Injury Lonergan

[cynical]

he shouldnt play again unless scarlett goes down

i wouldnt worry about big forwards dominating, we are more prone to being out run because of our slow team

taylor hunt and wojo add much needed speed to the side and although hunt might not be ready for finals i think we should take the risk with him

none of the top sides have 2 gun talls, saints have riewoldt and kosi (spud) and the pies have cloke and dawes (still too raw). Taylor and Scarlett can take both of those, we dont need lonners.

having wojo and t hunt run out of our backline linking up our midfield will make the difference between us winning the flag or being overrun by the pies

if a big forward does start dominating you can always have guys like j hunt/milburn/enright float infront or at worst have one of the rucks go back and block space

 

[meto]

he shouldnt play again unless scarlett goes down

i wouldnt worry about big forwards dominating, we are more prone to being out run because of our slow team

taylor hunt and wojo add much needed speed to the side and although hunt might not be ready for finals i think we should take the risk with him

none of the top sides have 2 gun talls, saints have riewoldt and kosi (spud) and the pies have cloke and dawes (still too raw). Taylor and Scarlett can take both of those, we dont need lonners.

having wojo and t hunt run out of our backline linking up our midfield will make the difference between us winning the flag or being overrun by the pies

if a big forward does start dominating you can always have guys like j hunt/milburn/enright float infront or at worst have one of the rucks go back and block space

You forgot to mention L Brown of Collingwood usually kicks 2-3, who's gonnas man him T Hunt?
Not to mention Jolley, Maccaffer even Anthony if played.

St Kilda Riewolt, Cozzie, Mcavoy and Gardner, Goddard, and one or two others.

Both our rucks should be rested forward and play most naturally as forward targets, so we need to get the defencive mix right to defend against v tall fwd setups.
Like I've already said, Lonergon shutout inform Cloke in a loosing Geelong team, I'd think abit before talking of leaving him out.

 

[DanA]

You forgot to mention L Brown of Collingwood usually kicks 2-3, who's gonnas man him T Hunt?
Not to mention Jolley, Maccaffer even Anthony if played.

St Kilda Riewolt, Cozzie, Mcavoy and Gardner, Goddard, and one or two others.

Both our rucks should be rested forward and play most naturally as forward targets, so we need to get the defencive mix right to defend against v tall fwd setups.
Like I've already said, Lonergon shutout inform Cloke in a loosing Geelong team, I'd think abit before talking of leaving him out.

Don't see an issue with that. Lonergan did a great job on Cloke while we got chopped up by Didak, Swan, Thomas & Beams. It's a trade off, I think a smaller defense that had Wojak & T.Hunt would provide more value but Cloke might get a bit more of the ball.

Similar against the Saints, it's always been Schnieder & Didak that have done well against them.

 

[Gaz_Brownlow]

Last point is actually quite good....

However, I still like Lonergan in the side as i think that balance is right. We probably have a bit more flexibility to use Harry or Scarlo in an attacking capacity, but Lonergan is the true stay at home defender that we require. His efforts on Cloke should not be underestimated - it just gives us that option if an opposition tall starts to work around Harry (i.e. Franklin, Riewoldt or Cloke).

The small brigade can hurt us as was rightly pointed out with this balance...however, i think with finals football the small brigade tend to quieten a little as the pressure and physicality around the packs intensifies. I imagine we will be a lot tighter on MacCaffer, Beams, Sidebottom next time round....similarily with Schneider and Milne (although it must be said that Hunt is doing an excellent job this year in the back pocket).

Lonergan stays - especially against Carlton next week who just thumped Richmond via 4 goals each from Henderson and Waite.

Anybody suggesting Lonergan hasn't earn't his hoops this year seriously needs to take another look at the season highlights.

 

[cynical]

You forgot to mention L Brown of Collingwood usually kicks 2-3, who's gonnas man him T Hunt?
Not to mention Jolley, Maccaffer even Anthony if played.

St Kilda Riewolt, Cozzie, Mcavoy and Gardner, Goddard, and one or two others.

Both our rucks should be rested forward and play most naturally as forward targets, so we need to get the defencive mix right to defend against v tall fwd setups.
Like I've already said, Lonergon shutout inform Cloke in a loosing Geelong team, I'd think abit before talking of leaving him out.

If a ruckman goes forward then our ruck defends. Both hawkins and ottens are capable of taking marks in defense.

Lonners fumbled a couple of goals in a high pressure game and we were overrun by their smalls. Cloke is a poor shot on goal i'd rather have him put under pressure with a set shot over having one of their smalls run it in.

