Crows visit Riverland

[WaynesWorld19]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
Spot on. Very harsh on Rhett Biglands. While he is not the sharpest tool in the shed he is much smarter than Perrie who is a liability after a marking contest (unless he grabs it inside 50)

Don't think i'm being harsh in the context that the comments were made in relation to Biglands playing FB or in a defensive KP.

 

[naughty monkey]

Originally posted by Wayne's-World
You dont agree that leopards don't change their spots?
Biglands is 27 this year, has a very poor record of ground stats, even when he has been given the workload in Clarkes occasional absence.
He has been torn to shreds by smart forwards everytime Eyres has tried this exercise.
He is just a Ruckman - a good one - but nothing else.

You advocate now in the off season giving him the time, and allowing him to make mistakes, but you would change your tune very quickly, if what your advocating lost us a game or 2.

No, not that
But i do believe you can improve, and sometimes dramatically. Just look at the player that you were comparing RB to for an example in Perrie!

My point is that Biglands has never been tried there for an extended period of time. I would like to see that before I write him off. The occasional attempt achieves nothing.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Originally posted by naughty monkey
No, not that
But i do believe you can improve, and sometimes dramatically. Just look at the player that you were comparing RB to for an example in Perrie!

My point is that Biglands has never been tried there for an extended period of time. I would like to see that before I write him off. The occasional attempt achieves nothing.

He doesn't appear to be a good reader of the game, hence why his around the ground ruck work does't greatly help the side.
This in addition to the fact he doesn't possess soft hands, means he spills more marks than he completes.

If he was to be tried anywhere I would try him more as a tall forward option.
At least incomplete marks would result in opportunities for
our crumbers.

I think by the sounds of PS training we could have other defensive options.

 

[napsyd]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
Guys what this belief that only Lynch gives us trouble?????? Do the names Tredrea, Sav Rocca, Neitz, etc... ring a bell??????

The additional names you mention just illustrate the point that the right match up combined with a tailored game plan is what is required.

All those blokes have managed to kick a few against us here or there. Similarly we have managed to more or less completely nulify them on other occasions.

They just prove that we don't need to genetically engineer a better defender to beat them.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by napsyd
The additional names you mention just illustrate the point that the right match up combined with a tailored game plan is what is required.

All those blokes have managed to kick a few against us here or there. Similarly we have managed to more or less completely nulify them on other occasions.

They just prove that we don't need to genetically engineer a better defender to beat them.

I agree with you on the game plan bit BUT we have never completely nulified Tredrea. He always plays well against us the best we always hoped for was to put someone on him that will break even. On the occasional note where his opponent broke even , he was still a match winner

Sav Rocca always kicks at least 2-3 goals against us and Neitz has been only nulified when he has played in the backline (see game against Melbourne last year).

While I agree that we need a modified plan to keep those bastards quiet we also need someone who can go one on one with them for a whole game. I don't care if they don't get a kick themeselves as long as their opponents doesn't get one either.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Good arguements going on here.

1. Biglands should become our #1 ruckman, so IMO playing him as a key defender will stiffle his development. He is no David Pitman with the defensive smarts. Also, we would be robbing Peter to play Paul. However, he should learn to drop back & help cover opposition forwards that are giving us grief.

2. Sure we struggle on the bigger forwards, but we are not alone! IMO, we should be playing Kenny on them, regardless of whether they are playing FF or CHF. Horses for courses with our matchups.

3. It's not only the bigger forwards that give us grief. Lloyd has a good record against us too (moreso than Rocca or Neitz). We just need to have different strategies in place to counter key forwards.

 

[napsyd]

It's an interesting discussion Stiffy.

What does it mean to nullify an opponent? To go into a game expecting to keep say a Lloyd or Lynch goalless is a pretty high expectation. I would say that keeping a Lynch, Lloyd, Rocca, Tredrea etc to 2 or 3 is a break even.

Also the type of player we would require to take on Lynch would be quite different from the type who would play on say Tredrea. Or at least said player would have to show a fair bit of versatility.

The point is that only a few teams have a particular player who we have trouble matching up on and only one has a bloke who we really have never been able to get a grip on.

If we did develop a player to play on the Lynch type thats great, but you'd have to question said players usefulness against teams that don't run a genuine full forward or big half forward. The days of the gorilla FF are ending, the need for gorilla FBs are finishing also.

