Analysis Mihocek-Cox-Reid: Yes, No, or Maybe going forward?

[Timmy from Thomastown]

What about no Mihocek instead?

HF. De Goey - Reid - Stephenson
F. Elliot - Cox - Hoskin-Elliott

I

I’d rather not drop Mihocek. Can’t see the need.

Sunday was the first game with three tall forwards. Give it time. Those who think they were the problem on Sunday need their heads read.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

I’d rather not drop Mihocek. Can’t see the need.

Sunday was the first game with three tall forwards. Give it time. Those who think they were the problem on Sunday need their heads read.

Or all three with Mihocek doing the roaming role.

I’ll leave it to those that know such things far better than I.

My only real strong view is, Cox is the first of the triumvirate picked.

 

[left at home]

Maybe for me, it really depends on who we are playing, if West Coast then yes as it will test there Defense, but against teams that play a quick brand of footy it’s a no as it makes us a little slow, especially with the lose of Stevo for a while

 

[neilk]

What about no Mihocek instead?

HF. De Goey - Reid - Stephenson
F. Elliot - Cox - Hoskin-Elliott

I

Mihocek could still play in defense with Howe going down until Shaz or Langdon are ready.

 

[Black_White]

We’ve been great at locking the ball in our 50 this year.
Until this week.
The defensive pressure of the three named in this thread is something we can’t afford.

 

[Robroy22]

I don't know why people are even contemplating this....dropping Checkers?
When everyone is up and about we won't want to be taking injury prone players into big games. Checkers, Thomas, Brown WHE, DeGoey and Cox (not to mention Stevo) all play lots of minutes and at high intensity. And each of them offers a point of difference. Checkers is a running machine. He gets to so many contested balls and he usually kicks important goals. JT has beautiful hands and gets to a lot of ground balls. He hasn't had the shots he had last year because others are getting there first (Stevo, Brown) but JT always gives a contest and he's a smart user. WHE is a beautiful finisher who can also mark a lot taller than he is and he doesn't get injured as much as say someone like Billy. DeGoey is a beast and a real weapon as is Stevo (9 weeks to go). And Coxy gives us a 10 foot target who's smart and durable.

I love the romanticism of Benny Reid reinventing himself as a fwd / ruck but I just don't want to see him do another calf and make us play 1 down in a final....same goes for Billy. They're fabulous blokes and if they'd had the uninjured careers other have had, they'd both be legendary. But age and soft tissue injuries catches up with everyone.

So for mine: I want Checkers and Big Mason with Stevo, WHE, JDG and JT isolating teams in our front half.

Reidy, Beamer, Billy, Goldy and Wells are all "gravy" now.

 

[magpies42]

Our arm is bent now Stevo is gone. I actually liked how they all bobbed up, they are still a handful together.

It’s a +/- type argument. We were definitely caught on the rebound, with less pressure in the forward line. They did all compete and contribute though...I’d say drop Cox.

 

[Markfs]

I love the romanticism of Benny Reid reinventing himself as a fwd / ruck but I just don't want to see him do another calf and make us play 1 down in a final....same goes for Billy.

I think this is a good point. Reid has only started stringing some games together and Elliott is a week by week proposition and will remain so for the rest of the year. There are plan A and plan Bs and i wouldnt be betting the ranch on them at this stage.

 

[jackcass]

Not Schofield. He’s basically first reserve - came in for Sheppard last year and Barrass this year. Shannon Hurn would be the third tall at West Coast.

Getting on in years but generally plays when fit. Missed the 1st few rounds this year and maybe 1 other due to injury, played every game otherwise.

 

[Rorzza]

I don't see why you can't have an adaptable game plan based on opposition. So, I'm yes when playing certain sides and no when playing others.

I was surprised when Bucks opted 3 talls against WB, then I wasn't surprised. One of WB key attacking plan is based on quick ball movement by under sized skilful defenders such as JJ. Perfect for exposing tall forward lines. So, why not trial 3 talls against one of the smallest back lines in the league.

The tail of the night is CFC talls kicked a winning score.

Tall forwards:
Reid (196 cm) 3 Goals
Grundy (203 cm) 2 goals
Cox (211 cm) 2 goals
Mihocek (192 cm) 1 goal
DeGoey (188 cm) 2 goals

Mids/Small forward goals:
Phillips (187 cm) 2 goals
Brown (178 cm) 1 goal

Buck's master stroke maybe!! I think Bucks would be concerned about the return or lack of from the small forwards and mids.

The previous game against Melbourne, mids and small forward scores included Wilbur kicking 3, Sidebottom 1, Treloar 1, Thomas 1. Twice the amount of goal scorers and twice the amount of goals.

