season, his highest tally was 3 after that.

I have no doubt he could be developed more as a forward, and would have been serviceable in the role, but I witnessed too many games in which he seemed lost at sea to say that he would ever be a 'likely' AA forward. He might have, but I'm not sure it ever seemed more probable than not.

My own view is that he already looks more accomplished and comfortable in defence than he ever did in the forward line. He looks like he owns his space, looks like he can read the play so much better, and I think that his athleticism after a few injury-ravaged years will continue to show itself.
Click to expand...
Amazing the difference for some when they can run at the ball and not pivot back.
The defensive area is built for Darcy. (Or is it the other way around?)
Regardless a full healthy career as a key back, he’ll be AA more than once you’d think.

Maybe he and Kelly can build the foundation into the future years.
 
loki04 said:
My issue is that its harder to find a premier tall GOAL kicking fwd then a quality CHB or arrange a player to be an intercept defender (Howe and Langdon both play the role well despite being only 190cmish).
Click to expand...


Do you think we win the GF if Darcy played in defence?

Imo...yes.

That's the difference between flankers who play tall and bigs who can play small. Flankers can get away with it but will get exposed. See GF.
 
TW Sherrin said:
Do you think we win the GF if Darcy played in defence?

Imo...yes.

That's the difference between flankers who play tall and bigs who can play small. Flankers can get away with it but will get exposed. See GF.
Click to expand...
Assuming everything the same; Moore fully fit and firing; we’d be better a goal or two...
 
sr36 said:
There were those two shockers in the air, but Treloar was in there scrapping for ground balls. Meanwhile Sidebottom, Pendles and Beams were playing their usual style, which is to sit just off the contest in order to pounce on balls that bobbled out. I've got no issue with their style, it's just that it you can't have all of them doing it. It left us unbalanced around the contest. Really need Beams to smash in whilst Adams is in the stands and it's time for Pendles to become a wingman.
Click to expand...

For me this is the issue regarding the coaching in the game. With Adams, the clubs best midfielder in terms of scrapping for the ground balls, out injured they slot Beams straight into his role despite his natural game being to sit just off it. I'd rather have seen either Thomas or Brown play the role with Beams playing elsewhere. This would also have had the added benefit of reducing any cohesion issues caused by integrating Beams back into the team in the position he'll be relegated to once Adams returns.

Speaking of cohesion issues we saw that on Friday night when often on transition the team would get the ball to the wing only for there to be no one in the forward line. Last year when they got their structure right there was always at least one player up there. However with Stephenson playing up the ground and Elliot being reintegrated into the forward line it seems the players occasionally lost track of which one of them should have been anchored up forward. The issue was compounded by the coaches being denied the use of runners. One of things I'm going to being watching over the coming weeks is how long it takes for the forwards to gel together as they did last year, practice makes perfect.
 
sr36 said:
There were those two shockers in the air, but Treloar was in there scrapping for ground balls. Meanwhile Sidebottom, Pendles and Beams were playing their usual style, which is to sit just off the contest in order to pounce on balls that bobbled out. I've got no issue with their style, it's just that it you can't have all of them doing it. It left us unbalanced around the contest. Really need Beams to smash in whilst Adams is in the stands and it's time for Pendles to become a wingman.
Click to expand...

There was a few times especially first half where he was doing anything but scrapping at the contest.

If i have time later (read can be bothered) i will make a highlights of what im talking about.
 
TW Sherrin said:
Do you think we win the GF if Darcy played in defence?

Imo...yes.

That's the difference between flankers who play tall and bigs who can play small. Flankers can get away with it but will get exposed. See GF.
Click to expand...

But we didnt have Dunn or Roughead in that side either, so whilst i take your point it is on the premise that Darcy is the ONLY tall in the back 50.

Im saying you can have 2 KPD who aren't as good as Darcy as an intercepter but do a good defensive role and have the flankers provide the incept role instead for a similar net result.


I think having Darcy up forward would of won us the game too and likely made McGovern much more accountable and less impactful. Cox didn't worry them in the slightest and was well contained for the most part.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

loki04 said:
But we didnt have Dunn or Roughead in that side either, so whilst i take your point it is on the premise that Darcy is the ONLY tall in the back 50.

Im saying you can have 2 KPD who aren't as good as Darcy as an intercepter but do a good defensive role and have the flankers provide the incept role instead for a similar net result.


I think having Darcy up forward would of won us the game too and likely made McGovern much more accountable and less impactful. Cox didn't worry them in the slightest and was well contained for the most part.
Click to expand...


We'll agree to disagree.
 
FAIRANDBALANCED said:
Mate, Grundy was the epitome of s**t. He got clearly beaten by Rhys Stanley
Click to expand...

Really? Didn't think there was much in it. Grundy dominated the hitouts (34-23) and won the clearances (7-6), Stanley a bit cleaner with his ball use.
 
jackcass said:
Really? Didn't think there was much in it. Grundy dominated the hitouts (34-23) and won the clearances (7-6), Stanley a bit cleaner with his ball use.
Click to expand...
It’s fair to say that FAIRANDBALANCED wasn’t fair and balanced...
 
loki04 said:
But we didnt have Dunn or Roughead in that side either, so whilst i take your point it is on the premise that Darcy is the ONLY tall in the back 50.

Im saying you can have 2 KPD who aren't as good as Darcy as an intercepter but do a good defensive role and have the flankers provide the incept role instead for a similar net result.


I think having Darcy up forward would of won us the game too and likely made McGovern much more accountable and less impactful. Cox didn't worry them in the slightest and was well contained for the most part.
Click to expand...

I don't get this obsessiveness with who is an interceptor and who isn't. I want all 18 players capable of intercepting if/as needed. With defenders, 1st and foremost I want them able to defend and all of Langdon, Howe, Crisp, Maynard have shown they can. Signs are positive with Moore, Roughy and Aish.
 
loki04 said:
But we didnt have Dunn or Roughead in that side either, so whilst i take your point it is on the premise that Darcy is the ONLY tall in the back 50.

Im saying you can have 2 KPD who aren't as good as Darcy as an intercepter but do a good defensive role and have the flankers provide the incept role instead for a similar net result.


I think having Darcy up forward would of won us the game too and likely made McGovern much more accountable and less impactful. Cox didn't worry them in the slightest and was well contained for the most part.
Click to expand...

While I agree with your point that it doesn't matter which of your defenders intercept as long someone does I don't think that moving Moore forward would suit the current team. In the current forward structure the talls push up the ground to create space to isolate a small or medium. I don't think Moore would work too well pushing up the ground and although agile for a 200cm+ player he is still not agile enough to be the player anchored and isolated in the forward line. Hence moving Moore forward would require the forward structure be rejigged.

In my opinion if looking to get a second marking option up forward besides Cox I would replace Mihocek with Howe. Howe was initially recruited to the club to play a high half forward role, combine this with his aerial ability and I reckon he could slot in next to Cox without disrupting structures.
 
jackcass said:
Really? Didn't think there was much in it. Grundy dominated the hitouts (34-23) and won the clearances (7-6), Stanley a bit cleaner with his ball use.
Click to expand...
Your assessment is fair and balanced.

Grundy was that bit better than Stanley but credit to Stanley for taking the game up to him.
 
ottoman said:
Darcy is a show pony, and we all know show ponies can excel at any end of the ground.
As long as he can stay injury free he has the potential to be a gun as a forward or a defender.
Nice asset to have.
Just has to stay injury free.
Click to expand...

He's a good kick at goal too. I remember how nice it was when he started that he could kick the gimme set shots regularly, unlike the mainstay at the time Cloke who had infuriated us for years with his goal kicking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top