Preview Geelong v West Coast Sunday Apr 28 @ GMHBA

[ijaxcat]

That's exactly what I say. They are barely half-forward-flanker size, and while they are good marks, the height isn't the issue.

Allen and Darling, 192cm. Barely half forward flanker size?

 

[ijaxcat]

Should I worry about our depth? Zuthrie & Parsons still around. Hmmm. Eagles & bombers massive! Win both top 4, 1-1, top 8, 0-2 pretenders again.

Zuthrie, still around?
Young developing player with a future I would have thought.

 

[Down at K Park]

Fair points but Smith was very good first year at Cats especially at marking in transition.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

He’s soft as butter. Plays too nice and gets pushed around. Zero aggression.

 

[Seeds]

He’s soft as butter. Plays too nice and gets pushed around. Zero aggression.

Thats what everyone said about Stanley.

Smith is actually pretty aggressive when the ball hits the deck. He fights hard for the ball.

 

[Turbocat]

Thats what everyone said about Stanley.

Smith is actually pretty aggressive when the ball hits the deck. He fights hard for the ball.

For his size he seems just a nice guy... I guess what people want is a Mumford. He is more Newfoundland than Rotty ..on field he is just a genial giant that has to work hard to aggressive. Its seems being aggressive in chasing the ball is not enough for some.

 

[Down at K Park]

Thats what everyone said about Stanley.

Smith is actually pretty aggressive when the ball hits the deck. He fights hard for the ball.

He doesn’t have stanleys athleticism. And too much of a nice guy to push and shove.

 

[Mad_Hatter]

I would love to hear the inside word on Smith, seems either he has told the club he's out, or the club has told him he's out because he's not getting a chance at all.
Stanley right now is obviously the better ruckman but I'm still surprised they haven't tried Smith in Savs role, even during pre-season, he can kick a goal (didn't he kick 3 against the Hawks one time?).

 

[fpm84]

I would love to hear the inside word on Smith, seems either he has told the club he's out, or the club has told him he's out because he's not getting a chance at all.
Stanley right now is obviously the better ruckman but I'm still surprised they haven't tried Smith in Savs role, even during pre-season, he can kick a goal (didn't he kick 3 against the Hawks one time?).

Smith is a ruck and a ruck only. He's nowhere near mobile or athletic enough to play Sav's role.

Yes, he kicked three goals in his first game for us, but kicked just 8 goals in 24 games across 2017/18.

The only way I can see Smith breaking through for a senior game this year is if Stanley gets injured/is rested.

 

[Johanpetro]

Tuohy for Clark
Constable for Parfitt

And if we want to rest Sav then we bring in Abbott or Fort.

Simple. No need to make any unnecessary changes to a team that’s 4-1.

 

[Nickoo]

Does anybody know how much he is being played in the VFL? Abbott won some sort of award I think so am imagining he’s the third ruck in order then smith and fort.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Seeds]

For his size he seems just a nice guy... I guess what people want is a Mumford. He is more Newfoundland than Rotty ..on field he is just a genial giant that has to work hard to aggressive. Its seems being aggressive in chasing the ball is not enough for some.

We had mumfird and everyone preferred keeping nice guy mark blake instead.

He is no gun but he is a solid contributor who is quite a decent ruck player and whilst quite immobile he does fight for the ball on the ground and he can pluck a contested mark. He has more mongrel in him then Abbott. The notion he is soft as butter compared to our other rucks is wrong.

 

[cats_09]

We had mumfird and everyone preferred keeping nice guy mark blake instead.

He is no gun but he is a solid contributor who is quite a decent ruck player and whilst quite immobile he does fight for the ball on the ground and he can pluck a contested mark. He has more mongrel in him then Abbott. The notion he is soft as butter compared to our other rucks is wrong.

This is probably taking discussion off topic - but who is the "everyone" you speak of that preferred Blake over Mumford?
- Both Mumford & Blake were off contract
- Mumford was offered a 3-year contract
- Blake wasn't offered a new contract until after the end of the trade period

- Mumford chose to go to Sydney who increased their offer to a 4-year deal
- Blake rejected a 3 year offer from St Kilda, was eventually re-signed by Geelong

 

[Turbocat]

We had mumfird and everyone preferred keeping nice guy mark blake instead.

He is no gun but he is a solid contributor who is quite a decent ruck player and whilst quite immobile he does fight for the ball on the ground and he can pluck a contested mark. He has more mongrel in him then Abbott. The notion he is soft as butter compared to our other rucks is wrong.

Thats not the way I remember it. ..

 

[witsend]

Just a thought on Sav...I'm a huge fan of his potential, athleticism and attitude. I think he has a VERY bright future as a Nic Nat-esque KPF/Ruck but I have an observation about his markings so far this season. It seems to me that he's "floating" for contested marks in much the same way he jumps for Centre bounces in the ruck. That technique works fine for those ruck contests unimpeded at a front on opponent essentially doing the same thing. His advantage is he generallyv can jump higher than most of his opponents even if he's shorter. However, in a contested pack/CHF v CHB contest I feel he needs to take a more aggressive leap AT the ball a few milliseconds later than he instinctively does. He's a big enough unit to hold himself in the contest against opponents at his side or behind. It's a very subtle difference but one I feel I've seen consistently this year from the big fella.

