Opinion Versatility Vs True Positions

[Willo_]

I have seen many posters of the last 18 months at least mention/moan about the way our side is being developed and the way players are being played.

We have a coaching staff who seem to want to make players capable of being able to play multiple roles if called upon. The logic is obviously in the modern game flexibility is a must, teams are often made up of 7 or 8 key players that never move and the rest rotating utilities.

But are we doing this at the detriment of our own players development? Over this off season alone we are hearing that Jed Bews a defender is being played as a forward, Harry Taylor who has been one of the top defenders at our club is being played as a forward. We insisted on playing Billie Smedts as a backman despite his best showings being as a forward, Jordan Murdoch is currently going through similar.. and so on and so forth..

I understand the need for flexibility and have no doubt that there is a need for it, but I feel the balance is being skewed too far, we seem to be trying to have a side of 3 or 4 locks and the rest able to play anywhere, we even heard that as a reason why Jimmy was kept over SJ for last season... as he could play in 3 areas of the ground (despite no one wanting to see him down in defense)

Are we placing too high an emphasis on developing people in all areas? Is this at a cost at allowing them to excel in their most natural area? Does this strengthen the side as we have multiple options for any situation?

I feel this is an interesting topic for discussion, and hope no one takes it as a 'whine' I am simply interested to hear others views on it, leaving aside any bias against the coach as I would prefer this not degenerate into a Scott bashing thread.

 

[catempire]

Good topic Willo_.

I'd say that it starts earlier than development - Wells has always had a penchant for versatility in his selections. The Mackie/Smedts/Thurlow mid sized player who can play anywhere is his number one trademark (the injury slider being the other).

 

[STPer18]

Why have an elite on-baller when you can have an average small/medium-forward-flanker/pocket who is versatile enough to switch into an average small/medium-lockdown/rebound-defender, and if the team demands it, still being versatile enough to be an average inside/outside-midfielder and tap ruckman? There's so much value to be had.

When the AFL finally come to their senses and implement a rule where after every goal everyone must rotate one position sideways, and by the end of the match the 22 players have played in each and every position at least once, we will be so far ahead of the other clubs.

 

[Willo_]

I should also add that I have no issue with a young developing mid developing as a small forward, but I do wonder if we are better at times putting time into a genuine small forward.
Linc seems to be one that is not talked about as anywhere other than a sml forward and I like that as he can hone and develop his craft there... but a Lang breaking into the team as a Half forward I think is perfectly fine.. its a foot in the door, and provided it is done right he should get mid minutes and then gradually increase them to be a mid mainly who rests forward.

 

[Partridge]

I second that, excellent discussion point Willo_.

I'm very comfortably in the 'true position' category. I'd rather a player becomes proficient in one spot first, as opposed to kinda sorta being ok in a few. I'm not so sure many if any of our current team are truly versatile - as in being able to play quality football in multiple roles. I think the focus on it, as you've already stated, has seriously hindered the development of Murdoch, and Smedts, and I can't see it working for Bews. Then when I think of either our best or most important players, the names that come up are Dangerfield, Selwood, and Hawkins. 'Versatile' isn't the word that comes to mind with them.

 

[dazbroncos]

The term flexible has become too important IMO. Gone are the days of single only position players. That said, not every player needs to be multidisciplinary.

It should not be mandated that all players play multiple positions. I dont have an issue asking a defender at training to play forward, and vice versa, to learn the nuances of their positions but the seemingly random shuffling of players all over the place gets a bit much.

Murda and Smedts come to mind. Neither seemed comfortable at defending really and while I get the overall principle, if players cant adapt then so be it. There a certain points where it just has to be accepted.

Bews, I could see it working given ive seen him playing a very attacking role a few times and it had decent results.

Blitz is one where it should be persisted with IMO.

Overall, IMO it has to be a case by case application and when it doesnt work let it go.

GO Catters

 

[Rondog]

Flexibility should be a luxury not a given. I would love it they thought a bit like the NFL on this especially for key position players. We should have a starting team i.e.best positional players. That shouldn't change throughout the year the rest of the squad are for injury, form or circumstance.

 

[cynical]

it's just unnecessary

a couple of smalls should be able to play mid/def or mid/for but not all of them

I dont think you need a KPP who has to play at the other end, would only be necessary if you play a small backline and someone is getting dominated by a tall

the players need clear roles and clear structures

the problem is the coach just wants to play the best players regardless of structures so we get Bartel playing forward despite being too slow, Blicavs roaming around the midfield without having the skills and an overly tall backline cos he doesnt want to drop a tall

i dont expect much to change

 

[BlightysCats]

I should also add that I have no issue with a young developing mid developing as a small forward, but I do wonder if we are better at times putting time into a genuine small forward.
Linc seems to be one that is not talked about as anywhere other than a sml forward and I like that as he can hone and develop his craft there... but a Lang breaking into the team as a Half forward I think is perfectly fine.. its a foot in the door, and provided it is done right he should get mid minutes and then gradually increase them to be a mid mainly who rests forward.