 

[Portia]

The trait that all of these big forwards have in common is a strong, fast lead.

Basically you need a strong, fast reacting tall backman (the gorilla) or a fast leading tall backman that can time a spoil properly, with a half back ready to cut off space.

For the second, you'd want someone like Brian Harris from the Dogs.

 

[mr snip]

we forget how lucky we were with rehn as our ruckman, not to many players ever read the play as well as he did.

the question is what is rhett and clarkies role/instructions from the coach? since gary's been coach i do't think he has used a ruckman in a kick behind the play role for any extended period. preferring to have one at all stoppages.

so what are their roles, between stoppages, i cant say i've just watched the ruckman for an entire game to see where they go to, couldn't think of anything more boring.

so does their role enable them to take a more active part in field play? one would hope so.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by napsyd
It's an interesting discussion Stiffy.

What does it mean to nullify an opponent? To go into a game expecting to keep say a Lloyd or Lynch goalless is a pretty high expectation. I would say that keeping a Lynch, Lloyd, Rocca, Tredrea etc to 2 or 3 is a break even.

Also the type of player we would require to take on Lynch would be quite different from the type who would play on say Tredrea. Or at least said player would have to show a fair bit of versatility.

The point is that only a few teams have a particular player who we have trouble matching up on and only one has a bloke who we really have never been able to get a grip on.

If we did develop a player to play on the Lynch type thats great, but you'd have to question said players usefulness against teams that don't run a genuine full forward or big half forward. The days of the gorilla FF are ending, the need for gorilla FBs are finishing also.

It is a very interesting discussion

I agree with Porthos on his analysis. In answer to your question a player capable of playing on all those fellas you mentioned is Mal Michael and I would also say Matthew Scarlett can truely play on any tall forward in the comp and win his duel. Be it a Lloyd, Tredrea or Lynch those 2 blokes can do the job.

I agree if one of those gorillas kicks 2 or 3 goals it sometimes means that we broke even. For example Tredrea doesn't have to kick one single goal in the entire match and he stilll could win a game for the Power because he is so bloody good in other aspects. He gets ****loads of marks and possesions which he uses to perfection in setting up his team mates. He is the sort of bloke that doesn't need much of the footy to hurt you.

The bottom line is we need a strategy to stop those players but I also think we need a player who can negate them if the certain play breaks down. One cannot possibly go without another.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
It is a very interesting discussion

I agree with Porthos on his analysis. In answer to your question a player capable of playing on all those fellas you mentioned is Mal Michael and I would also say Matthew Scarlett can truely play on any tall forward in the comp and win his duel. Be it a Lloyd, Tredrea or Lynch those 2 blokes can do the job.

The bottom line is we need a strategy to stop those players but I also think we need a player who can negate them if the certain play breaks down. One cannot possibly go without another.

Here's one from left field - Wayne Carey.
Has played CHB for NM, has strength, footy smarts and speed for gorillas.

Longterm Bassett is not the answer, hasn't height and speed to play successfully against a wide variety of FF types, and struggles out across the hb line.
With the exception of Parker(who i have not seen play), we don't appear to have anyone on the list capable of stepping up.
Could Krueger be a longterm option? or is he more a forward?

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by Wayne's-World
Here's one from left field - Wayne Carey.
Has played CHB for NM, has strength, footy smarts and speed for gorillas.

Longterm Bassett is not the answer, hasn't height and speed to play successfully against a wide variety of FF types, and struggles out across the hb line.
With the exception of Parker(who i have not seen play), we don't appear to have anyone on the list capable of stepping up.
Could Krueger be a longterm option? or is he more a forward?

I think Parker is definetly one option in the long term. I think Bock could develop into a FB with another 10kg

Personally I prefer Krueger in attack. If we are to play him in defence I would prefer it at CHB where he can use his marking, spring and running ability to rebound out of defence and push forward.

 

[macca23]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
I think Parker is definetly one option in the long term. I think Bock could develop into a FB with another 10kg

Personally I prefer Krueger in attack. If we are to play him in defence I would prefer it at CHB where he can use his marking, spring and running ability to rebound out of defence and push forward.

Don't fix it if it's not broke. Kenny is a top CHB, and that's where he should stay.

Next to Bassett, Parker looks the most likely candidate for FB but he's not in the main squad.

Krueger strikes me as more of a forward than a backman, but I'll reserve judgement on that one.

