I actually think we have a player there... his grunt and attack on the ball is elite... and is he only 20 btw?? you would mistake him for 22.
he will make it and be fine.
Review Cats down Bombers by 28 points - Tomma has 8
- Thread starter dazbroncos
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
he will make it and be fine.
Kobe Gryant
Professional Quidditch Player
I think it's got more to do with the key forwards of the opposition rather than the ruck battle.
We've known for a long time that Scotty is indifferent when it's comes to ruckman and their worth.
With the Crows trio of talls SDK will be required back and therefore we will need a genuine ruckman.
from my own observations, he reminds me a bit of a midfield version of Gary Rohan to this point... he plays very much on instinct and adrenaline.
when he is in a contested situation he looks like a bull in a cage with his attack and grunt at it and you think "wow here is a player".. but he lacks a lot of connection and transition when the ball is in general play. Does not get into great positions around the field to influence contests defensively or link up offensively 1-2-3 steps ahead of play. he seems to read the play poorly in general at this stage of his career..
this is not unusual for a 20yo, and can change heaps with experience and quality coaching and his own commitment to learn.
but just my own 2 cents into this
We were good for patches in each quarter. But I felt we were too easily scored against. It reminded me a little of round 1. Very little defensive pressure unlike last week.
Our offence is brilliant though.
As just about the biggest 'Ceglar cynic' on this board, even I can acknowledge he's a massive chance to come in for the game next week.
(1) The coach declared he's basically a certainty to play in the seniors some time in the next few weeks.
(2) We're going around against a much less mobile ruck (in O'Brien) than we faced against the Bombers.
(3) We're playing on the 'cheat ground', where there is quite simply less territory for the ruck to cover.
(4) We're playing a team with several tall options up forward, meaning SDK surely can't be considered to chop out Blitz in the ruck.
(5) It gives Blitz a break from being smashed in the ruck week on week, and keeps him fresher for his damaging role running back and forth between the arcs.
Put all that together, and I see that Ceglar is odds on to get a guernsey in the AFL team next weekend. And while I won't eagerly await the opportunity to see him play, even I can reluctantly submit to the logic in going with it for this game, at the very least.
Last edited:
- Dec 11, 2009
- 29,767
- 36,957
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Our defensive issues are the result of injuries, and some indifferent form.
We've lost Henry, had Kolo out for a period, lost SDK to cover the ruck, suffered some ordinary form from Bews, and are trying to cover Sav's rawness.
Pure_Ownage
TheBrownDog
All jokes aside next week is on the narrower ground where ceglars lack of running cant get exposed and obrien is very slow for speed. If we are going to lower blitz workload this is the week to do it.
Pure_Ownage
TheBrownDog
Thats all and thats probably partly why he only played 3/4s in the 2s (that and because hes old).
DangerHere
Pivotonian
Maybe because it wasn’t Riewoldt ?
The lack of defensive pressure was certainly startling at times, considering how well we started the game. The Dons had a least half a dozen goals that started from possession chains in their D50, which is a very alarming statistic in isolation.
Still, it mostly just felt like we hit cruise control after the initial onslaught and that was pretty much that. And that feeling was only reinforced after we started the second half semi-conscious and then completely reclaimed control of the game before the last break, just to make certain that the Bombers knew there was to be absolutely no coming back on the day.
Will be interesting to see, of course, But it felt as if the defensive effort of last week was hopefully more indicative of where we are heading than the wildly fluctuating intensity that was on show today.
Time will tell.
Pure_Ownage
TheBrownDog
In the presser scott essentially guaranteed ceglar would play in the next 2 or 3 weeks (next week i assume). Also sounds like we wont see stanley til around the bye and henry after that.
He was also very bullish about clark.
He was also very bullish about clark.
We cannot forget that we had a few newbies in and around the guts today.
What that means is that firstly it is harder to get it out of the guts and secondly harder to be in position to defend when it comes back out of our F50
that is random the mention of clark?? how did that one come about in his presser
One of the reporters mentioned he had a great game in the VFL and wondered if he'd be called up soon. Scott answered diplomatically - doesn't want to put pressure on Clark by talking him up, though they're very happy with what they've seen so far.
