Our improved Back Half

[CoggaRules]

Newman got beaten in defense so often because he positions himself poorly, lacks genuine speed and is not a good contested ball winner - in the air or at ground level.

He's a decent upgrade on Tivendale on a wing as a receiver, but the same flaws he had as a defender will show through clearly if he is put in the centre where he has to win his own ball at AFL level.

Bwahhaaahaaa, but Tuck is exceptional huh?. And Ray Hall would walk into the side now too....Bwahaahaaahhaaa....man you are a pisser.

 

[Wally Matera]

you must be from out Narree then records, mate from work involved in jun footy out that way says exactly same thing

You three need to get a room with Newy... l've never seen a bigger gay love-fest as you blokes with him in the midfield.

Rooster/Harry... wipe that spunk off your chin!

 

[Tazzytiger]

yeah and you forgot the best option, Richo.

Why is it that everybody [but the people that pick the side] thinks Richo could be a good chb. He can run, mark, pass the football nearly pinpoint etc. Even opposition supporters say this. Just a question mind you but I like to see it tried.

 

[CoggaRules]

Why is it that everybody [but the people that pick the side] thinks Richo could be a good chb. He can run, mark, pass the football nearly pinpoint etc. Even opposition supporters say this. Just a question mind you but I like to see it tried.

because the people that pick the side, also pick match winners in Hyde, Tuck and Tivendale. 3 triers. Like we dont pick one trier and 2 vital cogs, we pick 3 triers and what do you get? yep...its wooden. Richo might have all the stats that he has in the FL, but for all that he just fell in for a JD medal in his whole career. Facing up the ground and then turning towards goal, as he has done for all his career, was hard enough. And his pure athleticism and tenacity to not be beaten, has put him in the star dept throughout the footy world. Even those opposition supporters that bag him, know the deal on how good he is.
If he was at CHB facing the oncoming plays and only having to run straight at the play and then releasing it to a teammate. He would have had a Brownlow and most likely CHB of the century status. Not one CHF would have had the aerobic capacity to outrun him for the whole game, not one CHF would have had the upper hand in the marking contest.

What a ****ing waste. One dimensional coaches have literally stopped him from becoming a Hall of Famer of legendary proportions in the AFL.

The thing is, when he is running straight ahead and passing it to a player, he 9 times out of 10 hits the target with pinpoint accurracy too. Like what are these coaches and brains trust thinking? If he could kick straigth, he would have had a million goals to go with the million marks he has taken. He hasnt, and they still persevere FFS. Get a brain TW.

 

[Bojangles17]

because the people that pick the side, also pick match winners in Hyde, Tuck and Tivendale. 3 triers. Like we dont pick one trier and 2 vital cogs, we pick 3 triers and what do you get? yep...its wooden. Richo might have all the stats that he has in the FL, but for all that he just fell in for a JD medal in his whole career. Facing up the ground and then turning towards goal, as he has done for all his career, was hard enough. And his pure athleticism and tenacity to not be beaten, has put him in the star dept throughout the footy world. Even those opposition supporters that bag him, know the deal on how good he is.
If he was at CHB facing the oncoming plays and only having to run straight at the play and then releasing it to a teammate. He would have had a Brownlow and most likely CHB of the century status. Not one CHF would have had the aerobic capacity to outrun him for the whole game, not one CHF would have had the upper hand in the marking contest.

What a ****ing waste. One dimensional coaches have literally stopped him from becoming a Hall of Famer of legendary proportions in the AFL.

The thing is, when he is running straight ahead and passing it to a player, he 9 times out of 10 hits the target with pinpoint accurracy too. Like what are these coaches and brains trust thinking? If he could kick straigth, he would have had a million goals to go with the million marks he has taken. He hasnt, and they still persevere FFS. Get a brain TW.

its a crock of %^$# cogg, richo is as much a CHB as I a WC wrestler...what qualities does he exhibit to suggest he would be any bloody good in defence...His clever use of the ball, natural defensive skills...man I luv Richo like a brother , you ever heard of playing to your strengths

 

[Rayzorwire]

Bwahhaaahaaa, but Tuck is exceptional huh?. And Ray Hall would walk into the side now too....Bwahaahaaahhaaa....man you are a pisser.

Tuck walked into midfield 2nd year on the list, last player listed and blitzed them. Newman is years older and has never earned the same opportunity - for good reason.

