Brent Macaffer

[shrobhouse]

I have noticed we do not have any decent medium sized leading forwards at the moment and when our forwards do get on the end of a lead or take a grab they tend to miss more often then not. We do not seem to look for the lead in the game instead we always kick long to either Cloke or Dawes to mark or crumb for the small forwards. Macaffer at full fitness could provide a strong leading and converting option I50 instead of the long bomb to the square to a contest where Cloke is more often then not double teamed. Teams like Geelong score a lot of goals just from hitting up a lead inside 50 and good converters. Macaffer (though i have not seen play in ages) judging on his late 2010 form and could provide this option which i believe would be really useful. What do people reckon??

 

[SnakePlisskin]

That's what they were trying with Goldsack otherwise he'd be down back .

 

[MeisterBot]

Definitely, but not a realistic option this year.

Goldsack is being given the Macaffer role as third tall/defensive forward. He's done admirably, but I think Moneybags is better suited in the backline, or on the wing. He's got shades of Andrew Embley imo.

Don't know if Macaffer can recapture his late 2010 form, but if he can, it'll be a handful for the opposition.

 

[standingroomonly]

That was pretty much the role he was playing, no surprise our forward line functioned better with him in it.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

I don't think he's limited to playing purely as a forward, but yes he'd be handy to have back at full fitness.