I would say Lever is actually as strong as danger agilty wise no or speed no. But if Danger plays we all know he wont be 100% and after listening to him last night it will be both his agility and speed affected by the foot injury, he will play inside the 50 mostly which will suit lever and the fact Lever has the reach on height on danger he will be the perfect match up for a below par Danger playing as a stay at home forward.
Strategy Should we tag Danger?
- Thread starter crowded house
- Start date
- Tagged users None
I would say Lever is actually as strong as danger agilty wise no or speed no. But if Danger plays we all know he wont be 100% and after listening to him last night it will be both his agility and speed affected by the foot injury, he will play inside the 50 mostly which will suit lever and the fact Lever has the reach on height on danger he will be the perfect match up for a below par Danger playing as a stay at home forward.
Every time I am furious about how incompetent Pyke is, you go and show me that he could be even worse Marty. So thank you for providing a silver lining.
Pyke is just soooooooo Incompetent we have never had a coach in the history of the crows that has spent more time on top of the ladde and he has only been at the club a year and a half
This Pyke fella, he seriously knows absolutely zero about how to coach does he?
What sort of a moron is pyke his record is just pathetic
I'm suggesting we are in trouble if he plays forward.
- Oct 3, 2007
- 3,231
- 3,344
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- All OZ BBallerz,PPenguins,CBengals
No we should not tag Danger. We should tag Selwood. Brown or Kelly for me.
What was the question? Am I suggesting dodee?
No. I didn't even mention him.
- Oct 3, 2007
- 3,231
- 3,344
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- All OZ BBallerz,PPenguins,CBengals
The other of Kelly or Brown and Laird to Motlop. Danger forward use Lever.
I think the question poll is misleading, as it implies there is one person capable of nullifying Danger. We need to acknowledge that some players like Danger and Robbie Gray are special in that they can play 2 roles really well - midfield and forward. So it should really be a 'horses for coarses' approach.
If in midfield, Greenwood, Knight, Cameron, Brouch can all be tried at different intervals.
If in forward, Lever, Kelly, Talia, Smith can all be tried. Probably also depends how deep in the forward line Danger plays.
For this week's game, Danger is likely to:
- not play
- play but not fully fit (foot bone bruising won't heal that quickly). So if he plays, likely mostly time spent in the forward line. We need some guys to push and shove with Danger (ideally to step on his foot), so he needs to move his feet around, to unsettle him.
If in midfield, Greenwood, Knight, Cameron, Brouch can all be tried at different intervals.
If in forward, Lever, Kelly, Talia, Smith can all be tried. Probably also depends how deep in the forward line Danger plays.
For this week's game, Danger is likely to:
- not play
- play but not fully fit (foot bone bruising won't heal that quickly). So if he plays, likely mostly time spent in the forward line. We need some guys to push and shove with Danger (ideally to step on his foot), so he needs to move his feet around, to unsettle him.
No we shouldn't, even if he does play.
We should however tag Selwood, who doesn't cope as well with a tag and it is a proven technique to beat them
We should however tag Selwood, who doesn't cope as well with a tag and it is a proven technique to beat them
I think the thing people forget about taggers is that it's not as simple as just sending someone to him, you need to be almost 100% confident he'll get the job done, otherwise if you don't nullify that player, you're basically playing 17 against 18. Apart from Sloane or Laird I don't think any of those players could match Danger, and Sloane might not play, and we can't sacrifice what Laird does for us in defence.
On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
pirate bob
Cancelled
- Jul 11, 2017
- 1,635
- 1,406
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Physically Kelly is closer to being a better match up on Dangerfield than either Sloane or Laird, if he is going to be played primarily in the forward 50.
If he plays permanent forward he'll have a match up obviously, I was more thinking if his foot is alright and he plays midfield then they have to decide if theyll tag him. Kelly couldn't keep up with him for a whole game I don't think.
pirate bob
Cancelled
- Jul 11, 2017
- 1,635
- 1,406
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Yep - a lot of other posters believe the best option is to play close to Danger on the ball, however tagging Selwood gets a better result.
If Sloane is fit I think we send him to Selwood, as they're such similar players.
- Sep 23, 2012
- 3,739
- 5,653
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Sturt, Ozark Mountain Daredevils
Play goal side of Danger and stop the give and get, and tag Selwood
- May 10, 2016
- 16,259
- 13,252
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
No, Selwood.
I dont think there is any question if Danger plays he will play fowrard and it will be a case of man up which you do against any teams best forwards,if we are playing Sydney do you let Buddy have a free run at it
How will Geelongs midfield go without Danger this is the question, who will Selwood dish it out to
Please remove the comma and please us all.
Similar threads