 

[naughty monkey]

Originally posted by napsyd
The additional names you mention just illustrate the point that the right match up combined with a tailored game plan is what is required.

All those blokes have managed to kick a few against us here or there. Similarly we have managed to more or less completely nulify them on other occasions.

They just prove that we don't need to genetically engineer a better defender to beat them.

On the occasions we have nullified these types it is usually because our midfield has been on top and starved the oppositions forwards of supply, not because of a dominant defender. You don't get too many goals chasing kicks on a wing.

 

[naughty monkey]

Originally posted by Wayne's-World
Here's one from left field - Wayne Carey.
Has played CHB for NM, has strength, footy smarts and speed for gorillas.

Pretty hard to spoil when you can't get your arms above your head. Not sure he has that much pace left either.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
I think Parker is definetly one option in the long term. I think Bock could develop into a FB with another 10kg

Personally I prefer Krueger in attack. If we are to play him in defence I would prefer it at CHB where he can use his marking, spring and running ability to rebound out of defence and push forward.

Must admit the thought of Bock at FB is appealing, but as you say needs another 10kg as he is still pushed off the ball. I would like to see him improve his skills below his knees as well, but is certainly an option.

If Krueger were to take on CHB down the track, could McGregor go to FB, or is he more likely to take-on FF. I've said FF on the assumption Watts would play CHF.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by Wayne's-World
Here's one from left field - Wayne Carey.
Has played CHB for NM, has strength, footy smarts and speed for gorillas.

As naughty monkey said he can't spoil because of buggered shoulders and his pace isn't all that good.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Originally posted by naughty monkey
Pretty hard to spoil when you can't get your arms above your head. Not sure he has that much pace left either.

Think thats a myth about his shoulders now, believing he prefers to outbody players and take chest marks.
His pace was OK last year, certainly not slow, certainly no slower than when he was with NM, and quick enough for Gorillas.

Don't believe all the media hype on players - sometimes seeing is believing. Media talks players up (as in PS ), and talks them down, and we tend to take everything onboard as gospel.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by Wayne's-World
Must admit the thought of Bock at FB is appealing, but as you say needs another 10kg as he is still pushed off the ball. I would like to see him improve his skills below his knees as well, but is certainly an option.

If Krueger were to take on CHB down the track, could McGregor go to FB, or is he more likely to take-on FF. I've said FF on the assumption Watts would play CHF.

I honestly thing that Krueger will be developed as a tall forward who can be a back up ruckman. I would definet;ly play him there.

IMHO Parker is our best bet at FB and he should have been promoted. Another 2 options are Bock and Hentschel once they beef up but playing Hentschel at FB would be a bit of a waste as he has skills that should be utilised further up the ground.

I like McGregor at CHB and he is not half the player at FB or FF. A defence consisting of McGregor, Parker and Bock should complement a forward line of Watts, Krueger and Hentschel nicely. Now we only need to get some quaility midfielders and a quality young ruckman.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by Wayne's-World
Think thats a myth about his shoulders now, believing he prefers to outbody players and take chest marks.
His pace was OK last year, certainly not slow, certainly no slower than when he was with NM, and quick enough for Gorillas.

Don't believe all the media hype on players - sometimes seeing is believing. Media talks players up (as in PS ), and talks them down, and we tend to take everything onboard as gospel.

It is not a myth. For his year and a bit in Adelaide I have never seen him take an overhead mark at full strech even in practice. He has't got the "flexibility" in his shoulders as he used to because when he reconstructed them they restricted his movement so they don't pop out again.

He was slow physically but not mentally. Lynch and Tredrea are quicker off the mark than Carey.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18

I like McGregor at CHB and he is not half the player at FB or FF. A defence consisting of McGregor, Parker and Bock should complement a forward line of Watts, Krueger and Hentschel nicely. Now we only need to get some quaility midfielders and a quality young ruckman.

All hypothetical, but I would like to see a more attacking CHB.
THink Mcgregor at FF could do a really good job, Krueger hopefully athletic and attacking CHB, and I think S.Stevens has a huge upside (query on his pace, but like his footy brain). Bock gives us a tall dasher, better suited running in a straight line out of defence - but with ball handling definciencies (admittedly based on 2003).

Hentschell as a forward (if he makes it) is better suited as a 3rd tall defender or forward but only as a flanker. Watts well, if anyone was made for CHF its him.

