Worrying trend

[Just Kreuzing]

Who was BOG against Norf with four goals playing forward-midfield?

Love that supporters still cling to the 20th century notion of a midfielder being a player who starts at stoppages for four quarters. Using that argument, Murphy isn't a great midfielder. Marc wins his own ball at clearances and goes when he has to, yet he is no Ratten, Williams or Fraser Brown at the coal face. Smurf's best feature is running hard with the ball and delivering due to Judd, Curnow, Carrazzo and Robinson doing the grunt work. Harder than Campo, but both are/were better runners and kicks than in and under mids.

Even Dustin Martin is more forward-midfield after he pushes up into the middle and plays forward.

Soft in the centre

Soft in the centre

PS. Ratten was a back pocket before moving into the midfield in his 23rd year.

Shit, Ratts must of played over 500 games...., We know what you mean't Gen

 

[jezzatigerbrent]

RE CARRAZZO'S ROLE
I suspect that Ratten sees Armfield as getting alot of the run-with match ups that Carazzo was ideally set for..unless they r far stronger/bigger mids like Pendlebury/Kennedy ..in which case he'll use Gibbs [or develop Touhy for the longer term]

 

[WALKERTOBETTS]

Last two weeks we have been beaten at clearances and also allowed the opposition more shots on goal despite CFC actually having more F50 entries .
Have teams figured us out? Our strength is quick ball movement and last two games the opposition have put and extra man at stoppages to stop us getting the ball out to our outside runners.
Will Ratten find a way to overcome this? This seems to me to be a challenge for our coaching staff (and players).
Also, why are we having fewer shots on goal despite having more F50 entries ? Seems we are inefficient up fwd and at the same time are letting opposition teams get shots away too easily. Slackness then at both ends.
Are these problems due to teams figuring us out and if so Ratten must respond, or, are our players just not working hard enough?
We are in the top four and that is obviously terrific but there's no doubt we have some issues, the same problems occurring two weeks straight.

My observation is horses for courses, the only 2 issues are the one touch skills??? and how hard are our players running off the ball either to cover link ups or to spread??? some teams like to play in tight, some teams like to spread, round 3 we spread, colliewobbles like to play tight on their terms, freo like to spread on subi ground, we played tight??

 

[gbatman]

the flankers are midfielders now with how AFL is played. The wing, forward and back flanks are all pretty much similar positions with how they are played and how much time is spent around the middle of the ground. The only variation is how defensive a player is and how deep they go at times, though Yarran is the exception at times. The core players start in the center, for us that's Judd, Murphy, Carrazzo, Robinson and Curnow. Gibbs, Scotland go in there at times to increase our rotations and give blokes a rest or to help with structural changes. Simpson, Gibbs, Walker, Betts, Garlett, Yarran, Duigan, Scotland and Armfield are all our extra non-center playing midfielders. I know TheGenral might disagree but a couple of good games or acts do not make a career. I'm happy to see Gibbs rotate through the center but his position and role is playing flank/wing around the midfield and down back. He might end up playing well on the ball but I don't see it, it seems to take him out of the game which is a big loss to us as a team and his lack of consistancy in that role means he can not play it.

Re Carrazzo, the way he was going he is irreplacable. Joseph has come in to do his role but does it no where near as well. I think it takes a lot of expierence to be able to do what he was doing well. Robinson might be able to do it, i think Carlton will rotate the tag a bit now.

 

[Peete]

....
Re Carrazzo, the way he was going he is irreplacable. Joseph has come in to do his role but does it no where near as well. I think it takes a lot of expierence to be able to do what he was doing well. Robinson might be able to do it, i think Carlton will rotate the tag a bit now.

I really get a' larf' out of simplisitc analysis. The facts are that Carrazzo beat the opponent he was put onto - by getting more ball. The fact that media commentators called this good tagging - was just their way of avoiding the fact that Andrew has developed into a very strong ball getter - calling him a 'tagger' is an insult to what he accomplished .

The proof of the pudding was his beating opponents to the ball - the best way to stop an opponent btw.

Now look at Gibbs in his defensive roles - in particualr last year when called upon to 'tag' so called stars. He beat them to the ball and got the ball out. Another player put down by faint praise by too many experts not understanding just how talented this kid is.

