Opinion Josh Battle

[DarkSaint]

Have been giving this a fair bit of thought throughout the year, and just wanted to see what other peoples opinions are when it comes to Battle and his best position to play.

Now, first of all ill say that i think he should be played in the forward line. There are a number of reasons for this:

1. Just looks like a natural forward with the way he leads and kicks the ball.
2. Set shot kicking and general kicking is first class
3. Huge engine to play that roaming role
4. Believe he could play the Gunston role very well with similar traits.
5. Good mark and reader of play
6. Natural forward instincts

At the moment we have Bruce, Membrey and King as our tall forwards. King will need a couple of years to really hit his straps injury permitting which only leaves us with the current set up of Bruce and Membrey. McCartin unfortunately looks to be done due to the severity of his concussion injuries and we have another young player in Mayo who is 50/50 to make the step up. Our game plan ideally requires us to play with 2 Tall forward as seen in the pre season with (Bruce,McCartin) and Membrey being that medium one. Then we have 3 small forwards that we roll with in Lonie/Gresham (until this year) Parker (plays taller) Long, Young, Kent.

In saying this however, Battle has done an outstanding job this year in the back line with hardly any experience playing in that position and AFL in general. The reason i would like to see him play in the forward line is you can generally find a half decent defender (Wilkie) than a half decent forward. We all know good forwards are a dime a dozen while defenders can be plucked from state leagues or through the drafts much easier.

 

[plugger66]

Unless he goes forward we will probably never know but my feeling is battle can become a genuine star back and only a nice forward. I wouldn’t be moving him. I’d be dropping brown. 3 marking forwards will have little difference whilst our midfield is ordinary. Because of that forwards have to push up to stop us being smashed in the contest. They could have 6 talls and it wouldn’t help them mark it when there is no players up forward. Until the mids have better skill and more time the bombing continues. The difference I would do is instead of bombing kick mongrels so no one marks it. Obviously you only do that when you don’t have time to hit someone up

 

[AFLOnline]

He is amazing as a back man, which we need more than forwards right now.. why move him?

 

[sammm]

Besides th epoint. Brown will probably reitre this year and Battle and Carlisle can take over.

 

[saintsrfreak]

He is amazing as a back man, which we need more than forwards right now.. why move him?

Is that true though? Our forward line has been pretty woeful this season, and yeah a large part of that is the delivery inside 50, but something else that contributes is often we'll have one of Bruce or Membrey leading up the ground to provide a higher option while the other one is deep, and then that one tall forward inside 50 gets double teamed. Battle has some great attributes to be that lead up forward that then lets Bruce and Membrey have more time inside 50.

Meanwhile our backline has been probably our most consistent area this year and look to have a solid structure going. With Carlisle coming back in, who's a much better player than Battle at this point, we could have a net gain in both areas by putting Jake into Battle's current role and replacing a small forward with Battle IMO

 

[gringo2011]

Is that true though? Our forward line has been pretty woeful this season, and yeah a large part of that is the delivery inside 50, but something else that contributes is often we'll have one of Bruce or Membrey leading up the ground to provide a higher option while the other one is deep, and then that one tall forward inside 50 gets double teamed. Battle has some great attributes to be that lead up forward that then lets Bruce and Membrey have more time inside 50.

Meanwhile our backline has been probably our most consistent area this year and look to have a solid structure going. With Carlisle coming back in, who's a much better player than Battle at this point, we could have a net gain in both areas by putting Jake into Battle's current role and replacing a small forward with Battle IMO

Yeah often Kent is our lone forward target when the others have all peeled back to sure up further afield. Battle could be a better option and let Kent run like he was recruited to do. Battle is mobile but still tall enough to take grabs. It's worth a try. Send Bruce back and see if he's improved since his last stint even. Liam Jones and Casboult both work better back that forward and he's probably similar in ability.

 

[#gosaintas]

I think he'd only be an average fwd and he has a chance of being an excellent backman so I'd leave him where he is.

