Key match ups vs Carlton

[Teagueeee15]

one thing is for sure all West Coasts running players will be tagged not just the midfielders guys like Wirrapunda and Adkins as well by the second string midfielders Ie: Chambers,Bannister,Brett Johnson, Davies, Mcgrath,Sporn,Simpson and wiggins.

Without sounding like a smart arse, good luck tagging them all. There is at least a dozen options available to Worsfold.
I just dont think you have enough suitable players to do it. Its quite clear that your strength lies in the key position department. Or to look at it another way, our ability to match up on Favola and Whitnall. I believe we can cover Fevola adequately , however Whitnall is clearly a threat. That said i have faith in both Staker and Hunter.

That's a fair point but what Pagan has done at Carlton is just one on one football and your accountable for your opponent. This tactic has worked wonders for him in the past.

 

[sinepari]

[
That's a fair point but what Pagan has done at Carlton is just one on one football and your accountable for your opponent. This tactic has worked wonders for him in the past.

No doubt about that. However i still think against WCEs midfield, itsl easier said than done. Against a team with a 'standard' midfield (without great depth) Carlton has proven to be very successful.
Should be interesting to see how you cope with:
Judd
Cousins
Kerr
Embley
Fletcher
Stenglien
Butler
Selwood
Braun
Sampi
Wooden
Mcconnell
Waters
(however i assume that perhaps 1 - 2 of the above may not play)
Some pretty impressive running options there

 

[Thrawn]

Typical ignorant Carlton supporter, Glass beat Lloyd, Neitz, & Fevola to name a few.

No one is doubting his ability at full back, but it's a tad hypocritical to call someone ignorant after this line. Fevola kicked 1.6 against Glass in the previous match. Any forward that gets 7 scoring shots against a FB has him beat, no question about it. Fevola just wasn't accurate (and Glass isn't responsible for his accuracy).

When Glass did actually play on Fev in the round 20 clash, i think he only managed to kick 1 goal from memory

You're missing one vital bit of info here: Fevola also kicked 6 behinds. That's seven scoring shots... what would you say if it were 6.1 instead if he had his kicking boots on? Fevola having that many scoring opportunites against Glass is a clear indication that Fevola beat him (alos consider than the ball was rarely going to our forward line).

That said, you are facing a different Carlton to what you were playing against at Subi last year, in Melbourne. Which is why I think this game will be close... I'm not with this "blowout" theme, all I want is a good and competitive game to see where both our teams are at. We're both in good form, so hopefully this will be a cracker.

The only way I can see us winning is if we keep the pressure on your midfield, as it is entirely obvious that we can't match up on them. But what does come into our advantage is the crowd and ground familiarity - three wins in a row at TD in a short space of time and we might be better adapted to the ground. Though I don't think this will prove significant. All you guys need to do is shut down our forward line, all we need to do is make sure that there is always a huge amount of pressure around your midfield.

We'll probably be seeing a defensive Carlton this time, but I hope we can be more offensive so we can use Fevola and Whitnall as much as we can.

 

[F-U]

I cant believe people are doubting whether Staker is good enough to play on Lance Whitnall. Staker has showed he is quite capable over the past 2 games and even considering not letting him play on Whitnall would be huge blow to his morale. How is he supposed to learn to play CHB when your only gonna play him there against crap opponents.

People who are even suggesting he not play on Lance Whitnall are complete ******s. By that logic Staker would probably end up playing CHB like 4 times in the year. I mean should we have Adam Hunter play on Jonathon Brown and Nick Riewoldt and Anthony Rocca... Staker is our CHB and he has done nothing yet to deserve the lack of confidence some supporters seem to be showing in his ability. I mean its only a pre season game.... if ya dont want him playing CHB in a pre season game then you must not rate him at all... Lets send him back to the WAFL, theres another genius idea....

 

[Bestbird]

I actually think if Pagan crowds the midfield and goes a pagans paddock with Fevola Carlton will have a good chance.

Hopefully the coaching staff have addressed the Midfield flood tactics used by Sydney in the final last year

 

[Impunity!]

...if our taggers like bannister and sporn can shutout judd, cousins and fletcher then we should win comfortably...

That's a pretty big if.

...either way it should be a good match... just have to wait to see whos on their game

Agreed.