Gibbs not being able to ge the ball in the middle? Where do you get that idea from? Gibbs is talented enough to do whatever is required of him - where ever it is required. Back forward OR mniddle.

The simple facts are that Judd has been the sacrificial lamb in turning hismself into a ball getting machine inside and hard - when he arrived at Carlton - because that is what we needed.He made his name as a hard running outside player at WC- what a super star to be able to change his game and provide CFC with teh tiem to develop players around him!

Time for others like Carrots to step up and provide multiple soureces of balland multiple sources of protection - lets leave tagging ideas to second rate teams.

 

[Jabba73]

Carrots is the simple answer to the OP.

The only player I see as being an adequate replacement for that role would be Ellard. He chases and tackles hard, can find his own ball, and never gives away a contest. If he was taller, he would be dangerous as he is found out in the air if his opponent drifts forward.

We haven't been smashed in the middle, circumstances within the games have played a part in stopping our dominance. It will be worked out over the next couple of games and all will be well again.

 

[gbatman]

Carrazzo is a tagger, he always lines up on the best opposition midfielder, his offensive game is a sweet bonus, that is why he was the best in the comp. If other taggers arent good enough to get the ball then they aren't good enough. Ling was an example of a good tagger who could hurt the opposition with the ball too. Carrazzo was doing a tagging role without being over defensive, it was great to see and abig loss for us.

 

[Peete]

Look at Carrazzos stats for the three games he has played - he has the best contested and uncontested possession rating in the team over that period - some of our players with two more games are still trying to catch up with Carrots numbers ...

If he is a tagger- I'd like 3 more just like him.

 

[Slattery_20]

Would they consider throwing Robinson that role?

 

[Jabba73]

Would they consider throwing Robinson that role?

Doesn't have the tank or footy smarts to play that role for long periods in the middle.

Will probably rotate through with others, as he gets distracted and attacks when he should defend, not a bad trait except when your role is to keep someone else out of the play.

 

[Slattery_20]

Doesn't have the tank or footy smarts to play that role for long periods in the middle.

Will probably rotate through with others, as he gets distracted and attacks when he should defend, not a bad trait except when your role is to keep someone else out of the play.

You might be right at present, but it can come, with time.
He's got the physical tools, if he can get the discipline & positioning right, and it'd make him a better player, and add another option as well.
I'm not convinced Ellard could do the job.

 

[1981]

First Ratten and now Jamison saying we have thigns we need to work on, sort of justifies this thread really.

I do believe though successful sides will be able to play strong inside and also spread well, and then run and carry. I think we have a pretty good balance, but probably could do with a bit more on the inside.

Ideally Judd wouldn't have to play inside so much.

 

[Show_Me_The_Money]

Agreed, it doesnt seem too long ago some of us were thinking he was a liability at times and his time was limited.

How wrong can one be. Now it seems he's one of our most important players. Strong tough player with great endurance who can cover an opposition mid whilst dominating in and under the packs and a handy link up player How's that for multi-tasking/versatility?

The most adaptable footballer in the competition. Is anyone else in the comp able to pull off the jobs he does? Carrazzo is one of the fittest players in the comp and is still going full speed in the last 10 minutes of the game. He beats his opponent by standing in front of him and beating him to the ball. Simple yet very effective. Backs himself in every time and usually pulls it off. He of course comes with a couple of howling clangers but really who gives a fork? The guy can play, make no mistake.

 

[JigsawPuzzle]

Doesn't bother me in the slightest. We have the most talented and powerful midfield in the AFL, so it makes sense for them to put an extra number at stoppages, BUT by doing that we end up with a loose man elsewhere. That's the key point. If they put an extra number in the middle and manage to break even there we've actually "won". The reason opposition do that is because no other team has the list talent to go one-out with our midfield.

Did you watch the Essendon game?

The reason you lost (okay, injuries didn't help) was because they had an extra number at the stoppage, they won clearance after clearance (thanks to dominant ruck work), they spread the ball extremely well, their run and carry was outstanding.

You had Gibbs as the loose man across half back, but Essendon would clear from a stoppage, run and carry and kick it OVER Gibbs' head, so he couldn't influence the contest, for the first 3 quarters, Gibbs was a non-factor, it's not until he moved up to the stoppages in the final quarter did you start getting some useful attacking play.

