Toast Darcy Fort

[ChookNorris]

Nothing he did filled me with a lot of confidence. Lucky juggled Marks not under a heap of pressure... was better than Abbott in the ruck though. Gone very early on the Toast thread here, congrats on the debut though.

 

[Farmer2Goggin]

I thought he looked better in the ruck than Abbott but he really struggled at CHF ( slow , cumbersome and offered zero pressure )
Moving him to FF was a much better option as his height was a real concern for the Dogs - 3 snags was a nice reward.
We're going OK if our stopgap can do that

 

[Vdubs]

How they play CHF is what really counts and so far Fort has shown he can.
Second ruck importance pails by comparison if Fort kicks 3 and causes another 3.
Stanley’s the ruck 90% of the time.

You call it CHF. But really, he's playing like a tall FP. We do not have a true CHF, but Sav's attributes are more suited to that traditional CHF role.
Yes, Fort kicked 3 goals and did well against the Dogs defence.
Can he do this again? We hope so, but he is not going to play a true CHF role.

 

[Drunkcat]

Who knows Sav could be just a flash in the pain and never really improve he runs under the ball so much...so maybe it's Buzza who we need I am not sold on Buzza I just want him to do well because of his name lol

 

[The Final Word]

Who knows Sav could be just a flash in the pain and never really improve he runs under the ball so much...so maybe it's Buzza who we need I am not sold on Buzza I just want him to do well because of his name lol

He's definitely been something of a pain IMO. Just don't think he's there at the moment. Need a better look at Fort than a single game at home against a team lacking decent talls but wouldn't hesitate to play a fit Fort over a fit Ratagolea in a critical match.

 

[ChookNorris]

He's definitely been something of a pain IMO. Just don't think he's there at the moment. Need a better look at Fort than a single game at home against a team lacking decent talls but wouldn't hesitate to play a fit Fort over a fit Ratagolea in a critical match.

So you admit one game isn’t enough form? But also say you wouldn’t hesitate to pick him over Sav? This is a genuinely terrible take.

 

[Ratcat]

You call it CHF. But really, he's playing like a tall FP. We do not have a true CHF, but Sav's attributes are more suited to that traditional CHF role.
Yes, Fort kicked 3 goals and did well against the Dogs defence.
Can he do this again? We hope so, but he is not going to play a true CHF role.

Whatever but Hawkins definately plays better in space so if Fort is more like a FF then that's fine too.
Just reckon this guy has the forward craft worked out better than any other option atm especially Sav. He looks way more dangerous and likely to snag a goal than Sav.
His kicking was a treat to watch and he easily halved any aerial contest giving ground players more opportunities.
At 6' 81/2" he's a huge potential weapon, l wouldn't be so fast discounting his value to the forwards last weekend.
I've been backing him for a few weeks now and I'm very impressed with his significant
contributions fwd and ruck, albeit game 1.

 

[Pollywaffle]

Won't get too carried away. Maybe a toast with a cask red at this stage.
Looks to be a Mason Cox type. Not sure whether he is the answer at CHF/FF (whatever we are calling that position now)
Deserves a few more games to get an early read before the pointy end of the season. Good performing finals teams go in with settled lineups.
Won't hurt Sav ATM to keep working on stuff in the twos. He would be my pick at his best, but really needs to regain some touch and form.

 

[TheWoodenSlug]

So you admit one game isn’t enough form? But also say you wouldn’t hesitate to pick him over Sav? This is a genuinely terrible take.

Considering that one game was better than any of the eight Sav has played this year, I'm not sure why it would be so outlandish to pick Fort ahead of him? Strange post.

 

[The Final Word]

So you admit one game isn’t enough form? But also say you wouldn’t hesitate to pick him over Sav? This is a genuinely terrible take.

I'm completely underwhelmed by Esava at the moment. I'm a bit baffled why commentators talk about him in such positive regards.

Beyond creating a contest, to my eye he hasn't done terribly much of note.

On the "one game isn't enough form", of course it isn't. Once upon a time Matthew McCarthy kicked 5 goals one week. His career lasted 3 more senior games, aged 24. But when you're a forward and you've kicked 3 in your debut and the guy you've replaced has kicked 2 in 8 games, it's your spot to lose.