 

[Teagueeee15]

No doubt about that. However i still think against WCEs midfield, itsl easier said than done. Against a team with a 'standard' midfield (without great depth) Carlton has proven to be very successful.
Should be interesting to see how you cope with:
Judd
Cousins
Kerr
Embley
Fletcher
Stenglien
Butler
Selwood
Braun
Sampi
Wooden
Mcconnell
Waters
(however i assume that perhaps 1 - 2 of the above may not play)
Some pretty impressive running options there

Agreed It will be hard to stop them,but As i have seen so often players who get tagged often don't pick up their tagger they just think "aw stuff it" like Kouta does and if this happens on Saturday well it could cost you the match.

 

[Exeter]

The only match up in this contest that concerns me is Fevola. Glass is as good an option that we have but the best way to shut down his influence is to not let the ball get down there in the first place.

As good as he is, he can't kick goals if his supply lines are cut.

I'm hoping Staker will run off Whitnell and be first to the ball in every contest - otherwise Lance will do him toe to toe.

 

[Mead]

I cant believe people are doubting whether Staker is good enough to play on Lance Whitnall. Staker has showed he is quite capable over the past 2 games and even considering not letting him play on Whitnall would be huge blow to his morale. How is he supposed to learn to play CHB when your only gonna play him there against crap opponents.

People who are even suggesting he not play on Lance Whitnall are complete ******s. By that logic Staker would probably end up playing CHB like 4 times in the year. I mean should we have Adam Hunter play on Jonathon Brown and Nick Riewoldt and Anthony Rocca... Staker is our CHB and he has done nothing yet to deserve the lack of confidence some supporters seem to be showing in his ability. I mean its only a pre season game.... if ya dont want him playing CHB in a pre season game then you must not rate him at all... Lets send him back to the WAFL, theres another genius idea....

I would say one very good reason for a lack of confidence in Staker is that he was taken apart by pavlich in the first preseason match, and the week before by Gardiner in the intraclub.

I am a huge huge fan of Buffy, and think he will be a big part of our team over the next few years, but I have serious doubts over whether he can play on the big bodied CHFs- physically he just isn't there yet. The very good quality game he played on the weekend was more a 'mop up at ground level' on another skinny kid rather than being forced to compete in aerial duels.

IMO, I think Whitnall would take him to pieces, although I'd be happy to be proven wrong. But wch would be worse for Staker's confidence? being played in a loose HB role whilst someone else gets the job on Whitnall, or getting absolutely belted whilst his man wins the grand final for the opposition?

If we start Staker on Lance, so be it, but I don't think that's the best matchup and I'd be very very worried if we didn't have a plan B available.

 

[Thrawn]

That's true but Fev didn't have the kicking boots on and kicked 1.6 from a career high 19 possesions. So the end result Glass did win but when you look at the finer details i thought Fevola beat him.

No, Glass didn't win vs Fevola that game. A FF that picks up 19 possessions and has 7 scoring shots against his opponent, come on. Simple logic. Glass was lucky that Fevola was terribly inaccurate.

But I expect this time that Glass won't be beaten soundly.

 

[Jimmy_the_Gent]

But wch would be worse for Staker's confidence? being played in a loose HB role whilst someone else gets the job on Whitnall, or getting absolutely belted whilst his man wins the grand final for the opposition?.

What if he belts Whitnall and wins us the grand final? What would that do to his confidence?

If we start Staker on Lance, so be it, but I don't think that's the best matchup and I'd be very very worried if we didn't have a plan B available.

Having said the above, I'm all for a plan B.

 

[doog. where's my car]

kouta (if he plays) V Chick
maybe waters or hunter.

looking foward to either of these match-ups, I just hope kouta provides a contest.


have to agree with mead on stakers role against kanga's petrie was going ok until he polaxed selwood. Maybe he started worrying about tribunal???
But yeah he played fairly loose and used to to optimum after petrie dropped marks. Love his run, but will need to be more accountable against Shatnall.

 

[Bestbird]

No, Glass didn't win vs Fevola that game. A FF that picks up 19 possessions and has 7 scoring shots against his opponent, come on. Simple logic. Glass was lucky that Fevola was terribly inaccurate.

But I expect this time that Glass won't be beaten soundly.

He did actually

Fevola was taken of Glass and only returned late when the game was all over to pick up some cheap possesions

 

[RoK]

Typical ignorant Carlton supporter, Glass beat Lloyd, Neitz, & Fevola to name a few.

Not to mention he's probably in the top 5 FB's in the comp when on song.

