3 Forward Live Ideas

[Eudes]

As most have been saying, losing to the saints wasn't completely bad. Dropping some games during the regular season can show where the cracks may lie, allowing them to therefore be filled, ready for the big stage in september. So even though another win would have been sweet, to me, losing that game wasn't a big deal.

What crack I did start to see appear is that the Tommahawk is not quite right atm. His judgement in the air & his reluctance to crash packs worried me a little. To me, I think he needs to go back & get some confidence in the VFL. I believe he is starting to feel the full weight that is on his shoulders at that KP & he is starting to buckle. Hopefully a few weeks in the 2s will help him regain that confidence & we'll see him come back into the side & play like he was in the 1st 1/4 of the year. But I do believe it's something he should do.

Until then, though, I think we need to try some new things up forward, just so we have a couple of extra tricks in the bag. I had 3 ideas which I think could be trialed in the lead up to the finals. Never know, they might come in handy during september.


(1) Mooney to FF - Gamble to CHF

I believe Mooney is better suited closer to goal. Uses the body well & often will out muscle his oppent 1 on 1. I think putting Moons at the FF possie makes our forward line more pottent. After all we did win in 07 when he played there.

I then threw Gamble into the mix as i think we could trouble some teams with a more mobile forward line. I see Gamble in the O'Keefe mold, being that link up player up the ground. Genrally a good mark & finisher, & I think he has that x-factor about him that could lead to some freak-ish goals.

(2) Mooney to FF - Dasher to CHF - Lonergan to the backline

The Mooney to FF is the same as number 1 & the Dasher to CHF is a similar reason to why i said Gamble to CHF. Dasher, i believe, is a better mark then Gamble over head & maybe a better finisher. Also i think we saw a bit from him when he was thrown forward against the saints. Added something. Strong & a good lead, clean hands also.

The 3rd part to this solution i think adds some movement & flexability. We've all seen how much more suited to the backline Lonergan is, & i think he would only firm up our backline even futher. But then what can be done on game day, to mix it up & throw oppisition off guard is that Milburn & Lonners can switch it up. We know Dasher is strong down back & adds some run out of the backline, & Lonners (even though some would disagree) can play the forward line well enough to pinch a few up there. I just think it adds a little something that would be worth trialling before the finals.

(3) Mooney CHF - Blake Ruck - Mumford/Ottens Rotate through FF & Ruck

This could (obviously) only be trialled when Otto returns from his injury, but i think it could be worth a look.

You would keep Moons in that lead up/link player at CHF that he is playing now & play the 3 big rucks in the 1 team.

Blake would rotate through the interchange (never to step into the forward line). Otto & Mummy, on the other hand, would take turns in rotating through the FF possie & the interchange. Both Ottens & Mumford have displayed the ability to take a contested mark & would both add a big precence up forward. Otto is a lovely kick & him spending more time in the forward 50 can only benefit the cats. Mummy is big but has shown he is willing to attack & chase. He is rather mobile, for a big fella, & could snag a couple of majors if given the chance


These were just some thoughts I had after the game. Just wanted to share them with the geelong faithful & see what you had to add/say.

 

[hamG]

1 forward delayed idea - Mooney FF with Rooke & Gamble as leading targets.

 

[thegerman]

Lets take a deep breath, stop the Hawkins hatred. Every year we have the same problem; supporters wasting their breath on players they THINK should be gone.

In a few years we will be kicking ourselves that we didn't give Hawkins the games he needs. He is raw and young, against his contemporaries he is on par.

Give him a break, he'll come good.

 

[Eudes]

Lets take a deep breath, stop the Hawkins hatred. Every year we have the same problem; supporters wasting their breath on players they THINK should be gone.

In a few years we will be kicking ourselves that we didn't give Hawkins the games he needs. He is raw and young, against his contemporaries he is on par.

Give him a break, he'll come good.

When did i say he was "Gone". I just said i think he needs his confidence back & maybe he'd find it better in the VFL.