I'd rather take a small loss in a 1 on 1 with milburn or mackie on a 3rd tall and have the extra run from defense.

We haven't lost games because 1 key forwards has dominated, we have lost games because we couldn't get it out of defense and because we were too slow.

A lot of our goals come from running it out of defense and linking up with the midfield.

 

[The Casey Cat]

Problem is that if we play a side with 2 behemoth forwards (Saints, Pies, Hawks) - we really need Lonergan

Agree with above about this. We have Scarlett and Taylor. They are the KP backs. Taylor to come in for Laidler (unlucky and definitely in our future plans) and T Hunt stays in. Sorry but no Lonergan we are better balanced and quicker without him.

 

[Belisarius]

Hard to tell from the game against the Doggies what really worked - Lonergan and Taylor (talls) out for some smaller players who can run more, break the lines and put more pressure on the opposition ball carrier.

We just dominated - maybe mainly because of the poor performance last week more than anything ? Then again maybe not - as we looked far quicker and moved the ball better.

However Doggies are an ideal side not to have too many tall defenders in the side.

I think this week will tell us more. However I suspect we might just be better off in the trade off for a tall staying out for another quick runner like Taylor Hunt.

Then again do we want such an inexperienced player in the finals ?

I think this will be a hard call with so much to consider.

As some people have noted here we did look a little top heavy and slow throughout the year - but we are so good we get away with this possible issue better than most clubs.

I would be looking at what will cause the most grief to the Saints and Collingwood - and this sways me towards having some more pace in the side.

 

[Rik E Boy]

I agree with Bel above. In many of our losses, in particular againt Collingwood and Carlton earlier in the year we went in top heavy and looked slow as a result. That means no Lonergan and no Blake at this stage.

You have to worry about Corey as well who has struggled with injury all year long. We need run to win this flag and Taylor Hunt looks the goods to me. The only way to get finals experience is to play in them.

regards,

REB

 

[Claude Balls]

We didn't need Lonergan when Scarlett & Harley were our key defenders.
We didn't need Lonergan when Scarlett & Egan were our key defenders.
And we didn't need Lonergan when Scarlett & Harry were our key defenders.

Laidler was solid tonight.

^ ^ this has occurred to me also.

Collingwood scored 80-odd points from Geelong turnovers in Rd 19. That tells me we failed to carry the ball out of defence like the good old days. Failed miserably.

Though Lonergan, at 197cm, is individually the best equipped to take someone like Cloke, I'd rather Cloke kick 5 from 10 marks on Taylor and Geelong otherwise rebound well like they used to (and against the Dogs on Sat night), than Cloke kick 2 and Didak, McAffer, Thomas, Wellingham and Davis also kick 2 when Geelong keep turning it over TRYING to rebound from defence.

It's nothing personal against Lonergan - he's had a great year and deserves every acclamation. It's simply about finding the best team structure. Seems to me the structure comprising 4 players above 192cm (plus Milburn), is rather un-Geelong like in that it's unconducive to the gameplan we are renowned for. And the gameplan we are renowned for is surely the best way to counter 'pressing' teams like the Pies and Saints.

 

[Gladbaqs]

I think he's earned another game against Cloke.

But not crucial against other teams.

 

[meto]

^ ^ this has occurred to me also.

Collingwood scored 80-odd points from Geelong turnovers in Rd 19. That tells me we failed to carry the ball out of defence like the good old days. Failed miserably.

Though Lonergan, at 197cm, is individually the best equipped to take someone like Cloke, I'd rather Cloke kick 5 from 10 marks on Taylor and Geelong otherwise rebound well like they used to (and against the Dogs on Sat night), than Cloke kick 2 and Didak, McAffer, Thomas, Wellingham and Davis also kick 2 when Geelong keep turning it over TRYING to rebound from defence.

It's nothing personal against Lonergan - he's had a great year and deserves every acclamation. It's simply about finding the best team structure. Seems to me the structure comprising 4 players above 192cm (plus Milburn), is rather un-Geelong like in that it's unconducive to the gameplan we are renowned for. And the gameplan we are renowned for is surely the best way to counter 'pressing' teams like the Pies and Saints.

So its un-Geelong to have a tall or two?
I'd be more inclined to choose a winning combination, rather than some supposed sentimental gameplan that is compromised from the outset.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

It's nothing personal against Lonergan - he's had a great year and deserves every acclamation. It's simply about finding the best team structure. Seems to me the structure comprising 4 players above 192cm (plus Milburn), is rather un-Geelong like in that it's unconducive to the gameplan we are renowned for. And the gameplan we are renowned for is surely the best way to counter 'pressing' teams like the Pies and Saints.

