Analysis Do you have Wood going forward, or is it a massive flop?

[Mofra]

Now some people seem to think Bev is all about versatility for the sake of versatility. What a load of crap. He has a list of players which he only had a small part in assembling and he has to make the best of what he has. Why did we play Cordy at CHF? Was it Bev trying to be cute? No. It was because WE DIDN'T HAVE A DOMINANT TALL FORWARD TO COMPETE IN THE AIR. Guess what. We still don't. So whether it's Cordy, Wood or Adams, take your pick. If we don't get some marking power inside forward 50 we will be as impotent as we were last year. It's not the coaches fault that he has a list in which all the best marking players are backmen. Last year we tried Cloke. That didn't work out but it was worth the gamble. But at least he is trying to make it work. If we had a Ben Brown or a Joe Daniher on our list you could safely assume Wood would be playing in defence. But quality key forwards are bloody rare and not many teams will do well without one. Somehow we did and maybe this year we will again.

Excellent post, although I have to disagree with the reason Wood seems to be playing forward.
Defensive pressure in the F50 is a big issue in football right now, and Wood obviously provides it in spades.

Cordy played forward against WCE in the elimination final as West Coast's intercept marking was off the charts. Having a defensive tall who could counter that with natural aggression went a fair way towards countering West Coast's forte that night and was one major reason why we won.
This is the same Cordy who nailed a difficult set shot to kick our first goal in the granny, who knocked out ward in the prelim due to his attack on the ball, who never shirks a contest.

We need aggression and defensive pressure in the F50 which to me seems the rationale behind sending Wood forward (not that I entirely agree with Wood as that selection), noting we can always switch him back if need be. I assume it's the rationale behind Clay Smith playing forward, Honeychurch getting games, Dunkley playing forward, etc. I wouldn't be surprised to see one of Adams, Wood or Cordy playing forward at almost all stages this year.

 

[BRWB]

Excellent post, although I have to disagree with the reason Wood seems to be playing forward.
Defensive pressure in the F50 is a big issue in football right now, and Wood obviously provides it in spades.

Cordy played forward against WCE in the elimination final as West Coast's intercept marking was off the charts. Having a defensive tall who could counter that with natural aggression went a fair way towards countering West Coast's forte that night and was one major reason why we won.
This is the same Cordy who nailed a difficult set shot to kick our first goal in the granny, who knocked out ward in the prelim due to his attack on the ball, who never shirks a contest.

We need aggression and defensive pressure in the F50 which to me seems the rationale behind sending Wood forward (not that I entirely agree with Wood as that selection), noting we can always switch him back if need be. I assume it's the rationale behind Clay Smith playing forward, Honeychurch getting games, Dunkley playing forward, etc. I wouldn't be surprised to see one of Adams, Wood or Cordy playing forward at almost all stages this year.

Agree - our lack of marking power fwd is a big problem. Its why i thought Adams would play fwd. Wood is similar I guess.

The defensive pressure is key as you say. Its why I like Smith fwd and would like Dahl fwd more (better options than Honey who just cant finish.)

 

[dogwatch]

The problem is there's a big difference between taking intercept marks in the back half and being a marking target up forward. If the opposition knows Wood is the main aerial target they will block or double-team him and he will be largely ineffective.

For him to work as a forward he needs to bring other attributes (ground play, link-ups, defensive pressure, etc) and we will need several other viable CMers.

 

[ScragCity]

The problem is there's a big difference between taking intercept marks in the back half and being a marking target up forward. If the opposition knows Wood is the main aerial target they will block or double-team him and he will be largely ineffective.

For him to work as a forward he needs to bring other attributes (ground play, link-ups, defensive pressure, etc) and we will need several other viable CMers.

Wood definitely won't be the main aerial threat up forward, that would be pretty bad for the reasons you expressed. We will likely be playing 3 ruck/fwds who are 197cm+ and there will always be one resting forward at any given time.

 

[dogwatch]

Wood definitely won't be the main aerial threat up forward, that would be pretty bad for the reasons you expressed. We will likely be playing 3 ruck/fwds who are 197cm+ and there will always be one resting forward at any given time.