 

[ChookNorris]

Considering that one game was better than any of the eight Sav has played this year, I'm not sure why it would be so outlandish to pick Fort ahead of him? Strange post.

Sav looks infinitely better. 3 goals is not a bad result, but the way he kicked them, I could have been out there and one grabbed them. Fort is the back up to Stanley for me, not Sav. Although he hasn’t ripped a game to pieces Sav has shown more in glimpses than most key forwards his age, has the potential to be something special and developed. Fort is just a reserve player.

 

[Ratcat]

I'm completely underwhelmed by Esava at the moment. I'm a bit baffled why commentators talk about him in such positive regards.

Beyond creating a contest, to my eye he hasn't done terribly much of note.

On the "one game isn't enough form", of course it isn't. Once upon a time Matthew McCarthy kicked 5 goals one week. His career lasted 3 more senior games, aged 24. But when you're a forward and you've kicked 3 in your debut and the guy you've replaced has kicked 2 in 8 games, it's your spot to lose.

Totally agree about Sav, we gave him 8 straight and being a Stanley understudy only isn't enough.
If Fort can build confidence with a couple more goals next week taking pressure off TH at the same time, we've found a pearl.
The added dynamic of someone as tall with goal nouse and kicking ability is a great addition to our forwardline.
Until proven otherwise l think he has to be a starter.

 

[Farmer2Goggin]

You call it CHF. But really, he's playing like a tall FP. We do not have a true CHF, but Sav's attributes are more suited to that traditional CHF role.
Yes, Fort kicked 3 goals and did well against the Dogs defence.
Can he do this again? We hope so, but he is not going to play a true CHF role.

I saw it that way as well , Fort seemed to play close to goal for most of the game with Tommy further up the ground.
I think Fort would be a liability at CHF and even as a FP on the MCG - our home deck with the shallow pockets can make it easier to defend as opposed to the MCG.
We can argue Sav's value but what isn't in dispute is our forward pressure and ability to win the groundball - Sav does that quite well - I'd even like to see what Buzza can do should Sav miss again at some stage as he's more of a like for like. We need to preserve that pressure IMO and not create another "Menzel"
Fort showed enough to be a Stanley backup and would be better suited to that role , certainly better than Abbott on Saturdays display

 

[TheWoodenSlug]

Sav looks infinitely better. 3 goals is not a bad result, but the way he kicked them, I could have been out there and one grabbed them. Fort is the back up to Stanley for me, not Sav. Although he hasn’t ripped a game to pieces Sav has shown more in glimpses than most key forwards his age, has the potential to be something special and developed. Fort is just a reserve player.

I agree Sav 'looks' better than Fort, but that doesn't mean much when you're not actually producing anything worthwhile. Anyone could have kicked the goals Fort did on the weekend, except Sav it seems.

I don't mean to rag on Sav here by the way - I like the bloke and hope he makes it. He's only 20 and playing one of the most difficult positions on the ground, so overall he is tracking nicely. I just don't think he is anywhere near the sure thing he is treated as on this board, and I don't think he should be above playing VFL when other options are providing more.

 

[Vdubs]

I'm completely underwhelmed by Esava at the moment. I'm a bit baffled why commentators talk about him in such positive regards.

Beyond creating a contest, to my eye he hasn't done terribly much of note.

On the "one game isn't enough form", of course it isn't. Once upon a time Matthew McCarthy kicked 5 goals one week. His career lasted 3 more senior games, aged 24. But when you're a forward and you've kicked 3 in your debut and the guy you've replaced has kicked 2 in 8 games, it's your spot to lose.

I think a similar thing happened to Marcus Baldwin, a tall KF. Came on v Demons in last Q, kicked 3, looked ver promising, but only a handful of games after that.
What we will have to accept is that CS and the MC have a lot of faith in and time for Sav, so no doubt, he will be persevered with as much as possible for the long term future. We can read into that that Fort is a very good back up, but not necessarily the future. On the other hand, when we got Pods into the team, that was meant to be a bit of a wait and see- but he became a premiership player. (pity that was his worst of all the games he played...)

