The petrenko position

[1970crow]

Apologies if already posted.

I feel sorry for pets. His role is to;

1. Avoid getting the ball.
2. Get close to the contest, but don't get close enough to actually gain possession.
3. Having gotten near a contest, don't try and get the pill, wait for someone to get it and then tackle.

My personal feeling is that the best form of defensive forward is one who continually gets the nut themselves. If they dont get it then theyre close enough to apply pressure.

My question is. Are we the only team in the league that asks a forward to run around and not try any get the ball. Obviously, that player isn't playing as a lock-down on the opposition playmaker.

 

[1990crow]

1. His role is not to avoid getting the ball.

 

[1970crow]

1. His role is not to avoid getting the ball.

Are you sure.

 

[hugecannon]

I'd love to see Riley given a few weeks in this role, great tackler, good pace, excellent lateral movement, skills are solid (definitely an improvement on Pets) can push into the midfield if needed. Unfortunately Pets doesn't do enough damage for mine, and they're unwilling to try him in different positions that he's better suited for such as small defender.

 

[crowded house]

I'd like to see a forward line where we don't rely on a single person to provide all our forward pressure.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

Are you sure.

Yep, he just can not get it.

 

[smoovy]

I get annoyed at the notion that this role is needed.

Who is to say we really need a defensive forward? If we need one, then why only one? Why not 2, 3 or 4?

I've got a whacky idea, how about a forward that just stays in the 50 and kicks goals? Could it work?

 

[1970crow]

I get annoyed at the notion that this role is needed.

Who is to say we really need a defensive forward? If we need one, then why only one? Why not 2, 3 or 4?

I've got a whacky idea, how about a forward that just stays in the 50 and kicks goals? Could it work?

Are you talking about forward players who kick goals?? Don't think so bro!!

 

[1970crow]

I still wonder. Are we the only team in the comp who have this role??

 

[smoovy]

Are you talking about forward players who kick goals?? Don't think so bro!!

When we were getting flogged by the Swans and because we had to had nothing to lose I would've said to Jenkins/Lynch/Petrenko...someone, just stay in the goal square and don't move.

I would be interested to see what the defensive reaction to that would've been. Would the defender push up the ground and just leave the forward there on his own? My guess is that that they would probably still push up the ground, but I wonder how much they would be willing to risk seeing the ball go over their head to an unmarked forward.

 

[smoovy]

I still wonder. Are we the only team in the comp who have this role??

No Melbourne has 18 of these roles

 

[Slippery Pete]

I get annoyed at the notion that this role is needed.

Who is to say we really need a defensive forward? If we need one, then why only one? Why not 2, 3 or 4?

I've got a whacky idea, how about a forward that just stays in the 50 and kicks goals? Could it work?

This is my favourite post of the year so far.

Assistant and line coaches in the AFL have become a large pack of herd animals. Gameplans have become about trends rather than experience, about populist views rather than individual views. If I hear one more time from our coaching panel that Johncock can't play back because of "the way the game is going" I will SPEW UP.

 

[1970crow]

No Melbourne has 18 of these roles

Spot on. This thread is about destroying pets fantastic natural insticts. Put him behind the ball and he will be ok. Create a false position and he will fail like everyone else.

 

[1970crow]

This is my favourite post of the year so far.

Assistant and line coaches in the AFL have become a large pack of herd animals. Gameplans have become about trends rather than experience, about populist views rather than individual views. If I hear one more time from our coaching panel that Johncock can't play back because of "the way the game is going" I will SPEW UP.

It may not have even been about that. Sando said stiff let them down last year and his days in defense are gone. I'd live to know the difference benchmarks that stiff and reilly are judged upon.

 

[SugarShane]

1. His role is not to avoid getting the ball.

It's just a little something extra he brings on his own.

 

[1970crow]

I'd like to see a forward line where we don't rely on a single person to provide all our forward pressure.

I'd like to see pets played as a lock down defender. He could, seriously, make forwards think about getting the ball.

 

[1970crow]

I'd like to see a forward line where we don't rely on a single person to provide all our forward pressure.

Id like to see a forward line that creates pressure because they get the nut. Is that too much to ask for

 

[xchadders]

bit of a dodgy post... a defensive forward isnt someone who doesnt get the ball. they SHOULD be getting goals, its just someone who is supposed to work their butt off going the other way and tackle the crap out of them in the f50, something lacking in the history of forwards in the afl. that said, they should all be at a level where they work hard when they dont have the ball. its just that pets is probably the quickest.

 

[1970crow]

bit of a dodgy post... a defensive forward isnt someone who doesnt get the ball. they SHOULD be getting goals, its just someone who is supposed to work their butt off going the other way and tackle the crap out of them in the f50, something lacking in the history of forwards in the afl. that said, they should all be at a level where they work hard when they dont have the ball. its just that pets is probably the quickest.

And if he attacked the ball then he'd be ok. But he's not allowed to attack the ball. They have ruined pets natural instinct. This is to get the nut and pets is the bloke to do it.

 

[xchadders]

And if he attacked the ball then he'd be ok. But he's not allowed to attack the ball. They have ruined pets natural instinct. This is to get the nut and pets is the bloke to do it.

what do you mean hes not allowed to attack the ball? of course he is...

 

[beartoo]

Petrenko is not under instruction not to get the ball. That would be plain silly. The problem is that he doesn't get it often enough to worry the bloke on him, and he doesn't lock anyone down. I'm unsure why he is in the side at the expense of blokes that might kick a goal or two and would most likely lay as many tackles as he does.

 

[Draft Bored]

Have we all forgotten what he did three weeks ago?

I don't mind him having two bad weeks after that point and goal.

"Can you believe it? It's EXTRAORDINARY!"

 

[Elite Crow]

Shouldn't all our forwards be required to kick goals and tackle? After all wasn't that Tex's crime?

 

[Schulzycrow]

Have we all forgotten what he did three weeks ago?

I don't mind him having two bad weeks after that point and goal.

"Can you believe it? It's EXTRAORDINARY!"

Fair call. Good call. But one good game amongst plenty of not up to standard games means someone else needs to be tried. We need two forwards who can chase, tackle, crumb the packs and kick goals and Pets and Porps just ain't getting the job done. Time to give Wright and Jaensch a go.

 

[Mr_Moogle]

Petrenko is like the anti-Vince. He works hard enough, but he just doesn't have the talent.