Centre Half Forward 2008

[OldStyle2007]

Not just a NAblett thread

Scott Gullan makes a good point that NAblett was the perfect foil for Mooney and that Hawkins is not a dovetailed replacement in that position

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/1,9191,23020436-11088,00.html

Should we have kept Playfair or Charlie as insurance for the mobile CHF position?

Who will now play in the mobile CHF position? I don't think Hawkins will be up to it as he is more suited to staying within the 50m zone

Do we even need a mobile CHF? In my opinion we do because the best thing Nathan did was continually present for contests and create a mark / an option / at least a spilt ball

 

[cancat]

Not just a NAblett thread

Scott Gullan makes a good point that NAblett was the perfect foil for Mooney and that Hawkins is not a dovetailed replacement in that position

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/1,9191,23020436-11088,00.html

Should we have kept Playfair or Charlie as insurance for the mobile CHF position?

Who will now play in the mobile CHF position? I don't think Hawkins will be up to it as he is more suited to staying within the 50m zone

Do we even need a mobile CHF? In my opinion we do because the best thing Nathan did was continually present for contests and create a mark / an option / at least a spilt ball

Playfair and Gardner, you're having a laugh aren't you?

Mooney can play in the square or CHF. Hawkins will demand a good defender like Nablett did.

Forward line of Mooney, Hawkins, Steve Johnson, Chapman, Stokes, Rooke/Varcoe with Otto having a spell should be good enough.

 

[OldStyle2007]

Playfair and Gardner, you're having a laugh aren't you?

Mooney can play in the square or CHF. Hawkins will demand a good defender like Nablett did.

Forward line of Mooney, Hawkins, Steve Johnson, Chapman, Stokes, Rooke/Varcoe with Otto having a spell should be good enough.

Not really. The 2007 Cats team had synergy. Meaning that all required roles were filled, even if on a player-by-player comparison certain players weren't better than others they still played because the filled the role . (Ie. Byrnes, Varcoe, Hunt and NAblett)

Point is that we don't have a single mobile CHF in the team - not even to Pinch Hit. Like Gullan says, most of us think we'll be right with the guys you mention but that is ignoring structure and tactics

So, no I ain't joking homeboy

 

[The rabbi]

Playfair and Gardiner would be handy players in the VFL side. They would continue to struggle to get a kick at AFL level. They just cannot cut the mustard in the big league. Both players as forwards could only manage 1/2 a goal per game. They never were big contributers to the team and we would only see more of the same had they remained at K-Park.

Time to develop our young talent.

 

[OldStyle2007]

let me clarify that I have been one of Charlie's harshest critics and was horrified at Playfair v Port Adelaide 2007

but my point is that champion cricket teams need a dedicated wicketkeeper and premiership footy teams need a dedicated CHF!

 

[JUBJUB]

Should we have kept Playfair or Charlie as insurance for the mobile CHF position?

Nope and nope

Who will now play in the mobile CHF position? I don't think Hawkins will be up to it as he is more suited to staying within the 50m zone

Do we even need a mobile CHF? In my opinion we do because the best thing Nathan did was continually present for contests and create a mark / an option / at least a spilt ball

Isn't Harry Taylor a mobile CHF ?
Chappy and Dog are more than capable of having a run at CHF for parts of the game and then there's Lonergan if you want some height.

 

[Ling Sting]

OS2007 you've got some weird logic happening there!!

Fact, Hank has never played well enough to deserve a senior game since breaking his jaw. His attack on the ball was never the same and unlike Nath he just didn't have a natural footy brain that would allow him to setup goals and snag a few bags himself like Nath did.

Fact 2, Charlie was and is a hack. How often did we see Nath run full tilt and pick up a semi-volley off the deck then deliver a tidy handpass to advantage? How often have you seen Charlie fall over under little to no pressure and choke when he disposed of the ball? The point I made about Hanks footy brain (or lack there of) applies to Charlie as well.

These two were never viable replacements for Nath. How many chances have both of them had to prove they could play the second HF role......many.......why were they cut from the list......because they weren't good enough.

To those that keep mentioning Hank and Charlie, stop living in the past!!!

 

[The rabbi]

let me clarify that I have been one of Charlie's harshest critics and was horrified at Playfair v Port Adelaide 2007

but my point is that champion cricket teams need a dedicated wicketkeeper and premiership footy teams need a dedicated CHF!

I have no problem with the idea of the need for a dedicated CHF. My problem is that you mentioned Charlie and H as players for that role. They had a history of failure. Time to move on and look to developing young recruits.

Mooney to CHF and Hawkins to FF.

 

[OldStyle2007]

I'm loving the suggestion of Lonners at CHF

SJ was the story of 2007

Lonners Norm Smith 2008?? You couldn't write a better sporting fairytale

 

[cancat]

I'm loving the suggestion of Lonners at CHF

SJ was the story of 2007

Lonners Norm Smith 2008?? You couldn't write a better sporting fairytale

I don't think it's getting any better...

I'm with you that it would be a great story but Lonners wasn't any better than Henry up forward. I think he's been kept on as a back up tall in the back line.

 

[winty]

We have plenty of options for CHF in 2008 IMO.

1. Lonergan
2. One of the draftees (Taylor or Scott Simpson)
3. Mooney CHF, Hawkins FF
4. One out of left field, but depending on Egan's fitness. Milburn. Has pinch hit in the role before, and with Harley able to play on both tall and small forwards now, would not be as missed in the back line as he otherwise would be.
5. We could also have SJ or Rooke pinch-hitting there.

