Harvey
- Thread starter Clay Davis
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2004
- Posts
- 10,745
- Reaction score
- 10,718
- Location
- Melbourne
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Chicago Bulls, Kansas City Royals
Agreed.
We are all basing these arguments around the model of a traditional FF. Rightly or wrongly, it's quite obvious that we don't setup that way is all I was saying.
Its quite disturbing if you look at the last 2 games and strip out the goals we got from 50m penalties and free kicks. Something is clearly wrong with either the set up and/or the cattle down in the forward line
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2004
- Posts
- 31,273
- Reaction score
- 33,210
- Location
- Bali
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Fremantle
I don't think they do see it that way, certainly not in the very near future. As evidence, we recruited Anthony, so if the plan was for MJ there was simply no need.
Next year with Morabitto and Mundy available the amount of time Pavlich plays midfield will be minimal, and I would be fine if that amount of time was actually zero. As big body clearance players give me any of Mundy, Barlow, Mora, and Broughton before him, plus I'd consider Lower or de Boer as well. I just don't think it has been a good move this year despite our injuries, especially because it has had zero shock value.
Having Pavlich rather than MJ in the forward line massively increases the pressure because it tends to draws defenders from other forwards, leaving the opposition vulnerable if we have a set up to exploit that. It also increases pressure because the ball should take a more direct route forward, whether that is to Pavlich, Mayne, Ballantyne or Bradley, because the midfielders should have a lot more confidence.
The quality of our midfield and their delivery skills should be an open invitation to make the forward line much more aggressive offensively, without reducing the defensive capabilities of players like Mayne and Ballantyne.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2004
- Posts
- 31,273
- Reaction score
- 33,210
- Location
- Bali
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Fremantle
Yes. But surely Harvey is not happy with how that is working, and if Anthony had form or if Mundy and Mora were available so Pav can play there, it would change.
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #131
Yes, we've been going for fast break football all year. Inevitably however that tends to build front running, and if the break doesn't come off, you're exposed.
A very Chris Connolly circa 2004 game plan.
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2004
- Posts
- 10,745
- Reaction score
- 10,718
- Location
- Melbourne
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Chicago Bulls, Kansas City Royals
It's not 'fast break' footy ala Essendon under Knights.
We implemented forward 50 pressure as a means to create more scoring opportunities from our inside 50's. Our entire forward structure is to create forward 50 pressure and turnovers. That's not 'fast break' footy. We started it last year.
When the ball is down the other end, every team tries to get the ball out 'fast'..
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #133
You can't have a forward press unless you are already forward, malpaso.
My argument is about how we get the ball there.
West Coast were quite happy to retain possession across half back and the midfield without needing to rush it down the other end. They weren't worried about getting the ball down there fast at all.
Our forqard line has been undereforming since Keplar got dropped.
Prior to that we actually had the most efficient forward line in the comp for goals vs inside 50s
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2006
- Posts
- 3,936
- Reaction score
- 344
- Location
- Westeros
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- SFFC, 76ers, Steelers, Canucks
LOL. Until Harvey gets over his infatuation with MJ, Kepler is always going to be on the outer.
With Clarke performing solidly as the back-up ruckman, there is no longer a requirement for our FF to ruck. We're just as likely to see Anthony come into the side for MJ as we are Bradley.
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2010
- Posts
- 5,080
- Reaction score
- 2,496
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Fair point.
Because they had blokes of a decent height that could grab contested marks, they knew they'd be able to work their way down there. If they needed a get-out kick one of those blokes could lead up.
With Mayne as our full forward and MJ as our CHF we're pretty much r**ted in terms of contested marking from our KPFs.
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2010
- Posts
- 19,397
- Reaction score
- 15,595
- Location
- Perth
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Perth Football Club
Nobody said it has to stay that way. Your making it sound as though it is cast in stone. With a classier and more talented forward structure we may be able do something a little more creative than scaping and scrambling goals.
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2003
- Posts
- 1,598
- Reaction score
- 1,022
- Location
- Freo is where my heart is
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- FREO
The difference in the use of the two forward lines was obvious. But that is the advantage that you have when you have three good contested markers in your forward line.
Not sure we could have used the same tactic effectively. Pav, Mayne, Johnson just don't have the same contested marking ability as Kennedy, Darling and Lynch. Obviously Pav is a better forward than those three but, the tactic works because there are three... I think