As for Hall, he was always ahead of Moore, McGuane and Schulz, while Wallace had enough confidence in his ability to do what he refuses to do with Polak - play him man on man on good forwards.

At least one of these four, probably more, will play all the games they can this year.

I know it's far from your strong suit California, but as your Seppo idols would say, do the math.

 

[Rayzorwire]

As per usual California Cogga is long of criticism, but very short on who exactly we would have played as a key forward instead of Richo.

Schulz?

Houlihan?

Bowden?

Morrison?

Limbach?

LMAO

 

[CoggaRules]

Tuck walked into midfield 2nd year on the list, last player listed and blitzed them. Newman is years older and has never earned the same opportunity - for good reason.

yeah Newman was needed where the ball was heading to, since Tuck was Blitzing them as the last player listed. And while Tuck was blitzing, we blitzed, since he was so blitzing. Blitzed what fool? What relevance did Tuck blitzing have on anything? It had JS relevance. ie if the team is announced on a Thursday night, and Tuck is out, it means Jack ...like irrelevant to the max.

 

[Rayzorwire]

yeah Newman was needed where the ball was heading to, since Tuck was Blitzing them as the last player listed. And while Tuck was blitzing, we blitzed, since he was so blitzing. Blitzed what fool? What relevance did Tuck blitzing have on anything? It had JS relevance. ie if the team is announced on a Thursday night, and Tuck is out, it means Jack ...like irrelevant to the max.

Tuck went from the last person kept on the list in '05, to impressing the hell out of the coaching staff as an onballer at training, to a 516 possession breakout season where he was instantly elevated to our most dangerous onballer. Not by me, but by the opposition coaches who kept putting their best tagger on him.

It's all very simple California, but clearly beyond you.

As for the ridiculous argument that Newman was good enough for midfield but was more needed in defense, it's been done to death and is still just as false as it ever was.

Young small defenders are supposed to graduate to midfield - Newman never made it out of defense because we had better options. Lousy options in some cases, but better options. Players who competed against Newman at training and beat him for the opportunity. If you think for one second that sides don't pit their potential midfielders against each other at training to see who can cut it and who can't, then there's not much hope for you.

 

[CoggaRules]

Tuck went from the last person kept on the list in '05, to impressing the hell out of the coaching staff as an onballer at training, to a 516 possession breakout season where he was instantly elevated to our most dangerous onballer. Not by me, but by the opposition coaches who kept putting their best tagger on him.

It's all very simple California, but clearly beyond you.

As for the ridiculous argument that Newman was good enough for midfield but was more needed in defense, it's been done to death and is still just as false as it ever was.

Young small defenders are supposed to graduate to midfield - Newman never made it out of defense because we had better options. Lousy options in some cases, but better options. Players who competed against Newman at training and beat him for the opportunity. If you think for one second that sides don't pit their potential midfielders against each other at training to see who can cut it and who can't, then there's not much hope for you.

Lousy but better....but the lousy ones competed at training and beat him for the opportunity to be lousy huh? FFS, are you a relo of Tucks?

 

[Rayzorwire]

Lousy but better....but the lousy ones competed at training and beat him for the opportunity to be lousy huh?

You said it.

 

[Wally Matera]

Tuck went from the last person kept on the list in '05, to impressing the hell out of the coaching staff as an onballer at training, to a 516 possession breakout season where he was instantly elevated to our most dangerous onballer. Not by me, but by the opposition coaches who kept putting their best tagger on him.

It's all very simple California, but clearly beyond you.

As for the ridiculous argument that Newman was good enough for midfield but was more needed in defense, it's been done to death and is still just as false as it ever was.

Young small defenders are supposed to graduate to midfield - Newman never made it out of defense because we had better options. Lousy options in some cases, but better options. Players who competed against Newman at training and beat him for the opportunity. If you think for one second that sides don't pit their potential midfielders against each other at training to see who can cut it and who can't, then there's not much hope for you.

Agree 10000% on your Newman argument. Good, honest toiler that has better skills than the rest of his team-mates who are well below par. If he aint managed to make to the midfield in previous years where our we've been the laughing stock of the AFL... he wont make now, particularly as has so much more competition now.