At the moment, I can see option 3 being the one we go with initially, but then again, with the way we brought the ball forward last year, is a dominant CHF really necessary?

 

[year of the cat]

I would be playing both Mooney and Hawkins deep and use SJ and Chapman as the lead up players. Both are good overhead for their size, have great disposal, are quickish and are as hard as nails.

 

[bomberz08]

make otto a more permanent forward????

just a weird sugestion

 

[sammy the cat]

with nablett quiting. otto cant play that role he is not mobile enough, all i can think of is play tomcat deep depending on his fitness as for mooney he was our real CHF last year so i think not to much will change. as for playfair and gardiner thank god we pissed them off

 

[Sttew]

Playfair and Gardner, you're having a laugh aren't you?

Mooney can play in the square or CHF. Hawkins will demand a good defender like Nablett did.

Forward line of Mooney, Hawkins, Steve Johnson, Chapman, Stokes, Rooke/Varcoe with Otto having a spell should be good enough.

Throw in Tom Lonergan - he played a blinder in the VFL grand final, has the height, and agility to be a good back-up.

 

[Duskfire]

Mooney CHF, Hawkins FF. I am not sure that it matters all that much however with the talent in the forward line and the amount of goals the midfield kicks. Alot of teams dont have that standard CHF anymore, or at least not a permanent one.

 

[ryderman]

Nathan is a small loss only. How many times have we said in the crowd- he should have marked that, and only let him off the hook because he is an ablett.

I think the Cats should delist him at the end of year- irrespective of his future decision. We don't need half hearted people whom bring down others as well.

I would like to see Tom Lonergan given the same opportunity as Nathan in 2008. He has the balls and guts to put his body, and now his life on the line. He is as mobile as Nathan, and probably would provide 2-3 goals a game.

Not to mention the big Tomahawk- who will be ready now to make a massive impression in 2008.

 

[forrrestGump]

OS2007 you've got some weird logic happening there!!

Fact, Hank has never played well enough to deserve a senior game since breaking his jaw. His attack on the ball was never the same and unlike Nath he just didn't have a natural footy brain that would allow him to setup goals and snag a few bags himself like Nath did.

Fact 2, Charlie was and is a hack. How often did we see Nath run full tilt and pick up a semi-volley off the deck then deliver a tidy handpass to advantage? How often have you seen Charlie fall over under little to no pressure and choke when he disposed of the ball? The point I made about Hanks footy brain (or lack there of) applies to Charlie as well.

These two were never viable replacements for Nath. How many chances have both of them had to prove they could play the second HF role......many.......why were they cut from the list......because they weren't good enough.

To those that keep mentioning Hank and Charlie, stop living in the past!!!

why not bring back g.ablett
he would be ok

 

[Rosso]

why not bring back g.ablett
he would be ok

Curse you to hell Gary Ayres. Would Gary Snr still qualify under the veterans list or would we need to use a son/father pick in the draft??

In all seriousness, Geelong had three rotating marking targets in Mooney, Johnno and Nath with Otto playing a brief cameo here and there. If Hawkins can come in and kick a goal or two and set some up then it's all good. Don't forget that we drafted three KPP in the draft so I'm backing the club probably saw it comming.

 

[lexn]

Another fom left field, with further improvement and his ability to learn quickly what about a certain all Australian CHB being moulded as a CHF?

 

[LifeSpan-Void]

I don't think it's getting any better...

I'm with you that it would be a great story but Lonners wasn't any better than Henry up forward. I think he's been kept on as a back up tall in the back line.

there was about 43-odd difference in games experience between the two. Lonergan was shuffled in and out of the side for his 7 games without getting any real chance to find his feet. Playfair was at least granted the opportunity to play 50 senior games, same with Gardiner.

 

[SWISH15]

Here's one no one has thought of Ryan Gamble
Similar size to Charlie he has a great leap, good skills and has played midfield/wing so he must have a fair endurance tank.

 

[cs61]

Mooney CHF, Hawkins/Ottens deep forwards, S. J the creative type, and Ablett, Chapman, etc rotating through half forward.

Its a good set up, and I wouldn't be too worried about mobile CHF's when you have the midfield depth that you guys have cause you'll have no problem moving the ball through the corridor to go long for you targets. Not to say Ablett wont be missed or wouldn't have being a good option, just you can get around given you have solid targets to aim for.

Where you guys surprised you delisted T. Grima, or didn't promote him? Or even more surprised that no one picked him (Bulldogs!?).

 

[re cat]

Mooney CHF, Hawkins/Ottens deep forwards, S. J the creative type, and Ablett, Chapman, etc rotating through half forward.

Its a good set up, and I wouldn't be too worried about mobile CHF's when you have the midfield depth that you guys have cause you'll have no problem moving the ball through the corridor to go long for you targets. Not to say Ablett wont be missed or wouldn't have being a good option, just you can get around given you have solid targets to aim for.

Where you guys surprised you delisted T. Grima, or didn't promote him? Or even more surprised that no one picked him (Bulldogs!?).

Please don't mention Grima again some in here are still getting "help" after his departure.

 

[LifeSpan-Void]

Here's one no one has thought of Ryan Gamble
Similar size to Charlie he has a great leap, good skills and has played midfield/wing so he must have a fair endurance tank.

Gamble is 184cm, way too short to be a CHF. Gardiner at 190cm was never a successful CHF. The whole "link man" bullshit theory was put to bed when Geelong traded him for zip.