Really the main reason behind the thread was to throw up forward line ideas as a Plan B, C, D, etc. I like Hawk & think he has the goods, but if it comes GF day & he ain't preforming, would you want to go into the game with him? Just some other options for "just in case"

 

[meto]

Lets take a deep breath, stop the Hawkins hatred. Every year we have the same problem; supporters wasting their breath on players they THINK should be gone.
In a few years we will be kicking ourselves that we didn't give Hawkins the games he needs. He is raw and young, against his contemporaries he is on par.

Give him a break, he'll come good.

Who's hating him? Its just how long to put up with zero return.
This is the big-time, Harry Taylor puts himself in harms way for the team.
A lack of aggression up forward is inexcusable.

 

[noclashjumpers]

I then threw Gamble into the mix as i think we could trouble some teams with a more mobile forward line. I see Gamble in the O'Keefe mold, being that link up player up the ground. Genrally a good mark & finisher, & I think he has that x-factor about him that could lead to some freak-ish goals.

That's exactly what we've been doing with Gamble every time he's played since his break out start last year. .....And it hasn't worked.

Sit him in the square as a marking/leading target. He's unpredictable, good on the ground, great over head, plays tall, & knows where the goals are. And most importantly for me, he's got a slight streak of 'good' selfishness, in that he wants to kick goals and take shots.

It worked early last year and the club haven't really tried to revisit it. For some reason he's been floating around the 50 and the wing.

Dumb.

 

[winty]

What about a fourth option? Mooney at CHF, and rotate Bartel, Ablett and Chapman through the midfield, half forward line and full forward. I'd clear out the 50m arc too, and let the forward and his opponent go one out.

Those three would be bloody tough to man up on IMO. Put a small defender on them, and you'd back that trio to outmark their opponent nine times out of ten. Put a taller defender on them, and they'd kill them when the ball hits the deck.

 

[thegerman]

When did i say he was "Gone". I just said i think he needs his confidence back & maybe he'd find it better in the VFL.

Really the main reason behind the thread was to throw up forward line ideas as a Plan B, C, D, etc. I like Hawk & think he has the goods, but if it comes GF day & he ain't preforming, would you want to go into the game with him? Just some other options for "just in case"

Eudes,

Tell me exactly how he is going to learn anything or gain experience in the two's?

He's done this before, we threw him back and now has he changed? Did Playfair change? Or anyone else for that matter? The sub-standard VFL is not where he should be going.

The club has different options, that's why they moved Dasher there. Threads like this are just to continue with the same old argument, that's been done to death.

Get behind the players now; that's where the confidence builds, not writing crap about them every week they have a below par performance.

 

[Eudes]

Eudes,

Tell me exactly how he is going to learn anything or gain experience in the two's?

He's done this before, we threw him back and now has he changed? Did Playfair change? Or anyone else for that matter? The sub-standard VFL is not where he should be going.

The club has different options, that's why they moved Dasher there. Threads like this are just to continue with the same old argument, that's been done to death.

Get behind the players now; that's where the confidence builds, not writing crap about them every week they have a below par performance.

So answer me this, GF day, the Hawk ISN'T playing any better, would you choose him in the side? & if not do you know who you'd bring in? We're just talking about other options.

And how do you know it won't help giving him a couple of weeks in the VFL? He is still young & raw. He might be metally tired. Maybe even a bit physically run down.

This is all talk anyways. Bomber said they are going to stick with him, was in the paper today.

 

[jobear]

I agree with thegerman - big men take longer to mature and I think that Tom needed to feel the pressure of a big game. Besides I'm pretty sure that it was only last year we were (or most of us) highly critical of Travis Varcoe and yet I believe the club took the right approach with him - look at his year so far, he has gained in confidence and it shows in his game. Tom just needs to find his confidence and not be so down on himself - and sometimes this just comes with age, I mean he is only 20 years old.

 

[year of the cat]

I think that Eudes has made some very valid points, although I hate his third forward option!