Yes, you have arguably the strongest midfield in the comp, but all your opponents will now keep the extra man around the stoppages, because Ratten wants to play Gibbs loose across half back, if they follow the same plan that Essendon used, you'll get beaten by sides a lot worse than Essendon.

If the opposition is also playing a loose man in defence, fine - then leave Gibbs there, but your defence has improved ten-fold over the past two seasons and even more-so with Henderson playing career best footy, you should back you defenders to beat their opponents without the help of Gibbs, he should be up at the stoppages impacting the game and getting forward and kicking goals.

That's where Gibbs plays his best football.

 

[Blue since 72]

you should back you defenders to beat their opponents without the help of Gibbs, he should be up at the stoppages impacting the game and getting forward and kicking goals.

That's where Gibbs plays his best football.

Here here.

 

[falaufel]

The extra man back is fine, but while teams are throwing pagans paddock at us he needs to stay in the defensive 50. So not Gibbs, Duigan would be the man for it. They can lob the ball and try to run back on it, Duigs would certainly make them earn it...

 

[Peete]

Good thoughts on Gibbs from StKilda watcher - but

We lost against Essendon because the team was structured and played - expecting to win the ball at every clearance. Essendon ( sans Carrazzo in our team) were able to beat our midfield at clearances. However our team structures were not changed to accomodate this unexpected loss at bounce and clearance - almost as if Ratten didnt believe it was happenning - look at footage of the game he looked shell shocked.

The performance of our ruckmen was ordinary and we couldnt get any run during 2nd and 3rd quarters. The margin was exagerrated by particularly poor kicking during this period and particularly good kicking from Essendon.

Getting back nearly 50 points deficit was made all the more difficult because we were playing with injuries to Laidler and Armfield and Curnow.

Put things simply - everything went Essendon's way for two quarters. Gibbs playing more in contests as on baller in Q4 proved a good move at teh time- and I agree he would be a great contested ball player.

Against Fremantle our ruckmen didnt dominate as expected with no Sandilands. Carrazzo's loss was highlighted by the fact that for much of the game whilst we won the taps - Freemantle won the clearances...( remember how often Judd was playing forward?)

Fortunately we didnt have to play with an empty bench aginst Freemantle - and notably we didnt have to carry Bower OR McLean in that game hence lower turnover numbers and Robinson cut his tendancy to kick to no one and also reduced turnovers - three major negative factors in the Essendon game which were removed.

Freemantle aslo did not have the ability to kick over our HB line of defence - it played much smarter in this game as a unit.- there were no easy over the top goals - Henderson had a blinder against Pavlich - almost as good as his game aginmst Collingwood- which was outstanding.

Without Yarron as running rebound we lacked a multi point rebound capability - and had to rely mostly on a Stockland kick to Simpson or Murphy as the get out play.

Eddie Betts gave us the lift in midfield we needed in Q3 - an outstanding contribution for 15 minutes of gut running effort.

Our midfield isnt playing as well as it might just yet. Forget tags on Judd as a factoir it isnt new news.

As for Gibbsy - he was an extra layer of insurance for us playing behind clearnaces - if we won more ball at bounces and trusted our defence - it woudl free him to join the contested ball action and add a touch of class for 4 quarters in tight.

(Whilst Carrazzo is out ) My perfect set up would see Warnoch tapping to Kreuzer or Gibbs from there to Judd and Murphy on the recieving end running hard...Robinson/Curnow to do rotations.

Looking forward to teh St Kilda match - one of the real tests we are going to have this year. A win sets up a serious final 4 position for us.

 

[TOPBLUE_25]

Did you watch the Essendon game?

The reason you lost (okay, injuries didn't help) was because they had an extra number at the stoppage, they won clearance after clearance (thanks to dominant ruck work), they spread the ball extremely well, their run and carry was outstanding.

You had Gibbs as the loose man across half back, but Essendon would clear from a stoppage, run and carry and kick it OVER Gibbs' head, so he couldn't influence the contest, for the first 3 quarters, Gibbs was a non-factor, it's not until he moved up to the stoppages in the final quarter did you start getting some useful attacking play.

Yes, you have arguably the strongest midfield in the comp, but all your opponents will now keep the extra man around the stoppages, because Ratten wants to play Gibbs loose across half back, if they follow the same plan that Essendon used, you'll get beaten by sides a lot worse than Essendon.