EDIT
Last time they met CFC 78 - WB 64, 14 point win.

Tall goal scoring:
DeGoey 1, Cox 1, Stephenson 2 (188 cm)

Mids and small forwards:
Elliot 2, Phillips 2, Thomas 2, Varcoe 1

Different game plan, same result.

 

[sirlothie]

I don't know why people are even contemplating this....dropping Checkers?
When everyone is up and about we won't want to be taking injury prone players into big games. Checkers, Thomas, Brown WHE, DeGoey and Cox (not to mention Stevo) all play lots of minutes and at high intensity. And each of them offers a point of difference. Checkers is a running machine. He gets to so many contested balls and he usually kicks important goals. JT has beautiful hands and gets to a lot of ground balls. He hasn't had the shots he had last year because others are getting there first (Stevo, Brown) but JT always gives a contest and he's a smart user. WHE is a beautiful finisher who can also mark a lot taller than he is and he doesn't get injured as much as say someone like Billy. DeGoey is a beast and a real weapon as is Stevo (9 weeks to go). And Coxy gives us a 10 foot target who's smart and durable.

I love the romanticism of Benny Reid reinventing himself as a fwd / ruck but I just don't want to see him do another calf and make us play 1 down in a final....same goes for Billy. They're fabulous blokes and if they'd had the uninjured careers other have had, they'd both be legendary. But age and soft tissue injuries catches up with everyone.

So for mine: I want Checkers and Big Mason with Stevo, WHE, JDG and JT isolating teams in our front half.

Reidy, Beamer, Billy, Goldy and Wells are all "gravy" now.

Reid has played quite a number of VFL/AFL games in a row now though, this year he seems right. I'm not worried he's gonna go down at any moment anymore with the body of work he has completed issue free.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

I think this is a good point. Reid has only started stringing some games together and Elliott is a week by week proposition and will remain so for the rest of the year. There are plan A and plan Bs and i wouldnt be betting the ranch on them at this stage.

In Reids defence he has been injury free for most of the last season and a half. He just hasnt been given senior games.

 

[Unknown Identity]

Horses for Courses imo.

It was the wrong set up against Dogs, who love to counter attack off half back with run and carry.

Against North Melbourne i'm happy to go with it.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

I don't see why you can't have an adaptable game plan based on opposition. So, I'm yes when playing certain sides and no when playing others.

I was surprised when Bucks opted 3 talls against WB, then I wasn't surprised. One of WB key attacking plan is based on quick ball movement by under sized skilful defenders such as JJ. Perfect for exposing tall forward lines. So, why not trial 3 talls against one of the smallest back lines in the league.

The tail of the night is CFC talls kicked a winning score.

Tall forwards:
Reid (196 cm) 3 Goals
Grundy (203 cm) 2 goals
Cox (211 cm) 2 goals
Mihocek (192 cm) 1 goal
DeGoey (188 cm) 2 goals

Mids/Small forward goals:
Phillips (187 cm) 2 goals
Brown (178 cm) 1 goal

Buck's master stroke maybe!! I think Bucks would be concerned about the return or lack of from the small forwards and mids.

The previous game against Melbourne, mids and small forward scores included Wilbur kicking 3, Sidebottom 1, Treloar 1, Thomas 1. Twice the amount of goal scorers and twice the amount of goals.

EDIT
Last time they met CFC 78 - WB 64, 14 point win.

Tall goal scoring:
DeGoey 1, Cox 1, Stephenson 2 (188 cm)

Mids and small forwards:
Elliot 2, Phillips 2, Thomas 2, Varcoe 1

Different game plan, same result.

You had some fair points but ruined it when you listed Stephenson and De Goey under tall forwards.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Horses for Courses imo.

It was the wrong set up against Dogs, who love to counter attack off half back with run and carry.

Against North Melbourne i'm happy to go with it.

Imo good teams don’t select on a horses for courses basis.

The opposition should worry about us, not the other way around

 

[Unknown Identity]

Imo good teams don’t select on a horses for courses basis.

The opposition should worry about us, not the other way around

Fair enough, if it has to be a yes or a no.

I'm a no.

Mihocek CHF
Cox FF

Reid unlucky.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Fair enough, if it has to be a yes or a no.

I'm a no.

Mihocek CHF
Cox FF

Reid unlucky.

I’m a yes. Our biggest weak link forward is Varcoe.

 

[regpies]

No, Bulldogs are a rubbish team and they were able to easily score turnover goals.

Not enough pressure and presence at the ball drop in our fwd 50 when there is tall players plodding around.

 

[Quicky]

I’d rather not drop Mihocek. Can’t see the need.