 

[Hubnester]

Conflicted. Loved the look of him as a forward and thought he was just a natural. But at the same time you just cant justify him losing his spot down back. Tough one. Maybe he and Carlisle can just take turns.

 

[plugger66]

Yeah often Kent is our lone forward target when the others have all peeled back to sure up further afield. Battle could be a better option and let Kent run like he was recruited to do. Battle is mobile but still tall enough to take grabs. It's worth a try. Send Bruce back and see if he's improved since his last stint even. Liam Jones and Casboult both work better back that forward and he's probably similar in ability.

Yes let’s move a failed back back there and move a win this year forward. Makes sense.

 

[gringo2011]

Yes let’s move a failed back back there and move a win this year forward. Makes sense.

How failed was he? He wasn't there long. Maybe Josh is just a gun at either end. I'm from the old school where I like kicking winning scores rather than have the best losing side in the league.

Rooey was on SEN this morning saying he thinks Marshall will be a forward who rucks and we need another ruck. That's on top of Dal saying the same. I reckon it'll do your head in.

 

[plugger66]

How failed was he? He wasn't there long. Maybe Josh is just a gun at either end. I'm from the old school where I like kicking winning scores rather than have the best losing side in the league.

Rooey was on SEN this morning saying he thinks Marshall will be a forward who rucks and we need another ruck. That's on top of Dal saying the same. I reckon it'll do your head in.

Bruce failed. You even said it but you want to move back for a guy who is doing great. I heard roo. Yes so. Maybe you change your mind because of them but not likely because you met too for ten seconds and found in arrogant. I understand they know so much more than me but let’s get their opinions about everything and we can close this place down. I like Marshall as our first ruck. Shoot me.

 

[Grav]

Interesting one with Battle, has really done an exceptional job in the backline, but with Carlisle returning (who has said he prefers the backline) & Clavarino not far off from his debut, then maybe a run up front to see how he goes wouldn’t be out of the question. If he fires & if Carlisles back holds up for next season, play him next to King. Opposition cant afford to double team both & with Dixons expertise we should see the team kick twice as many behinds as we do now. Or they do there own thing and kick a heap of goals.

 

[Moral Decay]

IMO we've got Wilkie, Marsh, Brown, and Joyce fit and playing, we've got Carlisle coming back (maybe one more game at VFL) and the potential of Clavarino who'll probably debut this year so 6 tall to tallish defenders.
As forwards we have Membrey, better suited to third tall, Bruce who has played injured this year and while I admire his willingness plays injured far too often, and we have Parker who stands 190cm but isn't their for his marking ability. So 2ish tall forwards current. Then of course King and Mayo who shouldn't be seen until next year.

Then we have Marshall who we're unwilling to play forward either as a forward or as a ruckman.

In the long term we could have a forward line of King, Mayo, Membrey, Parker, Lonie and depending on game pan, skills of midfield, Bruce, Billings and Gresham in which case the argument for Battle playing back is very strong, with a then 30yr old Carlisle and Brown retired.

In the short term an injury to Bruce, Membrey or Parker laves a gaping hole forward that would be filled nicely by Battle. At some point regardless of game style/plan/intention we pick the best 22 and play them to greatest effect, if that means Battle forward I'm happy with that.

I think our best potential tall line up next year would be.
Webster, Clavarino, ……...
Wilkie, Carlisle, …………...
…………, Marshall, ………….
Battle, King, ………….
Membrey, Mayo,...…….

It should be noted that a winning midfield and a winning team would make the Battle question a lot easier to answer.

 

[plugger66]

IMO we've got Wilkie, Marsh, Brown, and Joyce fit and playing, we've got Carlisle coming back (maybe one more game at VFL) and the potential of Clavarino who'll probably debut this year so 6 tall to tallish defenders.
As forwards we have Membrey, better suited to third tall, Bruce who has played injured this year and while I admire his willingness plays injured far too often, and we have Parker who stands 190cm but isn't their for his marking ability. So 2ish tall forwards current. Then of course King and Mayo who shouldn't be seen until next year.

