Impotence - by defn. the Adelaide forward line

[bigman]

The Coaching staff intrigued me on Sunday by not having one player out of the square, on occasions - all day we played with two players out of the square and on too many occasions they got in each others road and often brought their direct opponent into the contest.

Why didnt we change this around from time to time and haveearly in the game Weshy one out, or Macca or Roo or Biglands one out later in the game. We could have had all players out of the 50 metre arc except for one player whom we were trying to isolate.

Given Welshys form it probably would not have been him on Sunday, but it could have been Macca, or later in the game when people got tired a Bigland with his height could have been a candidate.

Personnally I would have taken Welshy off far earlier when it was obvious he was getting frustrated and worse with every new contest he had to face. As it was when he was taken off - he came back a little better.

Were other people perplexed by this lack of imagination by the coaching staff in the forward line or not.

 

[- PC -]

An impotent forward line? But Stiffy was doing so well in back areas

 

[bigman]

So was Phil MCCracken and Ben Dover, a couple of likely Irish lads

 

[tribey]

The most obvious band-aid measure was to throw McGregor forward - a big body who can take a contested mark - but of course the everpresent threat of Pebbles and Taz put paid to that idea, especially with Rutten and Bassett busting a gut to keep them at bay as it was.

 

[bigman]

Good suggestion DT, but why not isolate just one forward - why always play with two - I look forward to your reply.

 

[outback jack]

need to leave kenny at CHB, he will improve more that way

 

[tribey]

Good suggestion DT, but why not isolate just one forward - why always play with two - I look forward to your reply.

With the amount of fringe smalls we have at our disposal we could very well have done that. Isolating a tall such as Biglands (though preferably Huddo) allowing Bode, Skipworth and/or a Rolls Royce like McLeod to run forward and crumb/play off them.

Your prior suggestion of Ricciuto I also liked, we all know he's filled that role to great effect before (playing out of the square rather than isolated)... rather than repeatedly resting him on the bench, why not send him to the goalsquare for a rest every now and then, a la the way Lethal handles Voss?

The captain not only gets a chance to recharge the batteries, but can also snag a few in the process.

While this is all theory, what is known is that the Pez/Stevo/Welshy experiment doesn't seem to working. Too disjointed and crowded and not one of them seems to be able to jag a contested grab. Answers must be found soon.

 

[outback jack]

Good suggestion DT, but why not isolate just one forward - why always play with two - I look forward to your reply.

Its difficult to isolate a forward, esp against collingwood as they tend to flood at bit. We dont really have the kind of forwards you want to isolate anyway. One thing over the past two yrs that was dissapointing was the effort to isolate w.carey, if we had worked on that more, we'd have been far more successful.

Overall the way we go forward still needs heaps of work, this has been the most dissapointing aspect of NC so far. His two forwards policy was used last yr, and we were told that he didnt have time to develop a new game plan. Yet there isnt any difference from today to last yr. He needs to have three or four forward plans or set ups that they are familar to with to go with the general game plan. The only time NC changed it was putting biglands down there in the last 5 mins, after GL had mentioned it and it won the game. Hopefully hes learned from that.

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

I was crying out for NC to put Biglands into a FP earlier. Didn't he say publicly that was his intention anyway? Surely he wouldn't have run out of puff by running around a FP for an extra quarter. I hope Clarke is back this week so we can leave him there permanently. Are we ever going to find a descent key forward???

 

[drakeyv2]

I was crying out for NC to put Biglands into a FP earlier. Didn't he say publicly that was his intention anyway? Surely he wouldn't have run out of puff by running around a FP for an extra quarter. I hope Clarke is back this week so we can leave him there permanently. Are we ever going to find a descent key forward???

If we had played Meesen we could have left Biglands there all day.

 

[drakeyv2]

need to leave kenny at CHB, he will improve more that way

He's played 94 games. We shouldn't be worried about playing him where he will improve the most. We should play him where it is of most benefit to the team.

Plenty of players look better at CHB than CHF. It's easier to play at CHB.

He is our best tall player & best mark. We are also better able to cover CHB. It should be looked at without the hysteria that went along with it last year.

 

[Cap]

I was crying out for NC to put Biglands into a FP earlier.

the problem with earlier is then Malthouse would have had time to fix the problem - by putting him there late in the game it swings it our way because it changes the structure of our forward and we have the few minutes to capitalise on opposition working out how to combat it.

 

[- PC -]

the problem with earlier is then Malthouse would have had time to fix the problem - by putting him there late in the game it swings it our way because it changes the structure of our forward and we have the few minutes to capitalise on opposition working out how to combat it.

Chicken or the egg?

If we put him there earlier , we get a buffer, if we wait then we might not have enough time for it to work.

We wanted 3 ruckmen to stretch their perceived lack of ruck, why didnt we then utilise the same deal up forward.

As to DT and his comment on Ncs plan, I think we saw one plan, and this may reflect on the comment made ( i think by acg) that the forwards were led under the ball.. one plan of attack seems to be kick to the top of the goal square. Its not NCs fault if A. The kicker chooses the wrong option or B. ALL the forwards lead instead of having one tall forward sit on that point in the square.

Its no use having 3 players lead in 3 different directions.The backmen follow and create havoc. But if one stays home and 2 lead out opposite it stretches the defences

 

[Jars458]

The most obvious band-aid measure was to throw McGregor forward - a big body who can take a contested mark - but of course the everpresent threat of Pebbles and Taz put paid to that idea, especially with Rutten and Bassett busting a gut to keep them at bay as it was.

Interesting that we didn't throw Stevens back to CHB. I wonder if his knee is broubling him?

 

[drakeyv2]

Interesting that we didn't throw Stevens back to CHB. I wonder if his knee is broubling him?

Virtualy no football for 2 years is probably broubling him too