Depending on who we are playing both the first and second options are worth considering IF HAWKINS FORM DOES NOT IMPROVE THIS YEAR.

I am almost just as worried about our backline as our forwardline at the moment. I wonder whether against both the other challengers whether we can now afford to be playing both Milburn and Harley down back at the same time? The lack of pace of these two has become apparent And whilst a suitable matchup can be found for one of them in each opponent (Hahn from the bulldogs, Leigh Brown from the pies and maybe Macqualter against the saints) I reckon it is getting tougher to find the second matchup with the lack of pace being a real issue. The only candidates I could think of were Josh Hill, Schneider (not ideal) and Medhurst (again not ideal). Hunt's absence is maybe more telling than first thought.

Wojcinski or even DJ will have to come in particularly against the smaller, running bulldogs forwardline with Aker, Higgins and Johnson to be matched up on. With Collingwood you have Didak, Medhurst, Davis, Lockyer and Thomas (maybe even Dick as well) to contend with at different times. That would give us Kelly, Woja and Enright to matchup on - looks quicker as well.

Perhaps then Milburn can be played forward with these teams.

Coming back to the forward structure for a moment if Gamble can get back in form and hunger then he will also provide much better defensive skills than Hawkins currently does. In that first term we were flogged by the lack of defensive work being done by our forwards. Putting Rooke on Fisher helped stem things from quarter time but Gilbert was also able to run out at will for much of the match. Having SJ back to matchup will also help in this regard. His absence on Sunday cannot be underestimated.

So a potential team (Ottens being available to ruck 30-40%) for the finals could be:

B: Wojcinski Scarlett Harley
HB: Enright Taylor Mackie
C: Kelly (playing defensive) Ling Corey
HF: S.Johnson Gamble Chapman
F: Stokes Mooney Rooke


Foll: Ottens (35-40%) Bartel Ablett

Int: Selwood, Varcoe, Milburn, (ruckman TBA)

Looks a quicker, more attacking, smaller outfit to me.

What do you think?

 

[Lemieux8]

I like Gamble and one of Mooney/Hawkins in the square, then four across the half forward line of say Chapman, Rooke, Johnson, Stokes/Byrnes in that kinda set up with the two taller blokes on the inside. Or even Stokes/Byrnes playing slight behind Rooke.

I believe Gamble does his best work inside the 50, and is more or less a livewire forward pocket type, who can also take a good grab. He is not the kind of bloke who should be running around on the wing, because from what I have seen, doesn't always use the ball in the greatest fashion. I feel far more comfortable when he is kicking for goal.

 

[Belisarius]

Who's hating him? Its just how long to put up with zero return.
This is the big-time, Harry Taylor puts himself in harms way for the team.
A lack of aggression up forward is inexcusable.

Yeah I get a bit put off with people not quite getting what you are saying about Hawkins when you make a criticism of him. I have written a fair bit about Hawkins' insipid performance against the Saints - but that does not mean I hate him or that he should be traded. It just means what it says - he was insipid against the Saints. He was also not any better against Lake - and these efforts against teams we may come up against in the finals concerns me.

And that right now he is not working as a KP forward against good opposition. So are there any other options worthy of consideration. What is wrong with that ? Stating the bleeding obvious ?

 

[Vdubs]

Year Of The Cat, planning a team based on Ottens in the ruck is too optimistic Let's plan the team based on his possible role off the bench, AT THIS STAGE. Ottens fit and firing is highly desirable but not a likely scenario for a long while as a ruck.

 

[Whit3y]

Dasher to CHF

no no no no no, thats just got no written all over it

 

[winty]

Just a query about Hawkins' mobility, or lack of it. Didn't he have his whole running style re-jigged over the off-season to minimise the onset of hot spots in his feet? Could it be he's still not used to his new running style?

 

[Johanpetro]

I think that Eudes has made some very valid points, although I hate his third forward option!

Depending on who we are playing both the first and second options are worth considering IF HAWKINS FORM DOES NOT IMPROVE THIS YEAR.