Then we have Marshall who we're unwilling to play forward either as a forward or as a ruckman.

In the long term we could have a forward line of King, Mayo, Membrey, Parker, Lonie and depending on game pan, skills of midfield, Bruce, Billings and Gresham in which case the argument for Battle playing back is very strong, with a then 30yr old Carlisle and Brown retired.

In the short term an injury to Bruce, Membrey or Parker laves a gaping hole forward that would be filled nicely by Battle. At some point regardless of game style/plan/intention we pick the best 22 and play them to greatest effect, if that means Battle forward I'm happy with that.

I think our best potential tall line up next year would be.
Webster, Clavarino, ……...
Wilkie, Carlisle, …………...
…………, Marshall, ………….
Battle, King, ………….
Membrey, Mayo,...…….

It should be noted that a winning midfield and a winning team would make the Battle question a lot easier to answer.

Potential maybe. Hope. Not a lot. Mayo is a long way off if he is ever good enough. Clav is still miles off. Fat to many talls anyway.

 

[saintkildaman]

I think it’s all dependent on Carlisle, if he returns to his 2018 form then we shouldn’t need Battle in defence. I believe Wilkie plays well on bigger opponents and along with Snake and Brown we should cover most forward set ups.

We have been lacking a 3rd tall up forward this season and now that King has endured a set back I’m all for moving Battle into attack.

However given his success as a defender we have the luxury of playing Carlisle up front as well and continue to let Josh develop down back.

Logan Austin is another forgotten man. He could certainly be a quality player with his athleticism, just needs to be better 1 on 1 and as Richo would say ‘stronger in the contest’. Add in a Clav + Joyce and we are certainly building some KPD depth.

 

[ScrappyDo]

It's ALL too soon to call. IMO Josh was moved to the backline to get games into him and fill a gap in our depth since Hugh didn't work out and Clav isn't ready, and Austin is, well, Austin.
In all likelihood they wouldn't have expected him to become the main man because Jake was expected to line up instead.
We already had Bruce, Skunk, Paddy and Winx allocated as the forwards and Josh was too good to leave in VFL, so Ratts had the same idea that saw Sicily moved back, and also solved 3 problems with one move. With the benefit of hindsight, and a view to the long term, it was the right move and would have been more obvious to the coaching group than us outsiders.
Josh's position is not set yet either. Paddy is done, Brucy may get traded, Marsh and Clav will come on and demand spots in the backline and there's a change of coach and trade periods that could throw anything up.
All in all, the move has worked on every front. But as to any deeper meaning, we'll have to wait until next year at the minimum.
I do like the idea of 3 tall mobile intercepting defenders that are also good distributors by foot. Add Wilkie and Coff to the mix and were gonna have a seriously good back 6, in 2021

 

[Crusty Undies]

Have been giving this a fair bit of thought throughout the year, and just wanted to see what other peoples opinions are when it comes to Battle and his best position to play.

Now, first of all ill say that i think he should be played in the forward line. There are a number of reasons for this:

1. Just looks like a natural forward with the way he leads and kicks the ball.
2. Set shot kicking and general kicking is first class
3. Huge engine to play that roaming role
4. Believe he could play the Gunston role very well with similar traits.
5. Good mark and reader of play
6. Natural forward instincts

At the moment we have Bruce, Membrey and King as our tall forwards. King will need a couple of years to really hit his straps injury permitting which only leaves us with the current set up of Bruce and Membrey. McCartin unfortunately looks to be done due to the severity of his concussion injuries and we have another young player in Mayo who is 50/50 to make the step up. Our game plan ideally requires us to play with 2 Tall forward as seen in the pre season with (Bruce,McCartin) and Membrey being that medium one. Then we have 3 small forwards that we roll with in Lonie/Gresham (until this year) Parker (plays taller) Long, Young, Kent.