There's a big difference between him & Tommy Carroll

Didn't Fev have 14 pos 11 marks and kick 1.6,if thats the case Fev flogged Glass it was more that Fev kicked badly.

 

[Thrawn]

He did actually

Fevola was taken of Glass and only returned late when the game was all over to pick up some cheap possesions

Erm, were you reading this thread at all? Seven, I count seven scoring shots against him. Fevola soundly beat him, FBs who beat their opponents don't let them have that much of an opportunity.

 

[Total Package]

Erm, were you reading this thread at all? Seven, I count seven scoring shots against him. Fevola soundly beat him, FBs who beat their opponents don't let them have that much of an opportunity.

Take a look at the replay of that game... nearly all those shots for goal were in the last quarter when the game was over.... I remember it because I kept thinking here we go.. Fevola will end up with 4 or 5 goals even though Glass has thrashed him. Thankfully he missed most of the goals because stats don't show how well Glass did against him.

 

[Mr Q]

Erm, were you reading this thread at all? Seven, I count seven scoring shots against him. Fevola soundly beat him, FBs who beat their opponents don't let them have that much of an opportunity.

Seriously, that is a good example of stats meaning bollocks. The one thing I remember about that game is that Fevola never got a stat at FF in the clear, that Glass had quite high stats as well (17 possessions), and that Fevola played away from FF quite a bit chasing the ball in the early parts of the game.

In this case it's pretty much as Frank says - Fevola only got his shots on goal late in the game (I suspect you'd find that 5 of those shots were in the last quarter when the game was well and truly over - and a couple came from shocking defensive errors by our HB flankers).

 

[Mead]

Seriously, that is a good example of stats meaning bollocks. The one thing I remember about that game is that Fevola never got a stat at FF in the clear, that Glass had quite high stats as well (17 possessions), and that Fevola played away from FF quite a bit chasing the ball in the early parts of the game.

In this case it's pretty much as Frank says - Fevola only got his shots on goal late in the game (I suspect you'd find that 5 of those shots were in the last quarter when the game was well and truly over - and a couple came from shocking defensive errors by our HB flankers).

Just to settle this, at by midway through the the third quarter, Fevola had 0.3- at that point he was dragged.
Up until then he had
- a behind, marked and missed a 40m set shot from virtually the first clearance of the game.
- a behind, free kick taken deep in the pocket after an eagle player (not glass) kicked it OOB on the full.
- a behind, missed from snapshot.

In the final quarter, Fevola kicked
- a behind, hitting the post from a 50m set shot after getting a free for high contact from sampi.
- a behind, missing from a 55m mark and set shot.
- a goal, scrubby snapshot dribbles along the ground from 30m out.

Overall, he was actually pretty lucky to get the shots he did. 2 of Fevola's shots on goal came from free kicks, neither conceded by Glass and one just an OOB rather than an infringment. His other misses were a tricky snapshot and a 55m set shot, over the course of the game there was perhaps one instance where Fevola outmarked Glass in the corridor and in range and then missed what he should have got- if anything, his only goal for the day was a bit of a fluke. It was actually a pretty comprehensive reaming from Glass, all things considered.

 

[quidy]

Even if you do shut down cousins judd and fletcher, what can you do about Kerr, Embley, Stenglien... the list goes on!

They arent going to win the game in the midfield.. Carlton need to flood or play very good defensivley to win this game of footy.

I'm backing coasters by +10goals.

 

[sinepari]

Just to settle this, at by midway through the the third quarter, Fevola had 0.3- at that point he was dragged.
Up until then he had
- a behind, marked and missed a 40m set shot from virtually the first clearance of the game.
- a behind, free kick taken deep in the pocket after an eagle player (not glass) kicked it OOB on the full.
- a behind, missed from snapshot.

In the final quarter, Fevola kicked
- a behind, hitting the post from a 50m set shot after getting a free for high contact from sampi.
- a behind, missing from a 55m mark and set shot.
- a goal, scrubby snapshot dribbles along the ground from 30m out.

Overall, he was actually pretty lucky to get the shots he did. 2 of Fevola's shots on goal came from free kicks, neither conceded by Glass and one just an OOB rather than an infringment. His other misses were a tricky snapshot and a 55m set shot, over the course of the game there was perhaps one instance where Fevola outmarked Glass in the corridor and in range and then missed what he should have got- if anything, his only goal for the day was a bit of a fluke. It was actually a pretty comprehensive reaming from Glass, all things considered.