Kobe Gryant
Professional Quidditch Player
What would Scotty know? Clark was declared a bust here after 2 games!!!
BlakeyNoFlakey
Brownlow Medallist
Gerard Healy mentioned several times how he thought it was going to be interesting how Chris Scott handles selections in the future because (to use his words) "They have quite a few good players out at the moment."
- Jun 19, 2006
- 10,050
- 18,455
- AFL Club
- Geelong
I think people understate this. Essendon have a strong midfield. Of our 6 major attendees at centre bounces 3 of them were kids just learning the role (Bruhn, Holmes and SDK).
We also had Knevitt on the wing.
On top of that we chose to manage Danger and Atkins with 64% and 69% game time compared to Holmes (82%), SDK (77%), Knevitt (77%) and Bruhn (60% in 3 quarters).
It's sort of amazing we won and won easily relying so much on these guys.
I love what SDK does in the Ruck but we arent going to get away with that strategy in the business end of the season, Sav got his arse handed to him by Weideman who is a genuine D Grader, Ceglar has to come in.
Last edited:
- Nov 30, 2000
- 10,462
- 7,100
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- LUFC/MSRLC/MVFC
Professional performance.
Disappointing to let in 100+, especially when we were in control for most of the game. But there's always something to work on, and we are still unsettled with personnel missing throughout the side, so I reckon that is playing a part in us getting exposed defensively. But so much of that can come down to luck - a poor bounce, a bad decision or execution, an unfortunate slip, etc is all it can take to get torn open the other way.
Felt we took the foot off such was our control and no doubt the six day break to Adelaide was in the back of our minds, similar to the WC game two weeks ago.
PFD and Hawk unbelievable. PFD's stat line in 65% game time was absurd. He's been the catalyst for our resurgence over the past four rounds, as we've found our contested game again. The forward line looks so powerful, with the plethora of options down there all capable of hurting you, and getting some contributions from the midfield as we did from Tanner is a nice bonus.
Five regulars missing from that side too, so that's almost a quarter of our best team out, but still had what was a soft win. We're building nicely again.
Disappointing to let in 100+, especially when we were in control for most of the game. But there's always something to work on, and we are still unsettled with personnel missing throughout the side, so I reckon that is playing a part in us getting exposed defensively. But so much of that can come down to luck - a poor bounce, a bad decision or execution, an unfortunate slip, etc is all it can take to get torn open the other way.
Felt we took the foot off such was our control and no doubt the six day break to Adelaide was in the back of our minds, similar to the WC game two weeks ago.
PFD and Hawk unbelievable. PFD's stat line in 65% game time was absurd. He's been the catalyst for our resurgence over the past four rounds, as we've found our contested game again. The forward line looks so powerful, with the plethora of options down there all capable of hurting you, and getting some contributions from the midfield as we did from Tanner is a nice bonus.
Five regulars missing from that side too, so that's almost a quarter of our best team out, but still had what was a soft win. We're building nicely again.
But that's what we did last season, after about Round 9 or so. Massive ingredient to our success. Dangerfield isn't expected to run out the entire game (and he shouldn't), the younger guys do far more grunt work, and everyone wins. I'd be curious to see what percentage Miers and Close were at as well.
Watching the replay the commentators mentioned that it looked like we were managing Dangerfield's workload. It's only taken them an entire season to figure it out.
- Jun 19, 2006
- 10,050
- 18,455
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Yes we rotated all our inside mids with low gametime last year. But it was particularly low yesterday for Danger and much higher for Holmes and Bruhn for 3 quarters. Last year it was normally around 70% game time while it was in the low 60s yesterday. There was a bit of extra management.
We were also without Guthrie, Selwood and Parfitt yesterday compared to much of last year. We could've chosen to put O'Connor or Duncan in there more. But I think we took the decision to give time to our kids once we were 5+ goals up.
- Status