I totally agree. I think Lonners has had a great year and really improved, and would be very unlucky to miss out on a GF. But I just think that the structure works best with 2 talls, particularly in terms of running the ball out of defence, and I think the defence can still hold without Lonners there.

Whether we go that way or not in finals remains to be seen.

 

[Belisarius]

^ ^ this has occurred to me also.

Collingwood scored 80-odd points from Geelong turnovers in Rd 19. That tells me we failed to carry the ball out of defence like the good old days. Failed miserably.

Though Lonergan, at 197cm, is individually the best equipped to take someone like Cloke, I'd rather Cloke kick 5 from 10 marks on Taylor and Geelong otherwise rebound well like they used to (and against the Dogs on Sat night), than Cloke kick 2 and Didak, McAffer, Thomas, Wellingham and Davis also kick 2 when Geelong keep turning it over TRYING to rebound from defence.

It's nothing personal against Lonergan - he's had a great year and deserves every acclamation. It's simply about finding the best team structure. Seems to me the structure comprising 4 players above 192cm (plus Milburn), is rather un-Geelong like in that it's unconducive to the gameplan we are renowned for. And the gameplan we are renowned for is surely the best way to counter 'pressing' teams like the Pies and Saints.

I agree basically. We have 2 talls in Scarlett and Taylor - and Milburn playing tall - that is usually enough for us to win and have a quick rebounding defence.

Lonergan - if he improves further - could be an asset in the years to come - bur right now not convinced he is our best option.

Not sure all this talk that Lonergan is the only person we have that can handle Cloke is an accurate assessment.

 

[catters rule]

Lonergan has been good this year but i would hate to see him with the ball under extreme pressure in the finals. Everyone who is saying Taylor cant handle good forwards well think again anyone rember his game on riewoldt in last years grand final taylor is a gun CHB and Scarlett is one of the best FBs of all time. We can also have mackie and milburn play tall if need be. And this week with the side we have we bring in Corey Ling and Taylor and drop Laidler T.Hunt and Menzel if you were going to bring in Lonergan as well who else would you drop i cant think of anyone else.

 

[Belisarius]

Lonergan has been good this year but i would hate to see him with the ball under extreme pressure in the finals. Everyone who is saying Taylor cant handle good forwards well think again anyone rember his game on riewoldt in last years grand final taylor is a gun CHB and Scarlett is one of the best FBs of all time. We can also have mackie and milburn play tall if need be. And this week with the side we have we bring in Corey Ling and Taylor and drop Laidler T.Hunt and Menzel if you were going to bring in Lonergan as well who else would you drop i cant think of anyone else.

My thoughts exactly. Not a Lonergan hater - and I suspect he will get another go in the seniors in the years to come.

 

[Claude Balls]

So its un-Geelong to have a tall or two?
I'd be more inclined to choose a winning combination, rather than some supposed sentimental gameplan that is compromised from the outset.

Not sure how you inferred that from my post. And what does the second sentence mean?

 

[meto]

Not sure how you inferred that from my post. And what does the second sentence mean?

Re-bound speed is great, but if your defensive structure is overly small then all the opposition will do is spot up their talls.
If their confidence is up the smalls also grow in confidence, I believe its vital to nullify the key forwards as much as poss.
Especially with the Saints and Pies.
Lonergan is our biggest defender and he's in form. If Harry T is having trouble with Cloke, Brown or Dawes its good to have an option.
Don't mind him up fwd occassionally either if team balance is an issue, but I carn't see it an issue with Saints and Pies.

 

[Claude Balls]

Re-bound speed is great, but if your defensive structure is overly small then all the opposition will do is spot up their talls.
If their confidence is up the smalls also grow in confidence, I believe its vital to nullify the key forwards as much as poss.
Especially with the Saints and Pies.
Lonergan is our biggest defender and he's in form. If Harry T is having trouble with Cloke, Brown or Dawes its good to have an option.
Don't mind him up fwd occassionally either if team balance is an issue, but I carn't see it an issue with Saints and Pies.

That's great, but you took from my post that I was suggesting it's un-Geelong like to have a "tall or two".

All I said that was with Lonergan in the team we actually have 4.5 talls (the .5 being Milburn), which is un-Geelong like in that it limits the gameplan we are renowned for - i.e. there is one less running player to help rebound from defence.