 

[Vdubs]

Totally agree about Sav, we gave him 8 straight and being a Stanley understudy only isn't enough.
If Fort can build confidence with a couple more goals next week taking pressure off TH at the same time, we've found a pearl.
The added dynamic of someone as tall with goal nouse and kicking ability is a great addition to our forwardline.
Until proven otherwise l think he has to be a starter.

Sav is not a Stanley understudy- he's being groomed/developed into a key forward that can help in the ruck, not a ruck who rests forward and can help out with a goal.
Fort could well be very handy and a weapon, but what Sav might evolve into is unique.

 

[ChookNorris]

I agree Sav 'looks' better than Fort, but that doesn't mean much when you're not actually producing anything worthwhile. Anyone could have kicked the goals Fort did on the weekend, except Sav it seems.

I don't mean to rag on Sav here by the way - I like the bloke and hope he makes it. He's only 20 and playing one of the most difficult positions on the ground, so overall he is tracking nicely. I just don't think he is anywhere near the sure thing he is treated as on this board, and I don't think he should be above playing VFL when other options are providing more.

I don’t think he’s a sure thing yet either, but I’ve seen so much more from him other than 3 lucky juggling marks and a few dropped sodas against an underside backline in a 40 point win.

 

[TheWoodenSlug]

I don’t think he’s a sure thing yet either, but I’ve seen so much more from him other than 3 lucky juggling marks and a few dropped sodas against an underside backline in a 40 point win.

1st mark - juggled, possibly lucky
2nd mark - one grab after rag-dolling opponent, not lucky
3rd mark - juggled (arm chopped), would have been a free kick if he didn't mark it anyway, don't see why it would be considered lucky.

I think you're judging him quite harshly, particularly since it was his debut and all.

Sav has only managed 3 or more marks in 2 out of his 8 games this year - I'm sure he'd love a few lucky juggling marks!

 

[iameviljez]

So you admit one game isn’t enough form? But also say you wouldn’t hesitate to pick him over Sav? This is a genuinely terrible take.

No, it's not - not given SavRat's exposed form thus far this year. Saying you'd rather try an unproven quantity than someone who's struggling to have an impact at AFL level if the GF were played tomorrow isn't genuinely terrible.

I don't agree with the poster, btw, but I get the reasoning.

 

[ChookNorris]

1st mark - juggled, possibly lucky
2nd mark - one grab after rag-dolling opponent, not lucky
3rd mark - juggled (arm chopped), would have been a free kick if he didn't mark it anyway, don't see why it would be considered lucky.

I think you're judging him quite harshly, particularly since it was his debut and all.

Sav has only managed 3 or more marks in 2 out of his 8 games this year - I'm sure he'd love a few lucky juggling marks!

I'm definitely being too harsh, but it was only brough out of me by the overexitement of some for Fort.

 

[Wojcinski]

Fort and Abbott were both OK against the Dogs but we can't play them both again. They both have the agility of a dead sloth, need either Sav or Stanley in as we can't carry two blokes who can't run, chase, tackle or apply pressure what-so-ever

 

[TheWoodenSlug]

I'm definitely being too harsh, but it was only brough out of me by the overexitement of some for Fort.

Seriously though, it was a decent first game from Fort - nothing more, nothing less.

Long term I hope Sav makes the position his own because with his attributes he has the potential to offer far more than Fort, from what I've seen at least. My view is simply that right now Fort deserves to play ahead of Sav based on form.

 

[Max Milburn]

Jimmy says Fort should be our second ruck.
Jimmy is a tactical genius, so he must be right.
Right?

 

[Frappe]

Jimmy says Fort should be our second ruck.
Jimmy is a tactical genius, so he must be right.
Right?

Are you Jimmy from Seinfeld?

 

[Vdubs]

Jimmy says Fort should be our second ruck.
Jimmy is a tactical genius, so he must be right.
Right?

Jimmy was a very good premiership utility player.
I'd rather hear the opinion of Brad Ottens on this matter.