Versatility is great as long as it's nuanced to suit the particular players build, natural instincts, and desire, after all you're not going to get much out of a player playing in a position he doesn't want to play in.

 

[00VicWard001]

The term flexible has become too important IMO. Gone are the days of single only position players. That said, not every player needs to be multidisciplinary.

It should not be mandated that all players play multiple positions. I dont have an issue asking a defender at training to play forward, and vice versa, to learn the nuances of their positions but the seemingly random shuffling of players all over the place gets a bit much.

Murda and Smedts come to mind. Neither seemed comfortable at defending really and while I get the overall principle, if players cant adapt then so be it. There a certain points where it just has to be accepted.

Bews, I could see it working given ive seen him playing a very attacking role a few times and it had decent results.

Blitz is one where it should be persisted with IMO.

Overall, IMO it has to be a case by case application and when it doesnt work let it go.

GO Catters

I've always noticed that Bews has an instinct to attack. Sort of like the Caddy style.

I think Bews knows he's fast and that he is strong, so he's willing to charge through.

This instinct is something that can be an absolute weapon for us if harnessed right.

 

[you pick one]

I second that, excellent discussion point Willo_.

I'm very comfortably in the 'true position' category. I'd rather a player becomes proficient in one spot first, as opposed to kinda sorta being ok in a few. I'm not so sure many if any of our current team are truly versatile - as in being able to play quality football in multiple roles. I think the focus on it, as you've already stated, has seriously hindered the development of Murdoch, and Smedts, and I can't see it working for Bews. Then when I think of either our best or most important players, the names that come up are Dangerfield, Selwood, and Hawkins. 'Versatile' isn't the word that comes to mind with them.

This is something you and I have been on the same page with for quite some time,become proficient in your best position or area of the ground first and if needs be add strings to your bow latter.

 

[Whit3y]

all i want is midfielders that kick goals, kicking goals while either playing in the midfield or in the forward line, think chapman or johnson or stokes

let the backman play in the backline, lets not get too cute

bews in the forward line, hyphen in the forward line, taylor in the forward line, lonergan in the forward line is just dumb in my book

 

[Willo_]

let the backman play in the backline, lets not get too cute

bews in the forward line, hyphen in the forward line, taylor in the forward line, lonergan in the forward line is just dumb in my book

I do wonder if we are worried what we have isn't good enough, so are trying to fit a square peg in a round hole and hope that it works.

 

[Cataholic]

Just like a cricket team an all-rounder can be beneficial, but the tipping point is very fine.

You simply can't replace specialist batsmen / bowlers.

Around them you can build versatility, but you can't replace them.

 

[smelly cat]

Good topic Willo_.

I'd say that it starts earlier than development - Wells has always had a penchant for versatility in his selections. The Mackie/Smedts/Thurlow mid sized player who can play anywhere is his number one trademark (the injury slider being the other).

Smedts couldn't even play in one position

 

[Partridge]

I do wonder if we are worried what we have isn't good enough, so are trying to fit a square peg in a round hole and hope that it works.

It's a good point.

That could explain why they shifted Corey, Bartel, and Kelly all to defence when they were done as midfielders rather than trying young defenders.

 

[Turbocat]

I think there are no positions anymore. Really its about single role or multiple role players.

Single role players better be dam good at what they do but in an idealistic world , if you had the best of the best would you really need multiple role players? Maybe. Different matchup can cause a change but if you were the best its the other side that has to cope with you , not the other way round. So multiple roles seem to be a way to maximise talent and there are only a few single role players in each side and players must either be very good or at the least be flexible.

Id question the wisdom of moving young players too much , before they have a real solid grasp on one role and can be a positive for the side with that role. Id prefer not to see Kolo forward for eg. I guess if the player is high level talent it may not matter as much but I feel our development of youth has been handicapped to a degree by maintaining us in the premiership zone. Sides out of the zone would be more likely to add more youth even at an immediate cost. It will be interesting to watch what they do with Parfitt , cause he really looks like a mid more than anything else.

 

[Vdubs]

all i want is midfielders that kick goals, kicking goals while either playing in the midfield or in the forward line, think chapman or johnson or stokes

let the backman play in the backline, lets not get too cute

bews in the forward line, hyphen in the forward line, taylor in the forward line, lonergan in the forward line is just dumb in my book

It can look like that.
But do we always know a player's natural position?
Who went to the 07 VFL GF?
I was privileged and reduced to tears watching Tom Lonergan tear the game open with many goals in one quarter. He was tried there in 08 , not great results, but since then, he has made his name as a KB. He lost his kidney playing KB. But, he actually can play at either end.
Henderson has played many excellent games for Carlton as a KF, more as a KB with us.
Some players at TAC level, are put in positions by coaches and will play there to get a game and help the team out, but many HBF would jump at the chance to play forward.
Mackie started as a HFF, but then went to the wing, and eventually HBF.
Paul Salmon had been an AA FF (if he wasn't, he should have been, he was that dominant!!), and AA ruck.
John Barnes started out as a KF, but quickly at Geelong, became an excellent mobile follower.
We could go on forever with examples, but unless you have a dead-set lock in champion CHF, FF, or CHB etc I am all for players being able to play where needed for the team.(and I am more than happy for Taylor to be tried out where we have an issue-he is one of our classiest talls with a penchant for goals)
Gary Ayers was a champion BP, but actually won a NS going into the MF.....
Where was Wanganeen best suited?
Or even GAS?

