Player Watch #24: Ben Griffiths - retired effectively immediately

Will he play for the Tigers at AFL level again?

  • Yes

    Votes: 54 32.1%

  • No

    Votes: 114 67.9%
  • Total voters
    168

Remove this Banner Ad

nut said:
he is the key ..... if he can hold down CHF whilst Vickery can be the forward/ruck whilst helping out an injury free Maric than we will seriously give it a huge shake.
Click to expand...
I don't think we can play a three tall forward line set up the ball comes out too fast . There I said it
 
The Rusty Trombone said:
I don't think we can play a three tall forward line set up the ball comes out too fast . There I said it
Click to expand...

Agree. Only might work if griff operates outside 50, JR and TV deep.
He's a great exit from defence marking option and lead up guy along the wings. Then bangs it in long. Rnd 23 v Sydney was good example.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Really cant see the thinking here that 3 talls cant be played in the 1 team here, It seems pretty simple to me that Ivan will only play 65-70% In the ruck
Leaving 20% for Vickery & 20% for Griffiths with Ben playing more between centre and hf & with his booming kick just 1 kick from the goal square

This also give us the option of having Jack moving up to hff and totally putting the opposition defence into kaos - The problem will be what do we do if McBean/McKenzie & Elton improve to the level and start dominating in the VFL
 
[QUOTE="THE_GUN, post: 36592147, member: The problem will be what do we do if McBean/McKenzie & Elton improve to the level and start dominating in the VFL[/QUOTE]

That's a big IF. All of those players are a bit off yet but if it happens then that's a good problem to have.
 
THE_GUN said:
Really cant see the thinking here that 3 talls cant be played in the 1 team here, It seems pretty simple to me that Ivan will only play 65-70% In the ruck
Leaving 20% for Vickery & 20% for Griffiths with Ben playing more between centre and hf & with his booming kick just 1 kick from the goal square

This also give us the option of having Jack moving up to hff and totally putting the opposition defence into kaos - The problem will be what do we do if McBean/McKenzie & Elton improve to the level and start dominating in the VFL
Click to expand...
means we will be in a very good position trade wise firstly. mcbean would attract plenty of interest. elton coming good and improving again after his good form in the second half of the year as a defender would be god send to replace chaplin grimes or astbury (sadly) if injury or form warrants. McKenzie coming good will mean either vickery or griff will be looking for game time and we will get good value in a trade again. win win win
 
Livonski said:
Agree. Only might work if griff operates outside 50, JR and TV deep.
He's a great exit from defence marking option and lead up guy along the wings. Then bangs it in long. Rnd 23 v Sydney was good example.
Click to expand...
I'd play Jack and Griff and have Astbury on the bench as he can play forward and back. Id send him to CHF or Full forward every time Ivan hits the pine for a rest while Griff goes into the ruck. The same would work with Grimes on the bench and Astbury starting down back just push Astbury up when needed and that way our forward line structure doesn't suffer while Ivy is having a 3 - 5 minute stint on the bench getting some air into his lungs to go again.

Vickery needs to learn how to play Ruck full time in the VFL IMO as he'll be needed if Ivy goes down with an injury or needs to be rested. I couldn't watch another half a season of footy where teams are running the ball out of our backline so quick with Jack , Vickery and Griffith hot on their tales 15m behind them. If Vickery had the extra yard of pace and defensive mindset McGuane had then we could be a shot but I haven't seen it and we desperately need a back up ruckman in case Ivy goes down which could happen considering what he puts his body through every week.
 
THE_GUN said:
Really cant see the thinking here that 3 talls cant be played in the 1 team here, It seems pretty simple to me that Ivan will only play 65-70% In the ruck
Leaving 20% for Vickery & 20% for Griffiths with Ben playing more between centre and hf & with his booming kick just 1 kick from the goal square

This also give us the option of having Jack moving up to hff and totally putting the opposition defence into kaos - The problem will be what do we do if McBean/McKenzie & Elton improve to the level and start dominating in the VFL
Click to expand...
We have a number of developing tall forward options. Id be looking at Elton as a KPD to replace Chaplin. I think thats his only shot at a career, otherwise he will be behind too many others for the KPF role.
 
Yep, get on board the sex monster Roachy8 . He has finally found out he can play at this level. All I ask is another 10% lift from this kid. Then watch out.
 
captain blood 17 said:
Yep, get on board the sex monster Roachy8 . He has finally found out he can play at this level. All I ask is another 10% lift from this kid. Then watch out.
Click to expand...
Yup - he had a good year without really getting out of a jog.... massive untapped potential - I'm well and truly on board the sexy beast!
 
Roachy8 said:
Yup - he had a good year without really getting out of a jog.... massive untapped potential - I'm well and truly on board the sexy beast!
Click to expand...

Can roost it 70m off 4 steps and sit on your head to take a grab. , he can play.


Sent from my iPad using righteous man power.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
juss said:
We have a number of developing tall forward options. Id be looking at Elton as a KPD to replace Chaplin. I think thats his only shot at a career, otherwise he will be behind too many others for the KPF role.
Click to expand...