As for Tuck... l think you're somewhat right. To call him dangerous is going over the top. He had a break out year, continues to develop and display traits that we desperately need (ie. puts his head over the ball, gets his own pill and is not a receiver). But in 2005, he was correctly and deservedly elevated to our most important midfielder purely because he had no competition.

 

[Rayzorwire]

Agree 10000% on your Newman argument. Good, honest toiler that has better skills than the rest of his team-mates who are well below par. If he aint managed to make to the midfield in previous years where our we've been the laughing stock of the AFL... he wont make now, particularly as has so much more competition now.

Yep, that's my feeling Wally, though he can kick Tivendale aside and play on a wing for this year and perhaps the next few if he's not going to be used in defense.

As for Tuck... l think you're somewhat right. To call him dangerous is going over the top.

I did say *our* most dangerous.

But in 2005, he was correctly and deservedly elevated to our most important midfielder purely because he had no competition.

Well, Coughlan did play 22 games and get almost as much ball, but he was a bit restricted by his groin, kicked poorly at times, and I thought Tuck had a better year overall. Obviously the opposition coaches saw Tuck as the greater threat, giving Coughlan a little more space to work in and less attention to deal with.

That's the point I hope we get to soon - a midfield you can't shut down by tagging one or two players because it's always full of ball winning players, any one of which can hurt opposition teams.

 

[Ando_4]

My ideal back half:

FB King Thursfield Moore
HB Bowden Schulz Tambling

Reasons:
King: Nugget. Nuff said this kid is a cert at BP.

Thursty: Ideally suited to a third defender possie but is an incredible spoil.
I do worry about his ability to play on the Gehrig's Hall's etc but I think Schulz might be given the task to match up on the bigger bodied players this year allowing Thursfield to match up on the more mobile forwards.

Moore: Seems to be coming on in leaps and bounds. It was a tossup between him and polak but I think Kelvin is more mobile, better skilled and most importantly more accountable than GP. Hopefully has a break out year. Early signs are good.

Bowden: The General of the defence returns to the creative half back roll where he plays his best football. The last two seasons he has had his LMID roll nabbed by both his brother and the unaccountable Polak. Neither of these recycled wallace recruits hold a candle to Joel in this creative role. Bowden's a gun off HB. A genuine weapon that makes us a better team when he's freed up o create.

Schulz: Some may be surprised but I think he's a monty to play CHB.
Will appreciate the one way traffic. Has excellent disposal by hand and foot for a big man and will thrive in a Richo free zone.
Unlike Polak, Schulz has the strength to be able to muscle up & play genuinely close to our previous nemises like J Brown, B Hall & F Gehrig. Sarge's biggest concerns are his motor and his weaknesses at ground level but he's a beauty in the air where he'll do most of his work allowing others to mop up.

Tambling:
Again likely another surprise.
I think Bling would thrive in the role at HB.
He will give us a shedload of speed & creativity and I honestly see him playing in much the same way as McLeod did in his breakout season. he can rotate from there onto the ball. If it falls over go to the more predictable option of McMahon.

 

[Wally Matera]

Well, Coughlan did play 22 games and get almost as much ball, but he was a bit restricted by his groin, kicked poorly at times, and I thought Tuck had a better year overall. Obviously the opposition coaches saw Tuck as the greater threat, giving Coughlan a little more space to work in and less attention to deal with. .

Coughlan played 22 games that year, but because of his groin, he couldnt kick over a jam tin. Did all his work farming the ball out to others. See game against Carlton that year for example... BOG and probably spent half the time doing 20 metres kicks or handballs out to Browny.

But in saying that, Tuck had similar issues last year and was made a scapegoat because TW couldnt (read: wouldnt) rest him. If we were travelling "reasonably" well and had something that even remotely resembled a back-up to Tuck last year, he would've been placed on the rightly injury list. He wasnt, he was crucified and therefore in the blind Richmond supporters eyes... he's no longer worth much and on the downward trend.

Pathetic really... l see anyone that shows half the guts of Cogs or Tucky... then they're in my first 5 picked. I'm sick of weak *****.

 

[Bojangles17]

My ideal back half:

FB King Thursfield Moore
HB Bowden Schulz Tambling

Reasons:
King: Nugget. Nuff said this kid is a cert at BP.

Thursty: Ideally suited to a third defender possie but is an incredible spoil.
I do worry about his ability to play on the Gehrig's Hall's etc but I think Schulz might be given the task to match up on the bigger bodied players this year allowing Thursfield to match up on the more mobile forwards.