I covered the business of Harry T potentially having trouble with someone like Cloke, and whether the defence would actually be "overly small". Not sure you actually comprehended much of my post when you read it.

 

[meto]

That's great, but you took from my post that I was suggesting it's un-Geelong like to have a "tall or two".

All I said that was with Lonergan in the team we actually have 4.5 talls (the .5 being Milburn), which is un-Geelong like in that it limits the gameplan we are renowned for - i.e. there is one less running player to help rebound from defence.

I covered the business of Harry T potentially having trouble with someone like Cloke, and whether the defence would actually be "overly small". Not sure you actually comprehended much of my post when you read it.

"Right O", I'm talking of CHB specifically, an option for the key tall role, like if Harry is being towelled.
Milburn, Enwright or Mackie, I don't think so.
They're run and carry flankers, not keypost defence.
Lonners, seems to me the only alternative as Harry T support, and he might need it against the taller fwd setups, that's why I support Lonners inclusion.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

"Right O", I'm talking of CHB specifically, an option for the key tall role, like if Harry is being towelled.
Milburn, Enwright or Mackie, I don't think so.
They're run and carry flankers, not keypost defence.
Lonners, seems to me the only alternative as Harry T support, and he might need it against the taller fwd setups, that's why I support Lonners inclusion.

The problem with that IMO is that it means we have too many defenders to squeeze into the 22, hence why I can't justify Lonners playing just as a nanny for Taylor.

I've said it before, but 8 defenders isn't justifiable for a GF because it's unnecessary and means leaving someone else out. The only way you get around that (other than dropping Mackie, which won't happen) is you consider Wojo a permanent wingman (to get it down to 7 defenders) but then that means a midfielder (or a small forward) has to go from the 22. There just aren't enough spots really.

Hence why Lonners has done nothing wrong but I can see the case for him being left out.

 

[Belisarius]

The problem with that IMO is that it means we have too many defenders to squeeze into the 22, hence why I can't justify Lonners playing just as a nanny for Taylor.

I've said it before, but 8 defenders isn't justifiable for a GF because it's unnecessary and means leaving someone else out. The only way you get around that (other than dropping Mackie, which won't happen) is you consider Wojo a permanent wingman (to get it down to 7 defenders) but then that means a midfielder (or a small forward) has to go from the 22. There just aren't enough spots really.

Hence why Lonners has done nothing wrong but I can see the case for him being left out.

This all makes logical sense to me. There is no perfect answer - but there is the best solution. I think this is it.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

This all makes logical sense to me. There is no perfect answer - but there is the best solution. I think this is it.

Which bit? No Lonergan, or Wojo and no midfielder/small forward?

For me, and I fully love how much Lonners have improved this year, the combined issues of you can't play 8defenders, and the fact that Wojo is absolutely critical, lpartly because of his form, but also argely because of slowness and injuries to others (Ling, Corey etc) means he probably draws the short straw. As I said, it wouldn't be deserved in the sense that he's been fantastic all year, but when you have more players than spots, in the cold rational light of unemotional day, it's probably the right decision (hopefully Bomber learns this way of thinking and uses it with Max too, but that's another discussion).

 

[Belisarius]

Which bit? No Lonergan, or Wojo and no midfielder/small forward?

Sorry P & O - got carried away. No Lonners I think is the best solution in general.

Wojo has impressed me this year after I thought he might struggle this year - and Byrnes, Varcoe and Stokes have been quite good as a group kicking goals, getting enough possessions and adding leg speed to the side.

It's the BS (Best Solution) IMO.

 

[darren forssman]

"Right O", I'm talking of CHB specifically, an option for the key tall role, like if Harry is being towelled.

who played this role last year?

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Which bit? No Lonergan, or Wojo and no midfielder/small forward?

Sorry P & O - got carried away. No Lonners I think is the best solution in general.

Wojo has impressed me this year after I thought he might struggle this year - and Byrnes, Varcoe and Stokes have been quite good as a group kicking goals, getting enough possessions and adding leg speed to the side.

It's the BS (Best Solution) IMO.

Fair enough. The problem with it is that if you accept the following players are or should be safe:
Hunt Scarlett Mackie Taylor Enright Milburn
Corey Ling Bartel SJ Mooney Varcoe
Chappy Pods Ottens Ablett Selwood Kelly Wojack Hawkins

That's 20 spots
Then there are only 2 spots left for Lonergan, Stokes and Byrnes. Hence why if you play Lonners and 8 defenders in a GF, you must either drop a midfielder or Stokes or Byrnes, they can't all play.