 

[Gunf]

Redden to miss this week

 

[MacStradbroke]

Thats not the way I remember it. ..

The cub dealt with Blakes mummy and not Shane Mummy unfortunately.

 

[Turbocat]

Just a thought on Sav...I'm a huge fan of his potential, athleticism and attitude. I think he has a VERY bright future as a Nic Nat-esque KPF/Ruck but I have an observation about his markings so far this season. It seems to me that he's "floating" for contested marks in much the same way he jumps for Centre bounces in the ruck. That technique works fine for those ruck contests unimpeded at a front on opponent essentially doing the same thing. His advantage is he generallyv can jump higher than most of his opponents even if he's shorter. However, in a contested pack/CHF v CHB contest I feel he needs to take a more aggressive leap AT the ball a few milliseconds later than he instinctively does. He's a big enough unit to hold himself in the contest against opponents at his side or behind. It's a very subtle difference but one I feel I've seen consistently this year from the big fella.

Id say he would be better off if could learn to not have torelie on his spring as much as he does. Hawkins rarely takes big specs anymore... its the KPF coaching that he need to give himself more looks at easier marks. I suspect once he starts getting more ball , he will start flying more aggressive at the marks.

 

[BlakeyNoFlakey]

With both Fort & Abbott named in the extended line-up, I expect we might see one of our ruckman dropped for this game, and I'm thinking the Big Sav has been tapped on the shoulder and told he needs to go back and work on it some more in the two's.

 

[goyoucatters]

With both Fort & Abbott named in the extended line-up, I expect we might see one of our ruckman dropped for this game, and I'm thinking the Big Sav has been tapped on the shoulder and told he needs to go back and work on it some more in the two's.

The twos don't have a game this weekend. So, if he's omitted, Esava could end up simply having a rest and coming straight back in to the ones against the Dons. If the MC is actually more concerned about his fitness than his form at this stage.

Will therefore be up to either Abbott or Fort (if they get the chance) to demonstrate they've got more to offer in the AFL side than Rata does currently.

For me, I'm still backing the #17 in.

 

[Shai]

Smith is a ruck and a ruck only. He's nowhere near mobile or athletic enough to play Sav's role.

Yes, he kicked three goals in his first game for us, but kicked just 8 goals in 24 games across 2017/18.

The only way I can see Smith breaking through for a senior game this year is if Stanley gets injured/is rested.

Abbott is being recognised for his efforts in the ruck & Fort is kicking goals in the VFL but I'm not getting overexcited about that just yet.

 

[Seeds]

He doesn’t have stanleys athleticism. And too much of a nice guy to push and shove.

He doesnt. But he has height and size which makes him better at ruckwork.

 

[Seeds]

Thats not the way I remember it. ..

Well its the way it happened.

 

[Seeds]

This is probably taking discussion off topic - but who is the "everyone" you speak of that preferred Blake over Mumford?
- Both Mumford & Blake were off contract
- Mumford was offered a 3-year contract
- Blake wasn't offered a new contract until after the end of the trade period

- Mumford chose to go to Sydney who increased their offer to a 4-year deal
- Blake rejected a 3 year offer from St Kilda, was eventually re-signed by Geelong

Mumford held up our ruck singlehandedly in the second half of the season in his first season of league football after blake prooved incapable of rucking without Ottens. Then we brought Blake back at the end of the season after Mumford was stuffed from rucking alone game after game.

Mumford sat in the stands as blake collected a premiership rucking second fiddle to ottens again. Mumford should of been given a rest for a week at the end and then brought in to team with ottens. He earned it. Blake hadnt. It was disgusting treatment of Mumford by the Mc who used Mumford like a second hand hooker. Mumford would of stayed if he wasnt treated so poorly.

 

[steady2]

This is probably taking discussion off topic - but who is the "everyone" you speak of that preferred Blake over Mumford?
- Both Mumford & Blake were off contract
- Mumford was offered a 3-year contract
- Blake wasn't offered a new contract until after the end of the trade period

- Mumford chose to go to Sydney who increased their offer to a 4-year deal
- Blake rejected a 3 year offer from St Kilda, was eventually re-signed by Geelong

Mumford was not off contract, he had one more year on the rookie list. Geelong assured him they wanted him but could not offer him more money, our salary cap was bursting. We knew Ablett would be out of contract and were trying to build a bank to keep him, had we known that the Suns would offer the fantastic sum they did and we would lose him, we could have offered Mumford a decent contract. Sydney kept increasing their offer until they got him.

 

[steady2]

... It was disgusting treatment of Mumford by the Mc who used Mumford like a second hand hooker. Mumford would of stayed if he wasnt treated so poorly.

This whole argument is off topic. However, they did to Mumford the same as they did to Blake two years earlier, when he was dropped and King was picked. The MC chose experience over enthusiasm, it worked in 2007 when King played one of his best games in years in the GF. In hindsight it is obvious Mumford would have been the better ruck option, for the future. Mumford would not have stayed even if he had been picked for the finals and he had gotten a Premiership medal, they were unable to offer him any more money and Sydney kept increasing their offer. Mumford would have been crazy to stay and made the sensible decision. The GFC were hoarding money to offer Gaz who would be out of contract the following year, had we known we could never match the Suns offer we could have kept Mumford, who did want to stay and would have stayed for much less than Sydney offered, but couldn't offer more under the circumstances.