True, but on past performances there, Boyd could hardly be described as an aerial threat inside 50. Nor could Redpath who seldom takes overhead CMs. Schache and Trengove may change the mix (we're yet to find out) and so could Adams of course but he seems destined for the back half.

Who would you say (in order) are our best marking options up forward, either lead-out or contested?

I'd have Bont at the top of the list but not sure who after that. And anyway I see Bont's best role as being at least 70% midfield. Maybe it's Wood? I haven't yet got confidence in any of the genuine talls. I'll admit Redpath is good for lead out marks but only in a straight line. Not sure he's good for multiple leads for the one i50.

 

[TempletonTheRat]

Wood definitely won't be the main aerial threat up forward, that would be pretty bad for the reasons you expressed. We will likely be playing 3 ruck/fwds who are 197cm+ and there will always be one resting forward at any given time.

While I agree with this - it only works when you have 3 fwd/rucks who are in form - At this stage I am only happy going in with Roughy and Trengove - we therefore need another marking target. This will be one of the defenders (Wood, Adams, Cordy, Young, Naughton) - would have been easier to implement if Moz hadn't done his knee.

Edit: and this doesn't include The Bont who will also be a marking target from time to time

 

[BRWB]

Bont improved overhead last yr bit stil not an overhead beasr like he is with most things. If he can improve further could see him playing a Pav or Hird path.

Its a shame Boyd isnt the answer fwd ...yet.

 

[ScragCity]

True, but on past performances there, Boyd could hardly be described as an aerial threat inside 50. Nor could Redpath who seldom takes overhead CMs. Schache and Trengove may change the mix (we're yet to find out) and so could Adams of course but he seems destined for the back half.

Who would you say (in order) are our best marking options up forward, either lead-out or contested?

I'd have Bont at the top of the list but not sure who after that. And anyway I see Bont's best role as being at least 70% midfield. Maybe it's Wood? I haven't yet got confidence in any of the genuine talls. I'll admit Redpath is good for lead out marks but only in a straight line. Not sure he's good for multiple leads for the one i50.

Roughead is our best contested mark and there's a big gap between him and our second best, whoever that is. He doesn't seem to spend much time as a target inside F50 though. Boyd isn't a great mark but his size alone makes him dangerous. He always gets the biggest defender which should leave Wood with a decent match up.

 

[Johnny_Dogg4]

wood named in DEF on team line up

 

[Next Waiting]

Agree - our lack of marking power fwd is a big problem. Its why i thought Adams would play fwd. Wood is similar I guess.

The defensive pressure is key as you say. Its why I like Smith fwd and would like Dahl fwd more (better options than Honey who just cant finish.)

I'm quite keen on the idea of Cordy going back to CHF. The aggression he brought to that area of the ground was very important to our (successful) finals campaign. He is also quite adept aerially even though he probably halves more than he wins - but a contest and ball in dispute at least.

I have Cordy, Adams, Trengrove and Bont all in the mix for the KPF roles at this stage of the season (plus roughie resting forward sometimes). Maybe they all end up being part-timers and share the load to varying degrees over the course of the game.

To this end, I wonder how Fletch is travelling. I like Young but perhaps not quite physically there yet. Fletch much more seasoned and a successful finals campaign on his resume. Wood and Naughton, as intercept markers in the back half help the case for Fletch IMO, with predominately Adams, but also Cordy back there if and when required. I could see Fletch being an anchor back there, with support, allowing Cordy and Adams more flexibility to go or remain forward.

Any insight into how Fletch has trained and is travelling this preseason?

 

[TempleKelvington]

wood named in DEF on team line up

The line ups mean nothing these days, the players are swung about all game. We seem to be taking it to another level this season, what we do Saturday who knows, but it will be intersting.

 

[stefoid]

the other thing is we need players with physical presence in the forward line. I always liked the way crameri handled himself within 5m of the ball. He was rarely the guy getting hands on it and snapping the goal, but in the score replays you will see him banging into opposition players or pushing them over and generally making life easier for his team mates - kind of stuff he got no stats for.

 

[Tommycash]

I'm quite keen on the idea of Cordy going back to CHF. The aggression he brought to that area of the ground was very important to our (successful) finals campaign. He is also quite adept aerially even though he probably halves more than he wins - but a contest and ball in dispute at least.