In saying this however, Battle has done an outstanding job this year in the back line with hardly any experience playing in that position and AFL in general. The reason i would like to see him play in the forward line is you can generally find a half decent defender (Wilkie) than a half decent forward. We all know good forwards are a dime a dozen while defenders can be plucked from state leagues or through the drafts much easier.

We look better with 2 talls than we did when paddy was playing. Membrey basically plays 10cm taller than he is cos his jump is great. We also have a lack of fit key defs currently with Brown the only fit one for most of the season alongside Battle. I really don't see the argument for playing him as a forward either as he's in fantastic form as an attacking CHB.

 

[Impatient Saint]

Battle has been brilliant down back, but with Carlisle coming back we need to kick goals so i would move Battle back into the forward line.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

I find it interesting to look back at our main goal kickers each year. At the different configurations and people involved.
Based on total goals for the year.

2010 Milne 57, Schneider, Riewoldt , Kosi, Goddard. Montagna 18 Team total 326 ( inc finals )
2011 Milne 57 , Riewoldt, Schneider , Kosi, DalSanto , Steven 13 Team total 283 ( inc 1 final )
2012 Milne 56, Riewoldt, Saad, Kosi, Milera, Steven 17 Team total 345
2013 Riewoldt 50, Milne , Saad , Lee ,Steven, Montagna 16 Team total 251
2014 Riewoldt 49, Stanley, Billings, Armitage, Dunstan, Montagna 9 Team total 212
2015 Bruce 50, Riewoldt, Sinclair , Lonie , Dunstan , Weller. 12 Team total 241
2016 Membrey 44, Riewoldt , Bruce, Weller, Newnes , Steven/Paddy 14 Team total 286 NOTE the 2 talls and Membrey.
2017 Membrey 38, Bruce, Gresham , Riewoldt, Billings, Acres, 11 Team total 271
2018 Gresham 35, Membrey, Newnes, Lonie , Billings , Steven 13 Team total 225
2019 YTD Membrey 24, Bruce, Kent , Parker, Gresham , Billings. 9 Team total 126

By average per game:
2011: Milne 2.4, Cripps 1.7, Riewoldt 1.6, Schneider 1.4, Kosi 1.2 , Siposs/Gamble 1.
2016: Membrey 2.6, Reiwoldt 2, Bruce 1.7, Paddy 1.3, Weller 1.1, Lonie 1.
2018: Membrey 1.7, Gresham 1.6, Lonie 1.5, Bruce 1.3, Battle 1.2 Paton1 ( Paddy 0.9 )
2019: Membrey 2.0 , Bruce 1.1, Lonie 1, Hind 1, Kent 1, Parker 1, Gresham 0.9, Long 0.8

I think part of the higher score in 2016 was having the three talls.

Average goals per game. Best , Saints , Worst.
2010 16.5 cats, 12.5 Saints, 11.2 Tigers.
2011 17 Cats, 12.3 Saints, 9.7 Suns
2012 17.4 Hawks, 15.7 Saints, 8.3 Giants.
2013 16.6 Hawks , 11.4 Saints, 9.5 Demons
2014 16.7 Hawks , 9.6 Saints , 8.6 Demons
2015 16.4 Hawks , 10.9 Saints, 9.9 Blues
2016 16.5 Crows, 13 Saints, 9.1 Bombers
2017 15.8 Crows, 12.3 Saints , 10.5 Dockers
2018 14.8 Demons, 10.2 Saints, 8.2 Suns.
2019 14.9 Cats, 10.5 Saints, 8.8 Suns.

Seems like its getting harder to score in general , but we have been near the bottom last couple of years.
We are getting the ball into our 50, we need to score.

I'd want goals from.
3 tall forward...5 per game.
3 small forwards 5 per game.
Others 5 per game.

Currently we have from talls ( Membrey plays as a tall, just as Parker plays as a small , lets keep it simple ).
3 goals per game.
From smalls , 3 goals per game.
From others, 4 per game .



Yes i like Battle in defence , but if we have the cattle ( ie Brown + Carlisle ) i'd rather us start trying to get a workable structure in the forward line.