Moore: Seems to be coming on in leaps and bounds. It was a tossup between him and polak but I think Kelvin is more mobile, better skilled and most importantly more accountable than GP. Hopefully has a break out year. Early signs are good.

Bowden: The General of the defence returns to the creative half back roll where he plays his best football. The last two seasons he has had his LMID roll nabbed by both his brother and the unaccountable Polak. Neither of these recycled wallace recruits hold a candle to Joel in this creative role. Bowden's a gun off HB. A genuine weapon that makes us a better team when he's freed up o create.

Schulz: Some may be surprised but I think he's a monty to play CHB.
Will appreciate the one way traffic. Has excellent disposal by hand and foot for a big man and will thrive in a Richo free zone.
Unlike Polak, Schulz has the strength to be able to muscle up & play genuinely close to our previous nemises like J Brown, B Hall & F Gehrig. Sarge's biggest concerns are his motor and his weaknesses at ground level but he's a beauty in the air where he'll do most of his work allowing others to mop up.

Tambling:
Again likely another surprise.
I think Bling would thrive in the role at HB.
He will give us a shedload of speed & creativity and I honestly see him playing in much the same way as McLeod did in his breakout season. he can rotate from there onto the ball. If it falls over go to the more predictable option of McMahon.

dont think RT could cut it defensively as a HB, tackling is good however size is needed for the contest...He will be a FP, part time midfielder

sarge will be a horses for courses, may miss out R1 as there is no real match up for him in back half in any case I prefer what Mcguane has to offer as he plays with plenty of ticker , a good quality for a defender

 

[Ando_4]

dont think RT could cut it defensively as a HB, tackling is good however size is needed for the contest...He will be a FP, part time midfielder

sarge will be a horses for courses, may miss out R1 as there is no real match up for him in back half in any case I prefer what Mcguane has to offer as he plays with plenty of ticker , a good quality for a defender

Well I disagree but as you say horses for courses.
In your back 6 you have basically got 3 'third talls' in Moore, McGuane and Thursfield. You could even throw in Bowden at a pinch as the 4th third tall. Schulz offers genuine size in defence.
Personally I think Bling is as good an option as McMahon if not better in that HBF role.
I am still scratching my head as to why we actually recruited him.

 

[Butane]

McMahon...Adds run and crisp delivery to the back half, blends in well with this group

McMahon will add a lot of things to the tiges backline and he will help improve the team overall. The Bulldogs with out him seem a lot slower(although our average weight has gone up).But i wouldn't say his delivery is crisp. His efficiency is around 75% by foot. Which is on the poorer side of average. And he's been around this mark for 5 years.

 

[Bojangles17]

Well I disagree but as you say horses for courses.
In your back 6 you have basically got 3 'third talls' in Moore, McGuane and Thursfield. You could even throw in Bowden at a pinch as the 4th third tall. Schulz offers genuine size in defence.
Personally I think Bling is as good an option as McMahon if not better in that HBF role.
I am still scratching my head as to why we actually recruited him.:rolleyes:

coz he attracts plenty of the pill, runs and carries it (most bounces in 2007) and generally delivers it with precision. To ask the question Id ask, have you seen the tiges play much recently....Bling would need to improve a bit to get to mcmahons level...To date he hasnt shown he has the work rate to get to enough contests or make the space...alot of work to do young RT

 

[Rayzorwire]

Coughlan played 22 games that year, but because of his groin, he couldnt kick over a jam tin. Did all his work farming the ball out to others. See game against Carlton that year for example... BOG and probably spent half the time doing 20 metres kicks or handballs out to Browny.

But in saying that, Tuck had similar issues last year and was made a scapegoat because TW couldnt (read: wouldnt) rest him. If we were travelling "reasonably" well and had something that even remotely resembled a back-up to Tuck last year, he would've been placed on the rightly injury list. He wasnt, he was crucified and therefore in the blind Richmond supporters eyes... he's no longer worth much and on the downward trend.

Pathetic really... l see anyone that shows half the guts of Cogs or Tucky... then they're in my first 5 picked. I'm sick of weak *****.

Very well said Wally, completely agree.

