Carlton in the Media (articles, podcasts etc) - Part IV

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Nov 8, 2000
83,680
87,149
Wherever I am
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Nottingham Forest
I believe this is called running interference.

#1, the roost from Stocker to Harry and the roost from Harry to goal. A couple of good looking roosters.

Not sure what the go is with #2. Yeah, it was his 7th goal but from a free kick and that frustrating kick around the corner from right in front and it just clears the line.

As a footy purist, I hate this new trend.
 

thylacine60

Post-Human
Jun 4, 2006
108,771
194,827
Elwood FFS
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Insert Token EPL Club
ultimately the footy purist gets hoist with their own petard - I like to think I'm one as well but does that mean I pine for the return of the place-kick? modernization of the game is inevitable and I have done well to hang on - the round the corner kick I have no issues with mainly due to the fact it just opens up the goal-face for those who can pull it off - and peter mckenna no longer plays for carlton...........if he ever did............
 
Nov 8, 2000
83,680
87,149
Wherever I am
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Nottingham Forest
ultimately the footy purist gets hoist with their own petard - I like to think I'm one as well but does that mean I pine for the return of the place-kick? modernization of the game is inevitable and I have done well to hang on - the round the corner kick I have no issues with mainly due to the fact it just opens up the goal-face for those who can pull it off - and peter mckenna no longer plays for carlton...........if he ever did............
See, I think the goal face is open exactly the same amount for a snap or a drop punt.

Not sure being a purist means everything needs to be the way it was on day dot though.

I get a poor drop will ruin a drop punt but a poor drop will ruin a snap just as easy. It's the lack of penetration that gets me. A set shot snap from 40m that is marked by a defender on the goalline is a cardinal sin.

Harry can roost them from 50m with a drop punt, but doubts himself 40m out or closer. Bring back a goalkicking coach IMO.
 
Nov 8, 2000
83,680
87,149
Wherever I am
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Nottingham Forest
I’m purely in the “ you do you” camp. If it works… insert cliche!
Well it works when you look at the accuracy percentage but you can't compare it to a drop punt that never happened. Mistiming a snap and having it marked in the square though ... that's dribble kick rant worthy.
 

BigBreakfast

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 19, 2019
6,758
10,312
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Lakeshow
Well it works when you look at the accuracy percentage but you can't compare it to a drop punt that never happened. Mistiming a snap and having it marked in the square though ... that's dribble kick rant worthy.
Nice. Still don’t mind if they get there. Did notice that the one in the top 5 list barely made the distance and without the the goal line shepherd, probably would have. Insert rant…
 

Coops93

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 19, 2015
7,991
19,073
Gold Coast
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Arsenal, Denver Broncos
See, I think the goal face is open exactly the same amount for a snap or a drop punt.

Not sure being a purist means everything needs to be the way it was on day dot though.

I get a poor drop will ruin a drop punt but a poor drop will ruin a snap just as easy. It's the lack of penetration that gets me. A set shot snap from 40m that is marked by a defender on the goalline is a cardinal sin.

Harry can roost them from 50m with a drop punt, but doubts himself 40m out or closer. Bring back a goalkicking coach IMO.
I think this point is incorrect.

I've heard former forwards (BT, Carey in particular stick out in my memory) have said many times that there's more margin for error on a snap as there's more of the ball to hit. If you're off by a few cm you can still make good connection and it goes where you want it to still, whereas a drop punt a couple cm either way makes a drastic difference.

With a snap the only way to truly butcher it is to hit the belly of the ball which means you've missed your mark by inches, not cm, or hitting way too skinny making it drop short. Even the drop short is generally on target though.

A drop punt is much easier to shank than a snap.

Not to say I advocate it, but I can see why he prefers it, particularly when inside 30-odd metres. Outside of that I'd much rather see him go the drop punt, once you get beyond 30 you start having to hit the belly more and the margin for error goes up.
 
Last edited:

Bletch

Team Captain
Dec 8, 2020
425
1,121
AFL Club
Carlton
I think this point is incorrect.

I've heard former forwards (BT, Carey in particular stick out in my memory) have said many times that there's more margin for error on a snap as there's more of the ball to hit. If you're off by a few cm you still make good connection and it goes where you want it too still, whereas a drop punt a couple cm either way makes a drastic difference.

With a snap the only way to truly butcher it is to hit the belly of the ball which means you've missed your mark by inches, not cm, or hitting way too skinny making it drop short. Even the drop short is generally on target though.

A drop punt is much easier to shank than a snap.

Not to say I advocate it, but I can see why he prefers it, particularly when inside 30-odd metres. Outside of that I'd much rather see him go the drop punt, once you get beyond 30 you start having to hit the belly more and the margin for error goes up.
I've heard Peter Hudson talk about this - not so much about the snap, but the drop punt. He didn't like the drop punt for the very reason mentioned above - low margin for error. So he favoured the flat punt. Which has gone the way of the drop-kick - just isn't used any more. But it worked well enough for Hudson :)
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad