Review Freo bully the Blues

[Caldera]

and to think Carlton beat freo in WA 2 years ago.

Should never be spoken about again

 

[wayToGo_]

Daisy Pearce joined Whateley and suggested that Fremantle may have just been very good and that Freo were "Richmond like in their pressure".

**** I love Daisy Pearce. Every time I've heard her as part of a commentary team (or on a footy show) she's the most knowledgeable and insightful of the lot. I really can't wait until the AFL finally wakes up to itself that being a 'jobs for the boys' club isn't the smart commercial move. They need to get some more AFLW players in to commentate - because unlike a lot of the guys, it isn't all about their egos.

 

[Joao]

**** I love Daisy Pearce. Every time I've heard her as part of a commentary team (or on a footy show) she's the most knowledgeable and insightful of the lot. I really can't wait until the AFL finally wakes up to itself that being a 'jobs for the boys' club isn't the smart commercial move. They need to get some more AFLW players in to commentate - because unlike a lot of the guys, it isn't all about their egos.

Daisy does go alright. Probably doesn't have full knowledge of all teams (to at least not say stuff that is blatantly untrue) but then nobody else does either.

I agree they need more people that make sense like her. Doesn't matter what gender they are either.

 

[scon]

She's head and shoulders above the grovelling pack.
Not to mention the fact that our "pressure was Richmond like".

 

[Unique Name]

On The Couch showed some horrible footage of Carlton's number 11 being the laziest ass on the field last night.

Amazing that in 2 hours of AFL Football Shows (360 & On The Couch) they didn't talk about how well Fremantle played once.

It was all about how bad Carlton and their rebuild are going. I just spent the last 2 hours driving to Sydney listening to SEN and it was all about Carlton until Daisy Pearce joined Whateley and suggested that Fremantle may have just been very good and that Freo were "Richmond like in their pressure".

Nothing like flying under the radar.

Yeah, just watched a bit of On The Couch. Fairly disappointing, literally didn't even mention us. Little bit of vision of a Carlton spud, little talk about their picks, job done move on to next game.

 

[theGav56]

It's pretty exciting to see what can happen with Tabs/Cox/Mccarthy with Apeness second ruck. Would benefit hugely for all involved.

I find it difficult to stay away from this debate. It is critical to where we are heading in terms of structure.

That set up to me reduces our flexibility in a couple of crucial ways. The most obvious one is that second ruck actually equates to 80% forward. And in that forward set up those guys are not going to run down too many defenders. Pretty amazing potential as a marking force though, and given that we have always bombed it into the forward line under Lyon, maybe that actually is the go.

The other option for me in that structure is to have any two of Taberner, Cox or Apeness sharing the 20% ruck duties, and select a forward/mid. This increases our options and running power, and should also increase our disposal skills. The easiest example in terms of our list is Bennell in for any of them. Sure it is not an ideal example as a fit Bennell comes in regardless, but in the end as a structure I think it is superior. The other example is Mundy, and again not an ideal example as he can play tall or as a midfielder. So I would add Walters into the mix, and in fact he is the ideal type for this role. I think it is not difficult for us to get someone like Banfield, Switkowski, Giro or Crowden to play this.

They are someone who Fyfe and Neale can rotate with which is an important tactical change up for us.

Out in the left field I have another proposal, which is Logue. His super mobility is what qualifies him against the other talls. Maybe he is needed down back, but I think his future position is a work in progress given his natural abilities.

 

[dockerfemme]

I find it difficult to stay away from this debate. It is critical to where we are heading in terms of structure.

That set up to me reduces our flexibility in a couple of crucial ways. The most obvious one is that second ruck actually equates to 80% forward. And in that forward set up those guys are not going to run down too many defenders. Pretty amazing potential as a marking force though, and given that we have always bombed it into the forward line under Lyon, maybe that actually is the go.

The other option for me in that structure is to have any two of Taberner, Cox or Apeness sharing the 20% ruck duties, and select a forward/mid. This increases our options and running power, and should also increase our disposal skills. The easiest example in terms of our list is Bennell in for any of them. Sure it is not an ideal example as a fit Bennell comes in regardless, but in the end as a structure I think it is superior. The other example is Mundy, and again not an ideal example as he can play tall or as a midfielder. So I would add Walters into the mix, and in fact he is the ideal type for this role. I think it is not difficult for us to get someone like Banfield, Switkowski, Giro or Crowden to play this.