If Hudson progress's, it could give us some breathing space, in our search for a champion ruckman in the mould of Rehn.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
It is not a myth. For his year and a bit in Adelaide I have never seen him take an overhead mark at full strech even in practice. He has't got the "flexibility" in his shoulders as he used to because when he reconstructed them they restricted his movement so they don't pop out again.

He was slow physically but not mentally. Lynch and Tredrea are quicker off the mark than Carey.

Sorry, I've watched him too closely to subsribe to this.
You must have missed a few games last year, because he certainly took the odd overhead mark (at full stretch).

As I said, don't believe all the media hype - no evidence whatsover that his pace was an issue or will be an issue in 2004. If you can supply any evidence to support this I would be interested.

If he was as bad ( stuffed shoulders, slow, has been) as suggested, why did he spend so much time at CHF during last year, when the club openly stated at the beginning of 2003, they were looking at him closer to goal, as a FF.

Surely, with all his supposed deficiencies, at CHF he would have been exploited by a quick CHB running off him - sorry didn't see that happen at all.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by Wayne's-World
All hypothetical, but I would like to see a more attacking CHB.
THink Mcgregor at FF could do a really good job, Krueger hopefully athletic and attacking CHB, and I think S.Stevens has a huge upside (query on his pace, but like his footy brain). Bock gives us a tall dasher, better suited running in a straight line out of defence - but with ball handling definciencies (admittedly based on 2003).

Hentschell as a forward (if he makes it) is better suited as a 3rd tall defender or forward but only as a flanker. Watts well, if anyone was made for CHF its him.

If Hudson progress's, it could give us some breathing space, in our search for a champion ruckman in the mould of Rehn.

McGregor would struggle up forward. He can pinch hit there but he has ALWAYS struggled when he was started up forward even in 2003. He is a bit like Bassett, when he goes forward as a pinch hitter he might sneak a couple of goals but if he plays a whole game there he puts in a stinker.

McGregor is still developing and AFC want him to be a bit more attacking. I think he is improving in that aspect but if you have a 3rd tall defender that is rebounding out of defence then that is probably enough and Hentschel and Bock would give us that option as would Jericho.

 

[macca23]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
McGregor would struggle up forward. He can pinch hit there but he has ALWAYS struggled when he was started up forward even in 2003. He is a bit like Bassett, when he goes forward as a pinch hitter he might sneak a couple of goals but if he plays a whole game there he puts in a stinker.

McGregor is still developing and AFC want him to be a bit more attacking. I think he is improving in that aspect but if you have a 3rd tall defender that is rebounding out of defence then that is probably enough and Hentschel and Bock would give us that option as would Jericho.

I'm with you on this one Stiffy. After having finally found McGregor's correct spot and turned him into one of the very best CHB's in the league, why the hell would we put him back in a spot he failed in.

As for Carey, simply this - we did not recruit the greatest player and forward in the last 15 years for him to be a backman - good or bad shoulders.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by Wayne's-World
Sorry, I've watched him too closely to subsribe to this.
You must have missed a few games last year, because he certainly took the odd overhead mark (at full stretch).

As I said, don't believe all the media hype - no evidence whatsover that his pace was an issue or will be an issue in 2004. If you can supply any evidence to support this I would be interested.

If he was as bad ( stuffed shoulders, slow, has been) as suggested, why did he spend so much time at CHF during last year, when the club openly stated at the beginning of 2003, they were looking at him closer to goal, as a FF.

Surely, with all his supposed deficiencies, at CHF he would have been exploited by a quick CHB running off him - sorry didn't see that happen at all.

Can you provide any evidence to support your belief??????

The reason he played as a CHF was because he has a fantastic footy brain and can out-smart his opponets. He would have stayed at FF if Stevo was fit and he is much more reliable option than Perrie at CHF because he would know what to do with the thing once he got it.

Have you watched Rd 20 match against Collingwood. Jason Cloke of all people was rebounding off him as was Leppitsch in the final so was Wakelin to ssome extent in the 1st showdown of the 2003 season.

The only reason he could make for those defencies was because he is a b;loody smart footballer.

If you say he was not slow why then have the coaching staff and fitness staff designed a pre-season program that has focused on him getting pore agile, quicker off the mark and getting back some of his pace that he had in previous years??????

Stephen Schwertd was quite blunt in stating this on 5AA in a first couple of weeks of the pre-season.