I have Cordy, Adams, Trengrove and Bont all in the mix for the KPF roles at this stage of the season (plus roughie resting forward sometimes). Maybe they all end up being part-timers and share the load to varying degrees over the course of the game.

To this end, I wonder how Fletch is travelling. I like Young but perhaps not quite physically there yet. Fletch much more seasoned and a successful finals campaign on his resume. Wood and Naughton, as intercept markers in the back half help the case for Fletch IMO, with predominately Adams, but also Cordy back there if and when required. I could see Fletch being an anchor back there, with support, allowing Cordy and Adams more flexibility to go or remain forward.

Any insight into how Fletch has trained and is travelling this preseason?

I would prefer to have Cordy down back then Fletch personally. I thought Cordy's defensive work was very impressive last year. Plays above his size.

 

[Next Waiting]

I would prefer to have Cordy down back then Fletch personally. I thought Cordy's defensive work was very impressive last year. Plays above his size.

Cordy played some good defensive games last year. No dispute. Personally, I think we missed him up forward though. So really just playing around with the idea of what would facilitate Cordy's return to the forward line.

Fletch played his role very well in the prelim and grand final. You'd think, if he were able play at that level consistently, that would be good enough to be regularly selected. But he, along with any number of others on our list, went missing last year. If he returns to form then he's an option that allows Cordy forward, perhaps Adams too. On pure talent, I'd suggest Young looks better but his mettle hasn't been tested at the very highest level (and he's young with some physical maturation still ahead of him).

If both Schache and Boyd come good the forward option for Cordy may be moot, and then he probably has the edge on Roberts for a place down back (on recent form).

 

[Lindsay_Gilbee]

Sammy Lands just said on afl tonight we’ll play him forward for as long as we can, Naughton and Crozier to play his role down back.

 

[ScragCity]

Wood forward was bold move but its clearly a failed experiment. Completely ineffective two games in a row.

 

[Norm De Guerre]

Might be time to reopen the poll.

 

[Contador]

Wood forward was bold move but its clearly a failed experiment. Completely ineffective two games in a row.

Strange that this seemed totally obvious to most of us though. I would have assumed it was Bev just messing around with pre-season games if it wasn't for the reports that he's been training there all summer. Surely they won't abandon their plans that quickly.

 

[Yojimbo]

Wood forward was bold move but its clearly a failed experiment. Completely ineffective two games in a row.

2 Games, 3 Goals, average 1.5, superb Boyd like with a slightly
better average. sorry Scrag.

 

[dogzrule]

2 Games, 3 Goals, average 1.5, superb Boyd like with a slightly
better average. sorry Scrag.

Stats are deceiving absolutely no impact on either game much better down back

 

[Yojimbo]

Stats are deceiving absolutely no impact on either game much better down back

I agree with what you are saying, but i wanted him tried
forward in a four man forward line along with Schache,
Johannisen and Jong as the power forward both Wood
and Jong even the Bont have been tried forward along
with Dunkley with some success in terms of goals and
to a degree it has worked, even with today's sub
standard entries. I don't think Libba and Dahl can go
much better than today that to me is a greater
concern in my opinion than Wood forward.

 

[dogwatch]

Apart from Dickson who do we have who you could describe as having natural forward instincts?

Redpath perhaps? Dale? Schache? Probably not Tom Boyd. All of our other small-medium forwards are contrivances of necessity, even Picken.

 

[Glenn Barclay]

Woods move up forward fits perfectly with our love of playing players out of their best position

 

[Norm De Guerre]

Apart from Dickson who do we have who you could describe as having natural forward instincts?

Redpath perhaps? Dale? Schache? Probably not Tom Boyd. All of our other small-medium forwards are contrivances of necessity, even Picken.

Toby McLean. Peter/Paul.

 

[dogwatch]

Toby McLean. Peter/Paul.

True. On that basis you could probably say Bont too.

So would we be prepared to leave McLean up forward all the time as our only other player with natural forward instincts? I doubt it. Peter/Paul as you say.

We need another gun outside midfielder before we can do that.