Gamble a backman?

[longtimecat]

Can anyone explain what the coaching staff were thinking, playing Gamble as a backman. We had good backmen playing VFL.

 

[alfy!]

Well he has done nothing when given his chances in the forward line!

 

[johnnystav]

what were we thinking picking gamble in the first place?

 

[hamG]

I was surprised to see him in the back half. But I think he earned his run in the side that week.

 

[Just do something]

It was a bit of a Gamble playing him down back but why not we need to see if he has any other sides to his game.

 

[noclashjumpers]

Ridiculous.

Fans, and presumably the club, are disappointed by the fact that he seems to perform poorly when given chances in the 1s. But more often than not, this is what happens, he spends the bulk of the time being played out of position. What do people expect?

It's about time we found out whether Gamble has anything serious to offer. Sit him in a forward pocket consistently for a few weeks and allow him to a chance to settle, and not mess with his head by throwing him into situations that clearly don't play to his strengths.

If he's given a decent run being played inside the forward arc and still procures nothing, then fine; at least we'll have a more conclusive answer. At the moment the coaching staff are wasting both the club's and Gamble's time by ignoring his skill set.

Some have said he has attitude problem. I'm not sure I blame him.

 

[worthogs]

Ridiculous.

Fans, and presumably the club, are disappointed by the fact that he seems to perform poorly when given chances in the 1s. But more often than not, this is what happens, he spends the bulk of the time being played out of position. What do people expect?

It's about time we found out whether Gamble has anything serious to offer. Sit him in a forward pocket consistently for a few weeks and allow him to a chance to settle, and not mess with his head by throwing him into situations that clearly don't play to his strengths.

If he's given a decent run being played inside the forward arc and still procures nothing, then fine; at least we'll have a more conclusive answer. At the moment the coaching staff are wasting both the club's and Gamble's time by ignoring his skill set.

Some have said he has attitude problem. I'm not sure I blame him.

While i think it was stupid to play him as a defender, I cant agree with you on leaving him in a pocket to see wht he has got. Versatility is the key to our players. Jonno, plays up the ground, Mackie, Bartel, Kelly, can all play in different positions when requried.

If you are going to rotate these guys replacement need to be versatile enough to give the A grades a break, however Gamble is one dimensional at the moment so its worth a try especially when we are down on personnel.

If he is to stay on the list he needs to take his opportunity when (and where) it comes. He is a lazy forward with crap kicking skills, but can take a grab. He needs to improveor its off to Adealide for him.

 

[noclashjumpers]

While i think it was stupid to play him as a defender, I cant agree with you on leaving him in a pocket to see wht he has got. Versatility is the key to our players. Jonno, plays up the ground, Mackie, Bartel, Kelly, can all play in different positions when requried.

If you are going to rotate these guys replacement need to be versatile enough to give the A grades a break, however Gamble is one dimensional at the moment so its worth a try especially when we are down on personnel.

If he is to stay on the list he needs to take his opportunity when (and where) it comes. He is a lazy forward with crap kicking skills, but can take a grab. He needs to improveor its off to Adealide for him.

I'm all for versatility, but the guy is a young developing small/mid forward who hasn't been given a chance to hone what he's actually talented at.

Where's the sense in developing plan B & C, when he and the club are hazy about how plan A works?

 

[rocker_oz33]

I'll get shoot down for say this but l think for gamble to play AFL he has to play different roles the days a gone of the permanent forward pocket that just stays in the pocket etc.look at mackie drafted as a forward it did not work gamble is not as tall but has good mark should be faster than gillies and drum if the club wants gamble in the milburn type mound play down back and go up forward once in a while he'll need improve.

 

[Sttew]

what were we thinking picking gamble in the first place?

Ditto. Maybe Cats should offer him to GC gratis.

 

[crunchola]

seems like it may be bomber's way of justifying that the player is going to make it or nor-play him out of position,crap performance, ok he's gone?! did that with playfair, and others

 

[CATACK]

Gamble is no good, should stay in the 2s, then give him away. Players like duncan, Motlop, Varcoe we have to put time in not gamble.

 

[witsend]

I think Mitch Duncan may have snuffed out any chance Gamble had of that 3rd med/tall forward spot. Either re-invents himself as a tallish midfielder a la Joel Corey, or as an attacking defender like Mackie, or he's trade-bait fo' sho'.

 

[noclashjumpers]

seems like it may be bomber's way of justifying that the player is going to make it or nor-play him out of position,crap performance, ok he's gone?! did that with playfair, and others

I think there may be some truth to this.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

I don't think there's a place for Gamble as a forward at the moment.

If you look at yesterday, we have great forwards like Chappy and SJ and Ablett can play well as a forward too. And Pods marked well and had a massive workrate. I said on the teams thread earlier in the week I thought we should have played another backman, and I still think so, but maybe for Gamble to have a future he'll have to try and find a role there.