Sunday was the first game with three tall forwards. Give it time. Those who think they were the problem on Sunday need their heads read.

I don't think individually the talls were a problem. But I do think they create a structure that makes it more difficult to apply forward pressure. That was part structure and part application on the weekend. If we allow a team with better forward efficiency than the Dogs (which is most teams in the comp) walk it out that easily we will lose games. We were lucky the Dogs didn't kick straight.

 

[DaVe86]

Horses for Courses imo.

It was the wrong set up against Dogs, who love to counter attack off half back with run and carry.

Against North Melbourne i'm happy to go with it.

It can work both ways though. the Dogs have a very small forward line. So if we had moved the ball better off half-back, we could have really exploited them. At the end, we got a pretty decent return goal-wise from our talls…not just directly, but also indirectly through contests and spillages.

The way the game panned out, I think we would've been better without the extra tall because we weren't getting enough inside 50s and we were getting rebounded on too easily. However, once Howe went down, there was the option to swing one of the talls back to cover. But Buckley elected to keep the structure and use Mayne in defence. In the second half, I reckon the setup looked pretty good for most parts.

 

[DaVe86]

I don't think individually the talls were a problem. But I do think they create a structure that makes it more difficult to apply forward pressure. That was part structure and part application on the weekend. If we allow a team with better forward efficiency than the Dogs (which is most teams in the comp) walk it out that easily we will lose games. We were lucky the Dogs didn't kick straight.

I agree. But that said, the Dogs are the best rebounding team in the comp. It's basically how they generate their scores. So it will be interesting to see how the setup goes against a more traditional setup like the Kangaroos. The Dogs are just really strong in that area.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

I don't think individually the talls were a problem. But I do think they create a structure that makes it more difficult to apply forward pressure. That was part structure and part application on the weekend. If we allow a team with better forward efficiency than the Dogs (which is most teams in the comp) walk it out that easily we will lose games. We were lucky the Dogs didn't kick straight.

The dogs were equally lucky our mids and defenders didn’t kick straight around the ground. The number of oob on the full for example.

I don’t see our forward line to be an issue. Mihocek is as mobile as any small. The problem was our small forwards are not our first choice in the absence of Elliott and Stephenson. Varcoe runs around like a headless chook and as Jack Dyer used to say.... “his problem is that he’s where the ball aint”.

 

[neilk]

No, Bulldogs are a rubbish team and they were able to easily score turnover goals.

Not enough pressure and presence at the ball drop in our fwd 50 when there is tall players plodding around.

Only 4 tackles inside 50 helps your argument.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

I don't know why people are even contemplating this....dropping Checkers?
When everyone is up and about we won't want to be taking injury prone players into big games. Checkers, Thomas, Brown WHE, DeGoey and Cox (not to mention Stevo) all play lots of minutes and at high intensity. And each of them offers a point of difference. Checkers is a running machine. He gets to so many contested balls and he usually kicks important goals. JT has beautiful hands and gets to a lot of ground balls. He hasn't had the shots he had last year because others are getting there first (Stevo, Brown) but JT always gives a contest and he's a smart user. WHE is a beautiful finisher who can also mark a lot taller than he is and he doesn't get injured as much as say someone like Billy. DeGoey is a beast and a real weapon as is Stevo (9 weeks to go). And Coxy gives us a 10 foot target who's smart and durable.

I love the romanticism of Benny Reid reinventing himself as a fwd / ruck but I just don't want to see him do another calf and make us play 1 down in a final....same goes for Billy. They're fabulous blokes and if they'd had the uninjured careers other have had, they'd both be legendary. But age and soft tissue injuries catches up with everyone.

So for mine: I want Checkers and Big Mason with Stevo, WHE, JDG and JT isolating teams in our front half.

Reidy, Beamer, Billy, Goldy and Wells are all "gravy" now.

All good and well but you’re not paying Reid enough credit for being 100% fit for a season and a half now. Wouldn’t write him off. Injuries and lack of opportunity post injuries, not lack of talent are the only thing that have held him back.

In fact he could be a real weapon for us this season if he can continue to stay fit. A secret weapon that not even club supporters acknowledge!!

 

[jackcass]

All good and well but you’re not paying Reid enough credit for being 100% fit for a season and a half now. Wouldn’t write him off. Injuries and lack of opportunity post injuries, not lack of talent are the only thing that have held him back.

In fact he could be a real weapon for us this season if he can continue to stay fit. A secret weapon that not even club supporters acknowledge!!

I'm not sure why there's continued angst about Reid. He's just playing consistently good footy. Not sure what more we can ask than 14-15 possessions at a DE% 2nd only to Roughy across both teams, 5 marks, 2 contested, 3 goals and the dish off to JDG.