That's a bit strong isn't it? I fully agree.I actively hate the idea of SPS becoming a backman. He's too much a natural mid for it for one, and his skills at extricating the ball from a contested situation to clear advantage are waaaay too valuable to throw him behind the ball. Around the stoppage is the perfect place for him.
Having said that, you're not wrong that we certainly need some more quality in the back half, some silk by foot. Part of our problem is that Plow's role is as much organiser as stopper; he's the mature player down there, and when Weitering went off he became the bloke that runs the back six. He's essentially third in line, behind Doc and Jacob; of course he's going to bite off more than he can chew. On one hand, we don't live in an ideal world, we're rarely going to have our full best back six available together; on the other, Plow cops it because he's effectively a bandaid for us, a jack of all trades that is expected to cover for a positional or leadership hole. He looks s**t when we're under siege or when a game is this close, because he's playing the hardest role across the back six; you cannot simply be all things. He cannot be the small defender and the intercept marker and the third man up and the playmaker at the same time; imagine how long your apprenticeship would be to collect all the skills needed to be that bloke. How long'd it take Dylan Grimes to be able to do most of that? And that's with Richmond supporters calling for his head for the better part of 10 years; and people on the Carlton board reckon we do whipping boys!
Plowman is average by foot, but he is required to be exceptional sometimes and gets found out. I'd sooner be blaming Weitering's injury, Simpson's decline, Newman's scattergun and Jones' chaotic influence than Plow's disposal by foot.