 

[Nankervis brothers]

I think Gamble is in trouble. If he doesn't find a regular spot in the 1's this year then he is probably trade bait.

He is clearly a talented, naturally gifted forward, yet he can't break into our forward line (and with good reason). And I really don't think he has the accountability to play defence.

 

[cynical]

i liked the fact that they tried him in the backline, probably looking for a potential wojo replacement, i didnt think he played too badly but doesn't really have the pace

he has been around long enough and would probably develop into a decent player at another club but i think he has run out of chances with us

 

[Brasil2007]

i liked the fact that they tried him in the backline, probably looking for a potential wojo replacement, i didnt think he played too badly but doesn't really have the pace

he has been around long enough and would probably develop into a decent player at another club but i think he has run out of chances with us

In the past he hasn't been team oriented enough when he's been forward too. It's a good chance for him to show that he can play that team role. You can't be a one out backman.

ATM our small/med forward stocks are pretty good (when you add the midfield players that can go forward). Our stocks down back look a tad thinner. If he's to stay on the list he won't do it up forward.

Personally, I thought he might have been moved on at the end of last year.

 

[longtimecat]

What I was trying to say is we need to get game time into our young backs, Gillies & Laidler. So, why bother trying to re-invent a guy like Gamble who has been tried and failed.

 

[Vdubs]

I'd hate to see him go elsewhere and become a gun hff, like Davenport, cos he wasn't tried in his correct spot long enough.But maybe he has passed his chances?

 

[Cohzee]

I'd hate to see him go elsewhere and become a gun hff, like Davenport, cos he wasn't tried in his correct spot long enough.But maybe he has passed his chances?

I wouldn't class Davenport as a gun.


I agree with the OP, we should be giving the young backmen a chance instead of someone like Gamble.

 

[The rabbi]

And as a forward pocket Hogan may be ahead of Gamble at the moment.

 

[theCATSfromHELL]

I wouldn't class Davenport as a gun.


I agree with the OP, we should be giving the young backmen a chance instead of someone like Gamble.

Just on Davenport.

He would be a gun anywhere BUT Geelong and Port Adelaide, as much as I hate to say it.

Choco barely gave him a decent run last year, and even after his last quarter heroics against West Coast Choco didn't exactly give him a glowing report in his post match interviews.

Slap him in the Sydney line-up and he would be doing exactly what Mglynn is doing at the moment. Their game style suits a player like him to perfection.

On Gamble.

Give him an extended run in the seniors as a defender, and if that fails I think he may be trade bait unfortunately.

 

[costanza23]

Not too happy with how Gamble and Djerrkura and even West have been treated. Had them all for 3-4 years now and it looks like all three are probably gone at the end of the year. It seems we've jumped this age bracket 23-25 yo's because of how successful and fairly untouched our best 22 has been the last few years.

With Gamble and Djerrkura, I don't understand why they were played where they were played against Freo. From what I've red on here and in the papers, Gamble's mostly played up forward and a little in the middle in the twos. While Djerrkura has played more through the middle - on ball, run with and even the Enright kind of half back role (I remember he did an alright job on Jetta at half back last year). The two of them should've been switched around the other day, but will now more than likely be dropped after one game, without any chance to prove themselves. I just feel its unfair for these guys, that's all. To get a chance in the ones and not get played in the position you've been playing in the twos. I know there's emphasis on versatility now, but not everyone has to be. We've just got the luxury now of many of our senior players having been able to play in numerous positions, but it's tougher for the fringe players.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Not too happy with how Gamble and Djerrkura and even West have been treated. Had them all for 3-4 years now and it looks like all three are probably gone at the end of the year. It seems we've jumped this age bracket 23-25 yo's because of how successful and fairly untouched our best 22 has been the last few years.

With Gamble and Djerrkura, I don't understand why they were played where they were played against Freo. From what I've red on here and in the papers, Gamble's mostly played up forward and a little in the middle in the twos. While Djerrkura has played more through the middle - on ball, run with and even the Enright kind of half back role (I remember he did an alright job on Jetta at half back last year). The two of them should've been switched around the other day, but will now more than likely be dropped after one game, without any chance to prove themselves. I just feel its unfair for these guys, that's all. To get a chance in the ones and not get played in the position you've been playing in the twos. I know there's emphasis on versatility now, but not everyone has to be. We've just got the luxury now of many of our senior players having been able to play in numerous positions, but it's tougher for the fringe players.

If it makes you feel any better, they probably would have been dropped anyway, with the ins coming back.

I hate to delist any player without giving them a real go, but if we are fully fit, then you can't justify giving Gamble an extended run in seniors unless he's outstanding, and Djerrkura has been cut down by injuries.

West I really feel could be a player but it seems like his time might be up too. Hopefully one of them may stay on next year.