 

[Crusty Undies]

IMO we've got Wilkie, Marsh, Brown, and Joyce fit and playing, we've got Carlisle coming back (maybe one more game at VFL) and the potential of Clavarino who'll probably debut this year so 6 tall to tallish defenders.
As forwards we have Membrey, better suited to third tall, Bruce who has played injured this year and while I admire his willingness plays injured far too often, and we have Parker who stands 190cm but isn't their for his marking ability. So 2ish tall forwards current. Then of course King and Mayo who shouldn't be seen until next year.

Then we have Marshall who we're unwilling to play forward either as a forward or as a ruckman.

In the long term we could have a forward line of King, Mayo, Membrey, Parker, Lonie and depending on game pan, skills of midfield, Bruce, Billings and Gresham in which case the argument for Battle playing back is very strong, with a then 30yr old Carlisle and Brown retired.

In the short term an injury to Bruce, Membrey or Parker laves a gaping hole forward that would be filled nicely by Battle. At some point regardless of game style/plan/intention we pick the best 22 and play them to greatest effect, if that means Battle forward I'm happy with that.

I think our best potential tall line up next year would be.
Webster, Clavarino, ……...
Wilkie, Carlisle, …………...
…………, Marshall, ………….
Battle, King, ………….
Membrey, Mayo,...…….

It should be noted that a winning midfield and a winning team would make the Battle question a lot easier to answer.

So two players that have never played an AFL game displace the only 50 goal in a season ayer we have. We play 4 key forwards and have a debutant defender hold down a post and a 30 year old with a dodgy back holding down the other?

 

[DarkSaint]

It's ALL too soon to call. IMO Josh was moved to the backline to get games into him and fill a gap in our depth since Hugh didn't work out and Clav isn't ready, and Austin is, well, Austin.
In all likelihood they wouldn't have expected him to become the main man because Jake was expected to line up instead.
We already had Bruce, Skunk, Paddy and Winx allocated as the forwards and Josh was too good to leave in VFL, so Ratts had the same idea that saw Sicily moved back, and also solved 3 problems with one move. With the benefit of hindsight, and a view to the long term, it was the right move and would have been more obvious to the coaching group than us outsiders.
Josh's position is not set yet either. Paddy is done, Brucy may get traded, Marsh and Clav will come on and demand spots in the backline and there's a change of coach and trade periods that could throw anything up.
All in all, the move has worked on every front. But as to any deeper meaning, we'll have to wait until next year at the minimum.
I do like the idea of 3 tall mobile intercepting defenders that are also good distributors by foot. Add Wilkie and Coff to the mix and were gonna have a seriously good back 6, in 2021

Don't get me wrong, the move to the back line has worked a treat and he is playing very good!

Using Sicily to describe Josh is spot on and i can see it 100%.

Now let me ask you a question.. If Josh could turn out like A) Sicily as a defender or B) Gunston 45-60 goal forward season after season who would you prefer?

 

[Impatient Saint]

Kosi & Roo both played their first year at CHB, David Neitz started as a CHB. Its not like better players cant rotate between forward and back.

 

[ScrappyDo]

Don't get me wrong, the move to the back line has worked a treat and he is playing very good!

Using Sicily to describe Josh is spot on and i can see it 100%.

Now let me ask you a question.. If Josh could turn out like A) Sicily as a defender or B) Gunston 45-60 goal forward season after season who would you prefer?

I suppose as pluggs noted, if he can be an elite CHB then it's better than a good 2nd or 3rd forward. But as l said, his future is subject to a number of influences and it's too soon to call. I can wait.

 

[Keg on legs]

The short term temptation might be to fill a gap in the fwd line but the long term plan should see him as a dynamic, quick, strong and skillful key back.

Leave him back and let him continue to flourish. Don't tinker with it. Address our disfunctional fwd line some other way

 

[BrutThough]

Battle will be an elite player no matter what position he plays.
I would keep him back for the remainder of the year then aim to play him forward with the ideal future forward line of Membrey, King and Battle.