Our Best 22?

[nathanchelsea]

had a think about it to see just how close we are to full strength with a view on building not only young guys but actually having a dangerous foward line structure. Dimma said at one stage that he would like to have 3 tall options up foward and i came up with this.

FB: Farmer McGuane Rance
HBF: Newman Astbury Batchelor
C: Edwards Martin Deledio
HFF: Houli Riewoldt Morton
FF: King Griffiths Vickery
Foll: Graham Jackson Cotchin
Int: Foley Grigg Conca Connors

Sub to change around every week around runners like connors, edwards, houli etc

Id really like to include troy taylor in that team but i don't know what his future is looking like (grim atm). I know alot of you will proberly say where are Moore, Tuck even Post and Derickx but i think these guys just arent as good as who are holding their spot who are Rance, Grigg, Griffiths and Graham.

On this board Graham is severly under rated. Gives everything, huge guy and always gives a contest. What i think is most important for him is his defensive pressure around the contest he gets 7 odd tackles a game and has shown he can provide a contest when he goes foward.

Another who i think we need in is Farmer, i think he is our answer to the Milnes, Thomas, Krakouer, Stokes of the comp. They are always the the guys who really take games from us. Showed some good things last year.

What do you guys think?

 

[peggles]

good post. i can't actually disagree with that team being our best 22 at this stage when available.

 

[Bird Man]

I believe with effort moore can make the side

 

[santa claws]

we should forget about so called best 22s its really not what its about.
we should be picking sides that cater to development. in doing this we have to guard against sending a shedload of kids out just to get eaten by the wolves.

lets get back to setting criteria for players to get a game. lets play with genuine structure.
as amany big bodies as we can. as many good kicks as we can. as many blokes who can get a bit of the ball and where possible some experience around those kids experienced players who will lead from the front. we can do all this and still get games into our kids sheesh we may even play some good footy and win a few.

 

[_RT_]

we should forget about so called best 22s its really not what its about.
we should be picking sides that cater to development. in doing this we have to guard against sending a shedload of kids out just to get eaten by the wolves.

lets get back to setting criteria for players to get a game. lets play with genuine structure.
as amany big bodies as we can. as many good kicks as we can. as many blokes who can get a bit of the ball and where possible some experience around those kids experienced players who will lead from the front. we can do all this and still get games into our kids sheesh we may even play some good footy and win a few.

There is one thing you seem to overlook Claws. Many of our best kicks are currently skinny runts, while many of our blokes who have decent size about them are rather shitful when it comes to disposal. Like I said last week its almost a case of damned if we do and damned if we don't.

 

[TigerTank]

There is also something else that needs to be fixed.
For whatever reason, our team appears completely unprepared in the first 20 minutes of every match we play.
That is part of the reason I would have Tuck in: at least he can get the thing, rather than 20 minutes of chasing tail before we finally get in the groove and start getting some of the pill.
Essendon has a list that is no better (according to a lot of Essendon posters at the start of the season when making the comparison) than ours, but they start with a bang. We start with a whimper even in games we play well.
In short, they appear better prepared mentally or physically or SOMETHING compared with us.
Clearly they are doing something we aren't. And should. This is getting embarrassing.

 

[santa claws]

There is one thing you seem to overlook Claws. Many of our best kicks are currently skinny runts, while many of our blokes who have decent size about them are rather shitful when it comes to disposal. Like I said last week its almost a case of damned if we do and damned if we don't.

not so true go look at the rnd 4 thread and tell me whats wrong with the side ive named.
we can play sides with good size structure and in the main skill. we can also play more who get their hands on it.and we can do it without sacrificing giving kids a game.