I am almost just as worried about our backline as our forwardline at the moment. I wonder whether against both the other challengers whether we can now afford to be playing both Milburn and Harley down back at the same time? The lack of pace of these two has become apparent And whilst a suitable matchup can be found for one of them in each opponent (Hahn from the bulldogs, Leigh Brown from the pies and maybe Macqualter against the saints) I reckon it is getting tougher to find the second matchup with the lack of pace being a real issue. The only candidates I could think of were Josh Hill, Schneider (not ideal) and Medhurst (again not ideal). Hunt's absence is maybe more telling than first thought.

Wojcinski or even DJ will have to come in particularly against the smaller, running bulldogs forwardline with Aker, Higgins and Johnson to be matched up on. With Collingwood you have Didak, Medhurst, Davis, Lockyer and Thomas (maybe even Dick as well) to contend with at different times. That would give us Kelly, Woja and Enright to matchup on - looks quicker as well.

Perhaps then Milburn can be played forward with these teams.

Coming back to the forward structure for a moment if Gamble can get back in form and hunger then he will also provide much better defensive skills than Hawkins currently does. In that first term we were flogged by the lack of defensive work being done by our forwards. Putting Rooke on Fisher helped stem things from quarter time but Gilbert was also able to run out at will for much of the match. Having SJ back to matchup will also help in this regard. His absence on Sunday cannot be underestimated.

So a potential team (Ottens being available to ruck 30-40%) for the finals could be:

B: Wojcinski Scarlett Harley
HB: Enright Taylor Mackie
C: Kelly (playing defensive) Ling Corey
HF: S.Johnson Gamble Chapman
F: Stokes Mooney Rooke


Foll: Ottens (35-40%) Bartel Ablett

Int: Selwood, Varcoe, Milburn, (ruckman TBA)

Looks a quicker, more attacking, smaller outfit to me.

What do you think?

No room for Byrnes?

 

[darrenmorgan]

i understand that they are going to perservere with hawk and i agree, but there is a flag to win this year, and we need to be ready if he doesnt get going, which looks likely. he is fairly certain to go missing in a big final if he cannot perform in big h&a games. im sure in 2-3 years he'll be a much better player and will win games for us but we have to be ready now. i like the idea of gamble in the square, at least give it a chance now, 2 months out and see if it works. it would be a good time for hawk to have a week off or a game in the 2's also to get some confidence back. thompson has done this before, too much faith in the set up, and it cost us a flag. we need to be trying different things right now before its too late.

 

[year of the cat]

No room for Byrnes?

Stokes and Byrnes will be fighting for the same spot. Although Stokes' forward pressure could improve I just like the fact that he can finish and is more a true forward pocket type that can be moved into the midfield. He looks more dangerous to me.

Byrnes on the other hand, whilst having a good season, worried me on Sunday with two regulation missed shots - one at simple set shot, the other a shot he should have nailed but kicked out-of-bounds on the run. I worry about him under pressure. Stokes when under the same pressure nailed a shot from an angle on the run.

 

[Hinkley29]

I have to admit, that whilst we were undefeated, and we were undefeated in the pre-season, I wanted us to create history by winning every game we played in this year. Because of this, I didn't want us to experiment with the line up because every game was a big game. I am bummed out that we can't be the team to win every game, but now our only goal is winning the GF, which may be a good thing.

Now that the perfect season is gone, I don't particularly care if we lose a couple more. This gives us a bit more freedom to experiment with our line-up because every game is not a GF anymore.

