IMO our midfield would be genuinely average if not for Fyfe, Neale would need to win 20 clearances a game and Mundy would actually need to contribute every week.
-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Why not Fyfe the forward??
- Thread starter Unique Name
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
IMO our midfield would be genuinely average if not for Fyfe, Neale would need to win 20 clearances a game and Mundy would actually need to contribute every week.
I put this in the trade thread as my plan A-Z.
Anyone else notice Fyfe in the backline for a bit last night too? He'd make a decent defender because he isn't already talented enough at everything else footy related.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
DudleyDocker
Cancelled
I thought Barlow to the midfield in the last quarter was a huge factor in us getting back into the game. We seem to be so focused on Fyfe this year that Mickey looks a little lost wandering around the forward line when he has always been such a gun in the midfield. Fyfe is a gun midfielder but could also be a gun forward.
We also have Ballard and Blakely in the WAFL who are inside mids. If we can't make a winning midfield up out of "the rest", excluding Fyfe then I think our problem is the midfield, not the forward line.
This'd be a good week to test it out. Bring in one of the kids e.g. Blakely, start Fyfe up forward, and if it all goes to shit, shift him back to the middle.
Did the first 8 games of the season not count for anything?
The last three suggest that perhaps the opposition has worked us out; namely, if they control the tempo from the outset and stop our run, and lock down on Pav knowing that our second tall isn't going to kick a bag, then we'll be spending the rest of the game chasing them.
Either Ross has to change up the game plan, or he's already doing something to it that puts us in situations where we have to scrap for games to challenge the team in a different way in the middle of the season. The latter is a bit of tinfoil hat stuff, though.
Last edited:
gaskin
Hall of Famer
- Aug 19, 2009
- 39,738
- 45,310
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- LFC, Glory, Wests, Seahawks, UGA
A lot of the goals in the 1st 8 rounds came from midfielders.
Purple Jesus
not jess
Yeah, no. The 3 games you mention, 2 were wet or slippery conditions and the 3rd was against a very good side and still sorta slippery. The first 8 games were dry, free flowing, high level of skill (look at the efficiency rating vs the last 3) etc which suit high scoring. The game plan isn't some intricate fiddly thing that can be 'stopped', it's a more of a philosophy. It's effective in it's simplicity and unpredictability. We only lost one, to Richmond who are playing some very good footy. And we came off a few hard games and a short break to boot.
- Apr 16, 2014
- 10,474
- 23,458
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Thread starter
- #88
The only thing stopping Fyfe from winning the Brownlow is suspension. He's probably close to already having it locked in.
Anyway 3-4 goals as a forward plus some stints in the midfield will be enough for 2-3 votes.
It's a pretty shithouse game plan that only works when the weather is nice.
- Jul 2, 2013
- 3,353
- 11,990
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
I believe Fremantle's goal scoring problems are due to their lack of inside 50s.
Fyfe currently has the equal 4th highest i50s (62) in the league. Moving him to the forward line will at best increase your goal scoring efficiency, but will reduce your teams i50s.
Hawthorn are current clear leaders of the competition for i50s. Hawthorn also have a high (ranked 2nd) goal scoring efficiency (i50s/goals) by converting every 3.7 i50's into a goal. The average for all teams is about 4.0 (lower is better, the range, West Coast best with 3.6 to Essendon worst with 4.7). Fremantle is ranked 7th for goal scoring efficiency even though Fremantle is currently ranked 9th for team i50s.
Note: If you ignore Fremantle's last 4 matches where the ball has been slippery, Fremantle would be ranked 1st for goal scoring efficiency (414 i50s/116 goals = 3.6). So I believe there is a very strong case to argue that Fremantle's forward line is good, they just need more inside 50s and better weather ... oh and a couple more Fyfes ... in the midfield.
Fyfe currently has the equal 4th highest i50s (62) in the league. Moving him to the forward line will at best increase your goal scoring efficiency, but will reduce your teams i50s.
Hawthorn are current clear leaders of the competition for i50s. Hawthorn also have a high (ranked 2nd) goal scoring efficiency (i50s/goals) by converting every 3.7 i50's into a goal. The average for all teams is about 4.0 (lower is better, the range, West Coast best with 3.6 to Essendon worst with 4.7). Fremantle is ranked 7th for goal scoring efficiency even though Fremantle is currently ranked 9th for team i50s.
Note: If you ignore Fremantle's last 4 matches where the ball has been slippery, Fremantle would be ranked 1st for goal scoring efficiency (414 i50s/116 goals = 3.6). So I believe there is a very strong case to argue that Fremantle's forward line is good, they just need more inside 50s and better weather ... oh and a couple more Fyfes ... in the midfield.