I think we can safely say you just won that arguement.Good work

 

[Altum Volantes]

Erm, were you reading this thread at all? Seven, I count seven scoring shots against him. Fevola soundly beat him, FBs who beat their opponents don't let them have that much of an opportunity.

I'd suggest you don't even remember the game.

 

[doog. where's my car]

Judd said last night we don't nessicarily have to beat fev and whits one on one everytime we just have to 'dry the supply'.

 

[Jako]

Just to settle this, at by midway through the the third quarter, Fevola had 0.3- at that point he was dragged.
Up until then he had
- a behind, marked and missed a 40m set shot from virtually the first clearance of the game.
- a behind, free kick taken deep in the pocket after an eagle player (not glass) kicked it OOB on the full.
- a behind, missed from snapshot.

In the final quarter, Fevola kicked
- a behind, hitting the post from a 50m set shot after getting a free for high contact from sampi.
- a behind, missing from a 55m mark and set shot.
- a goal, scrubby snapshot dribbles along the ground from 30m out.

Overall, he was actually pretty lucky to get the shots he did. 2 of Fevola's shots on goal came from free kicks, neither conceded by Glass and one just an OOB rather than an infringment. His other misses were a tricky snapshot and a 55m set shot, over the course of the game there was perhaps one instance where Fevola outmarked Glass in the corridor and in range and then missed what he should have got- if anything, his only goal for the day was a bit of a fluke. It was actually a pretty comprehensive reaming from Glass, all things considered.

argument closed!

game set match - eagles

 

[Thrawn]

Just to settle this, at by midway through the the third quarter, Fevola had 0.3- at that point he was dragged.
Up until then he had
- a behind, marked and missed a 40m set shot from virtually the first clearance of the game.
- a behind, free kick taken deep in the pocket after an eagle player (not glass) kicked it OOB on the full.
- a behind, missed from snapshot.

And? The potential to get three goals, right there. Fevola's inaccuracy is by no means of Glasses doing. Glass had held him very well to have only taken 3 scoring shots in the one half, but when they were taken are irrelevant. We are not discussing this at the game's viewpoint, we are discussing this at the matchup's viewpoint as the only reason I'm even arguing is with some of you claiming that Glass soundly beat him.

In the final quarter, Fevola kicked
- a behind, hitting the post from a 50m set shot after getting a free for high contact from sampi.
- a behind, missing from a 55m mark and set shot.
- a goal, scrubby snapshot dribbles along the ground from 30m out.

Again, I will state that "when" is irrelevant since we are looking at one matchup from one whole game. Whether he kicked the bulk of them in the final quarter does not really matter.

Overall, he was actually pretty lucky to get the shots he did.

And Glass was pretty luck Fevola missed them, because you know as well as I do that he can be very accurate from anywhere.

2 of Fevola's shots on goal came from free kicks, neither conceded by Glass and one just an OOB rather than an infringment. His other misses were a tricky snapshot and a 55m set shot, over the course of the game there was perhaps one instance where Fevola outmarked Glass in the corridor and in range and then missed what he should have got- if anything, his only goal for the day was a bit of a fluke. It was actually a pretty comprehensive reaming from Glass, all things considered.

And all things considered, Fevola still had 7 scoring shots (I'm pretty sure there was an OOB from Fevola too... I'll have to check again) against his opponent. Fevola's job is to kick goals, a FB to prevent them. Now, what would you be saying if he had kicked 6.1 or 5.2? If you think you can argue that his inaccuracy was as a result of Glass alone, I'm sorry, but that's just rubbish. Fevola's fault alone to miss shots that he can *usually* kick with ease.

For a forward to get THAT many opportunites to kick goals DESPITE the ball not even going up there at all is NOT an indication of a forward being "soundly beaten". Whether he kicked them during junktime does not matter - as we're not talking about the actual game, but a battle against two players alone.

Now, I'll watch the game against when I have the chance and I will also have some points to add if required. But I don't think I have to. You make some very good points Mead, but at the end of the day... when the matchup alone is concerned... Fevola had 7 opportunites to goal and that's where the statement "Glass thrashed Fevola" falls apart. Any forward that can get that much of the ball as well as taking that many shots (despite inaccuracy) clearly hasn't been thrashed. A thrashing would be < 3 scorings shots - that's when a defender has him beat because he's done so well NOT to let him have those chances. Where Fevola had plenty of.

 

[Debaser]

He was beaten. Case closed.