If the opposition is also playing a loose man in defence, fine - then leave Gibbs there, but your defence has improved ten-fold over the past two seasons and even more-so with Henderson playing career best footy, you should back you defenders to beat their opponents without the help of Gibbs, he should be up at the stoppages impacting the game and getting forward and kicking goals.

That's where Gibbs plays his best football.

This is spot on.

 

[bobsyouruncle]

Hardly a trend yet, but if it happens next week, then I'll be concerned!

I'm getting concerned

 

[gbatman]

Gibbs started on the ball, had little impact on the game, was moved to half back/wing where he was able to play the role he is best at and he carved things up and helped change the moment of the game in our direction. We lose far too much and get far to little from him playing him on the ball, I just don't get why Carlton supporters think he should be played there. I would say that 5% of his games on the ball are very good and the rest are just ordinary but just about all his games from half back and the wing are excellent and damaging to the opposition.

Yes we need another really good onballer, especially with Carrazzo injured and no it's not Gibbs. Mclean is playing good footy in the VFL in this role but I don't think he is the type of player that fits our style of play. Ellard is just a good average player who tries hard and tackles well but just lacks some size to get the ball out of there at a high level. Curnow was probably a bit of a loss today. Just need a player with skill, athleticism who can play onball and has plenty of size and strength.

What is a concern is we have lost the clearances in the last three games. Could have a lot to do with losing Carrazzo who was so good in this area. Good clearance players are very hard to replace. They are a lot like talls, generally hard to draft a good one and take a few years to make it. We just need that extra quality onballer. The fact we are winning when losing the clearances is a credit to our backline's ability to read things, win the footy and bring it out cleanly and at pace. This has a lot to do with Jamison, Henderson, Gibbs, Laidler, Yarran, Scotland and Duigan being very good at their roles. You are playing with fire trying to disrupt these players from their roles. Not sure we can win a flag with our clearance rate being the way it is. We are winning in the ruck, we need to find a way to start winning this statistic.

 

[serenityNow]

Did you watch the Essendon game?

The reason you lost (okay, injuries didn't help) was because they had an extra number at the stoppage, they won clearance after clearance (thanks to dominant ruck work), they spread the ball extremely well, their run and carry was outstanding.

You had Gibbs as the loose man across half back, but Essendon would clear from a stoppage, run and carry and kick it OVER Gibbs' head, so he couldn't influence the contest, for the first 3 quarters, Gibbs was a non-factor, it's not until he moved up to the stoppages in the final quarter did you start getting some useful attacking play.

Yes, you have arguably the strongest midfield in the comp, but all your opponents will now keep the extra man around the stoppages, because Ratten wants to play Gibbs loose across half back, if they follow the same plan that Essendon used, you'll get beaten by sides a lot worse than Essendon.

If the opposition is also playing a loose man in defence, fine - then leave Gibbs there, but your defence has improved ten-fold over the past two seasons and even more-so with Henderson playing career best footy, you should back you defenders to beat their opponents without the help of Gibbs, he should be up at the stoppages impacting the game and getting forward and kicking goals.

That's where Gibbs plays his best football.

Good post

 

[1981]

3 weeks in a row now we have been beaten at clearances, is that a trend now ?????

 

[ESKIE]

Yes its a maswsive concern , 3 weeks it needs to stop, the coaching panel need to address it...

 

[mediumsizered]

Clearance stats need to looked at in perspective.

With the way the game is played now, many clearances are just indiscriminate kicks or handballs out of a pack. Of more importance is the next possession after the clearance. That is why you can lose the clearances & still win a game.

 

[gbatman]

The last time we won the clearances was against Collingwood and we really put them to the sword. We can not be beaten by anyone if we win the clearances we are unstoppable so this is just about the final area we need to improve on to bring home a premiership. We set up so well and have such a strong backline that most of our attacks start from there. So often the opposition get it out of the center, it's turned over almost immediately by one of either Jamison, Laidler, Duigan, Gibbs, Scotland, Touhy, Henderson or Yarran etc then next thing it's in our forward line. Won't work all the time unfortunately, we need more of our attacks to start from the center bounces.

I just recon losing Carrazzo has effected us here a hell of a lot more than most of us thought it would as we have lost the clearances in all the games he's been missing but won them in all the games he has played. We really lost two players when we lost him because he was shutting the oppositions best down while winning big numbers and clearances.