 

[davemills]

good analysis Mr Mills however I beg to differ that a successful team would need to contend with these hulking forwards with a few dinosaur defenders...Take the Cats for example scarlett and Harley are a couple of the best in the business yet would not physically be any bigger than our lads...Im sure a couple of other tricks come into play with throwing numbers back when playing the one or two sides that present like this

Now, while you are correct, there is a couple of things that are still missing from the equation.

1. The Cats won't have to play against...the Cats (with Tom Hawkins)
2. The Saints are HUGE as of this year... (albeit they should go down hill rapidly)
3. There have not been that many bigs in dominant sides of recent. But this trend can (and probably will) easily change (see points 1 and 2).
4. The reason the teams don't have many dominant bigs is just that there haven't been many around of recent times. ie. Tony Locket would be the Number 1 pick in most drafts today.
5. From what I gather, the RFC don't apply good 'flood' pressure and prefer to play a more 1 on 1 style....which requires 1 on 1 defenders.

 

[Ando_4]

coz he attracts plenty of the pill, runs and carries it (most bounces in 2007) and generally delivers it with precision. To ask the question Id ask, have you seen the tiges play much recently....Bling would need to improve a bit to get to mcmahons level...To date he hasnt shown he has the work rate to get to enough contests or make the space...alot of work to do young RT

I'm not convinced by any means that McMahon's disposal is any better than many players in our side and the stats would back that up.
Yes he can bounce it. Bid deal. A kick is quicker. Carrying the football is hugely overated IMO.

The thing that really pisses me off about the McMahon recruitment is I see HBF as a development position for young players. McMahon might be more effective right NOW but he's 24, how much more improvement has he got in front of him.. and don't even start me on McMahon's 'defensive' capabilities.

Forget the praccie games, Bling is coming off an ankle but I watched a lot of him last year and towards the end of the season he was showing plenty. Also by all accounts he was tearing it up on the track over summer. Many were describing him as this years Foley. IMO there's still a very good chance this will be the case.
I think Tambling has got more than enough ability to play the role off HB in much the same way Lids did early last year. I'd like to see him played there and rotated through the centre like Mcleod was from that position early in his career.

 

[skybeau]

Personally I think Bling is as good an option as McMahon if not better in that HBF role.
I am still scratching my head as to why we actually recruited him.

I think there's a guy who showed (in the St Kilda game, at the very least) that he could play that HBF role...Casserly.

Certainly I agree that Bling in the backline isn't the best option, I reckon we need the excitement he can generate in a more dangerous position, ie the midfield or up forward. If Richmond were going to trial Bling down back, it probably would have happened already. Instead, he's looking at increasing time in the midfield. It's far from a bad idea, playing him off the HBF, but I believe he's more useful elsewhere.

But I reckon its Casserly's time. He's got the build now, he still may be shaking off his injury plagued career to date, but I reckon he'd flourish if he was given a senior berth early in the season. I'd even consider putting Newman in the midfield and Cass in his spot in the back pocket, if we're determined to play McMahon on the HBF. We'd still have room for the three staples (Thursfield, Bowden and King) and another, perhaps Moore.

 

[Ando_4]

Fair post sky.
Cass just needs to get his body right and rip it up at Coburg before pressing for selection.

I am in no way suggesting Tambling become a full time HBF.
He can certainly rotate through the middle until he has the fitness to play more permanently on ball.

Also don't underestimate the importance(danger) of the HBF, it's where most attack are launched from these days.

 

[skybeau]

I am in no way suggesting Tambling become a full time HBF.
He can certainly rotate through the middle until he has the fitness to play more permanently on ball.

Also don't underestimate the importance(danger) of the HBF, it's where most attack are launched from these days.

True, but I reckon Tambling is better where he can directly impact the score, hence why I'd play him further up the ground. We don't have a great deal of players who are as elusive as Tambling, and a lot of the players that are being touted as forward line options are the marking type, leaving really only Brown as a crumber. Tambling is perfect for that position, while he builds his midfield stamina.

Having said that though, there is definite merit to giving Tambling a HBF and I wouldn't dismiss it completely. It'd give him confidence to set play up, to have a run and use those elusive skills of his. I just don't see him being able to pull off the sort of damaging kicks that Bowden, Newman (and hopefully McMahon and Casserly) can deliver with such consistency. If he runs to beyond halfway, that wouldn't be such a huge problem, of course.