With that in mind, here are my 2 cents:

- Hawkins has to play. Every game for the next 8 weeks. The best case scenario for Geelong is if he is the answer to our forward line questions, and the only way we are going to find this out is if he plays. If he sucks, cut him at the business end of the season, but until then, lets see what he can do.
- Moons is going along just fine. He has shown that he still has the mobility to play at CHF. I think he can still play close to goals, obviously his kicking has at times left a bit to be desired, but we don't have anything to worry about with big Moons.
- We need to find a way to see if Gamble can cut it. If that means that we play Moons, Hawkins and Gamble in the same side, so be it. Play him close to goal, give him a license to create, and see what happens. He is going to frustrate at times (just as SJ did at the start of his career), but we need to find out what we have with him. A fit and firing Gamble would be a massive X-factor come finals time, so lets see if he has it in him.
- Let SJ do whatever the hell he wants.
- Our small forwards are fine. I actually think that Stokes is a valuable component of our team, Chapman is much more valuable played forward than in the midfield, and almost all of our midfielders are dangerous going forward.

I would hope that we are going to see a few mystery viruses and general soreness going around the club, so that we can manipulate selection to allow certain guys (I am looking at you Ryan Gamble) to play.

 

[Roos08]

Firstly; I don't think we need to change a whole lot in terms of personnel from Sunday's 22 (SJ for Stokes and Ottens for Blake when/if fit enough).

Secondly; I am certain that Gamble is not the short-term answer. He has shown glimpses but Hawkins has shown more and i think he is a much, much better long term prospect. Let's stick with Hawkins, please.

Thirdly; What do people think about moving Mackie forward if/when needed? I know he gives us plenty as a rebounding half back but he started his career forward, is a good mark, beautiful field kick and set shot, is 192cm and mobile.

Thoughts?

 

[Hinkley29]

Firstly; I don't think we need to change a whole lot in terms of personnel from Sunday's 22 (SJ for Stokes and Ottens for Blake when/if fit enough).

Secondly; I am certain that Gamble is not the short-term answer. He has shown glimpses but Hawkins has shown more and i think he is a much, much better long term prospect. Let's stick with Hawkins, please.

Thirdly; What do people think about moving Mackie forward if/when needed? I know he gives us plenty as a rebounding half back but he started his career forward, is a good mark, beautiful field kick and set shot, is 192cm and mobile.

Thoughts?

Gamble and Hawkins are totally different players. They can co-exist in the team in my opinion.

Mackie is Gamble without the tricks, but with more experience. Moving him forward would be robbing Peter to pay Paul. Why not give Gamble an extended run and see what happens, rather than destabilising a strength of our side by moving Mackie forward.

 

[Roos08]

Gamble and Hawkins are totally different players. They can co-exist in the team in my opinion.

Mackie is Gamble without the tricks, but with more experience. Moving him forward would be robbing Peter to pay Paul. Why not give Gamble an extended run and see what happens, rather than destabilising a strength of our side by moving Mackie forward.

Of course they are totally different players but neither is quick... Gamble, Hawkins and Mooney in the same forward line = TOO SLOW!!!

Wake up to yourself; Gamble wouldn't do up Mackie's boot lace What tricks are you even referring to?

 

[Belisarius]

i understand that they are going to perservere with hawk and i agree, but there is a flag to win this year, and we need to be ready if he doesnt get going, which looks likely. he is fairly certain to go missing in a big final if he cannot perform in big h&a games. im sure in 2-3 years he'll be a much better player and will win games for us but we have to be ready now. i like the idea of gamble in the square, at least give it a chance now, 2 months out and see if it works. it would be a good time for hawk to have a week off or a game in the 2's also to get some confidence back. thompson has done this before, too much faith in the set up, and it cost us a flag. we need to be trying different things right now before its too late.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[footymissionary]

PLEASE keep Hawkins in the side for another 4 weeks and if he is still NO GOOD by round 18, than bring in Tom Lonergan as an insurance cover for the side because he can switch between fwd and defence.

1 if BIG CAM failed to fire/injuried on the day, hopefully Tommy L can stand up in the foward line OR moves into the backline which could allow Mackie/Dasher to move up into the attack!

2 Tommy can also slot into the backline to cover an injuried defender if require

Personally, i think the BIG HAWKINS is lacking the some ANGER in his game...

I hope to see him goes WILD on the field and see what happens....