 

[Seeds]

I don't think we value versatility over set positions with exception for Blicavs and previously Bartel whose career didn't reach its potential because of versatility. However in other areas I think we lack versatility.

Bews isn't playing forward to be versatile. I think they are playing him forward because they don't see a spot for him in defence. Likewise with Taylor it's about a lack of key forward rather than the need to be versatile that has seen him move forward.

 

[Hinkley29]

I think there is no positions anymore. Really its about single role or multiple role players.

Single role players better be dam good at what they do but in an idealistic world , if you had the best of the best would you really need multiple role players? Maybe. Different matchup can cause a change but if you were the best its the other side that has to cope with you , not the other way round. So multiple roles seem to be a way to maximise talent and there are only a few single role players in each side and players must either be very good or at the least be flexible.

Id question the wisdom of moving young players too much , before they have a real solid grasp on one role and can be a positive for the side with that role. Id prefer not to see Kolo forward for eg. I guess if the player is high level talent it may not matter as much but I feel our development of youth has been handicapped to a degree by maintaining us in the premiership zone. Sides out of the zone would be more likely to add more youth even at an immediate cost. It will be interesting to watch what they do with Parfitt , cause he really looks like a mid more than anything else.

I agree with this. The concept of "positions" as we have traditionally known them is an antiquated concept that has little relevance to today's footy. It still makes me laugh when clubs go through the charade of selecting players in positions such as "Forward Pocket" or "Half Back Flank", etc and then the talking heads get all bent out of shape analysing the implications of said selections when in reality these positions don't even exist anymore.

In 90% of the team, players aren't selected on the basis of whether they can play a specific position, they are selected based on what skills they bring to the team, regardless of where on the ground this happens to be. Put simply, the basic skills you need to have in your team are:
- guys who are good at winning the contest (either ground level or marking),
- guys who are good at using the ball (which helps you keep the ball once you have it), and
- guys who are good at defending once the other team has it.
The very good players can do all 3, if you specialise in 1 you need to be elite at that one skill, and the rest of the team need to be able to do 2 out of 3. The position on the ground that these skills are exhibited is almost irrelevant because the running power of the modern player means that apart from 2 or 3 players on each team, all players are expected to contribute across the entire field. Positions are almost meaningless.

It is why I don't take much notice when a player like Bews is seen spending more time in the forward half during meaningless preseason matches. We are trying all sorts of things in the preseason - that is specifically what preseason is for. Maybe we want him to work on his ball usage or winning contested footy and decided that the best way for him to do that is to spend more time in the forward half of the ground in the preseason. This doesn't mean that we want him to be a specialist "forward pocket" (whatever that means in today's footy) when the season proper starts.

 

[terry_bright]

Bews isn't playing forward to be versatile. I think they are playing him forward because they don't see a spot for him in defence. Likewise with Taylor it's about a lack of key forward rather than the need to be versatile that has seen him move forward.

I think it's more a case of needing some who can apply defensive pressure in the forward half (a la, Rooke & L.Picken (W.B)). Outside of McCarthy, we were pretty ordinary in applying forward half defensive pressure last year. Hawkins, Menzel, Motlop, Kersten & Caddy didn't do enough with that aspect of their game last year.

 

[Vdubs]

I don't think we value versatility over set positions with exception for Blicavs and previously Bartel whose career didn't reach its potential because of versatility. However in other areas I think we lack versatility.

Bews isn't playing forward to be versatile. I think they are playing him forward because I don't see a spot for him in defence. Likewise with Taylor it's about a lack of key forward rather than the need to be versatile that has seen him move forward.

EDITED FOR DISCUSSON

 

[Seeds]

I think it's more a case of needing some who can apply defensive pressure in the forward half (a la, Rooke & L.Picken (W.B)). Outside of McCarthy, we were pretty ordinary in applying forward half defensive pressure last year. Hawkins, Menzel, Motlop, Kersten & Caddy didn't do enough with that aspect of their game last year.

Yes its more about where they see him as potentially supplying the most value given both his abilities and the nature of our list and perhaps they now see that as a forward.

 

[Daniel McL]

Chris Scott on Blicavs today:

 

[Vdubs]

I think it's more a case of needing some who can apply defensive pressure in the forward half (a la, Rooke & L.Picken (W.B)). Outside of McCarthy, we were pretty ordinary in applying forward half defensive pressure last year. Hawkins, Menzel, Motlop, Kersten & Caddy didn't do enough with that aspect of their game last year.

We know for certain Bews can get some extra tuition from close sources on how to be that defensive forward.

I thought Picken has turned himself into an absolutely outstanding player, the best of his "type" in the comp, maybe. Whatever his type is, he is the epitome of versatile for his height, as well as being a brilliant mark.