They are someone who Fyfe and Neale can rotate with which is an important tactical change up for us.

Out in the left field I have another proposal, which is Logue. His super mobility is what qualifies him against the other talls. Maybe he is needed down back, but I think his future position is a work in progress given his natural abilities.

I agree with you on Logue. I don't know that we need him down back. It would be interesting to see what he can provide forward.

I would like to see use Walters, Matera and Neale in a triple role share, some midfield time, some high half forward time, some deep forward. Lachie is dangerous inside forward 50 (as are the others) and it might keep them fresh and the opponents guessing.

 

[masai]

On The Couch showed some horrible footage of Carlton's number 11 being the laziest ass on the field last night.

Amazing that in 2 hours of AFL Football Shows (360 & On The Couch) they didn't talk about how well Fremantle played once.

It was all about how bad Carlton and their rebuild are going. I just spent the last 2 hours driving to Sydney listening to SEN and it was all about Carlton until Daisy Pearce joined Whateley and suggested that Fremantle may have just been very good and that Freo were "Richmond like in their pressure".

Nothing like flying under the radar.

Kerridge was the player they were talking about.

For rational footy discussion Daisy >>>>>>>>>>>> VFL nuffies >>>>> Whately. She is very good on discussing all footy issues.

I love flying under the radar, you see some interesting sites.

 

[TheMcManusNose]

I agree with you on Logue. I don't know that we need him down back. It would be interesting to see what he can provide forward.

I recall that North game last year where he kicked 1.3 and took a couple of great contested marks in the forward 50. Could be an interesting one for sure. Honestly he is quick enough to play a bit of mid as well.

 

[Kram]

On The Couch showed some horrible footage of Carlton's number 11 being the laziest ass on the field last night.

That was Kerridge I think, just bizarre in lack of effort. Ross would never ever play someone again if they did that.

 

[Arcassius]

I find it difficult to stay away from this debate. It is critical to where we are heading in terms of structure.

That set up to me reduces our flexibility in a couple of crucial ways. The most obvious one is that second ruck actually equates to 80% forward. And in that forward set up those guys are not going to run down too many defenders. Pretty amazing potential as a marking force though, and given that we have always bombed it into the forward line under Lyon, maybe that actually is the go.

The other option for me in that structure is to have any two of Taberner, Cox or Apeness sharing the 20% ruck duties, and select a forward/mid. This increases our options and running power, and should also increase our disposal skills. The easiest example in terms of our list is Bennell in for any of them. Sure it is not an ideal example as a fit Bennell comes in regardless, but in the end as a structure I think it is superior. The other example is Mundy, and again not an ideal example as he can play tall or as a midfielder. So I would add Walters into the mix, and in fact he is the ideal type for this role. I think it is not difficult for us to get someone like Banfield, Switkowski, Giro or Crowden to play this.

They are someone who Fyfe and Neale can rotate with which is an important tactical change up for us.

Out in the left field I have another proposal, which is Logue. His super mobility is what qualifies him against the other talls. Maybe he is needed down back, but I think his future position is a work in progress given his natural abilities.

Years ago we were training Walters, Neale and Ballas to swap with each other forward and in the midfield (with mixed results). Now I see Giro, Matera, etc rotating through the centre bounces which makes me think that the strategy is still alive (except with different parts). As a general rule I think we'll always aim to have our players have the ability to rotate through different roles, in order to constantly change the matchups.

 

[theGav56]

Years ago we were training Walters, Neale and Ballas to swap with each other forward and in the midfield (with mixed results). Now I see Giro, Matera, etc rotating through the centre bounces which makes me think that the strategy is still alive (except with different parts). As a general rule I think we'll always aim to have our players have the ability to rotate through different roles, in order to constantly change the matchups.

Yep. Matera and Walters are good enough as specialist small forwards if that is how our 22 emerges, but many small mids spend time forward or begin life there.

 

[manpurple]

Really liked Giro’s game. Edges Crowden for mine


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app