Do you think he can play Chappy's role juss ? As I think Astbury's being groomed for it. Just MHO though have no inside info or anything like that...
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

theflea said:
Astburys' role is to take the gorillas at FB, not the 3rd tall floater.
Click to expand...


What I meant was in terms of Chappy's role of backline general & set up flea. I wasn't very clear was I :oops:? But I agree that that is David's role & I can't wait to see him pick up where he left off...
 
Well it didn't take long for us to start arguing amongst ourselves did it?

I think Vickery is a ruckman who is a squib and can't take centre bounces, hence the desperate attempt to turn him into a key forward. Well it's not like we have an established CHF so maybe it will work. But I have my doubts. He's played well in a few games where the opposition are so concerned about Riewoldt that they double team him and Vickery more often than not gets to play on some midget. When he kicks 4 goals it's like an overage kid in the little league. Well that's the way I remember it. Will be very happy if it pans out differently but I have more or less given up on Vickery making any position on the ground his own. Will play games when we want to stretch the opposition in our forward line or possibly if the opposition have a young ruckman. If we have to play him at centre bounces all game (say Maric gets injured) we will get creamed because he squibs it. At boundary throwins where he doesn't have to worry about body contact he can break even... but so could Shane Tuck. For him to prove me wrong he will have to grow a set of balls over the preseason. I don't think that's likely but good luck to him.

I still have not given up on the idea of Griffiths playing FB, or at least taking the kickouts. I think we are going to be obligated to try him at CHF because of Vickery as described above, but I think the backline should not be ruled out. The only other potential option at CHF will be Astbury but he would want to pull his finger out as well (I actually think Astbury has potential at CHF or CHB but the clock is ticking).

Let's not forget that the last great FB we had (Turner) started as a forward. Griffiths is possibly the biggest kick in the league (I would definitely say in the top 6 guys). That kick is a weapon that you can use. Instead of doing the percentage play and kicking to the half back flank, he can kick it to the wing or even straight up the ground over the heads of all the opposition. Like someone else said, this changes the whole opposition gameplan. At the very least it leaves them 2, maybe 3 kicks from goal. The terrible 'rolling maul' style of play breaks down if it gets kicked over their heads because all that's left is the FF and FB one on one in the other half of the ground. No opposition coach will take those odds because one false move by the FB and Riewoldt strolls into open goal.

I say play to our strengths. Being able to hit the centre circle from a kickout would be a weapon that very few other teams have.
 
tigerdan said:
Well it didn't take long for us to start arguing amongst ourselves did it?

I think Vickery is a ruckman who is a squib and can't take centre bounces, hence the desperate attempt to turn him into a key forward. Well it's not like we have an established CHF so maybe it will work. But I have my doubts. He's played well in a few games where the opposition are so concerned about Riewoldt that they double team him and Vickery more often than not gets to play on some midget. When he kicks 4 goals it's like an overage kid in the little league. Well that's the way I remember it. Will be very happy if it pans out differently but I have more or less given up on Vickery making any position on the ground his own. Will play games when we want to stretch the opposition in our forward line or possibly if the opposition have a young ruckman. If we have to play him at centre bounces all game (say Maric gets injured) we will get creamed because he squibs it. At boundary throwins where he doesn't have to worry about body contact he can break even... but so could Shane Tuck. For him to prove me wrong he will have to grow a set of balls over the preseason. I don't think that's likely but good luck to him.

I still have not given up on the idea of Griffiths playing FB, or at least taking the kickouts. I think we are going to be obligated to try him at CHF because of Vickery as described above, but I think the backline should not be ruled out. The only other potential option at CHF will be Astbury but he would want to pull his finger out as well (I actually think Astbury has potential at CHF or CHB but the clock is ticking).

Let's not forget that the last great FB we had (Turner) started as a forward. Griffiths is possibly the biggest kick in the league (I would definitely say in the top 6 guys). That kick is a weapon that you can use. Instead of doing the percentage play and kicking to the half back flank, he can kick it to the wing or even straight up the ground over the heads of all the opposition. Like someone else said, this changes the whole opposition gameplan. At the very least it leaves them 2, maybe 3 kicks from goal. The terrible 'rolling maul' style of play breaks down if it gets kicked over their heads because all that's left is the FF and FB one on one in the other half of the ground. No opposition coach will take those odds because one false move by the FB and Riewoldt strolls into open goal.

I say play to our strengths. Being able to hit the centre circle from a kickout would be a weapon that very few other teams have.
Click to expand...

I agree with your idea that TV wont cut it as a ruck, but for the same issues BG wont make it as a backman, hence going back to the fwdline. There is a reason he doesn't mark it much 1 on 1 in the fwdline and he will need to get a lot better at it to really own that CHF position. As to just bombing it straight down the centre, you would have to organise better strategies than just that or at least around that, as it would be picked up pretty damn quick. All my op of course.
 
Tango67 said:
The problem is you want the ball kicked towards 200cm players not from them?
Click to expand...


Yep we've got enough of them, hopefully it starts to happen...
 
Yep agree. Is really improving each game.

Just needs to be more confident in his set shots from outside 50.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top