| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
WarrenerraW
Joined: 18 Apr 2008
Location: Melbourne
|
| Post subject: Our key forwards |  |
|
I'm convinced now that our big key forwards in Cloke and White are becoming
nothing more than decoys used to bring others into the game. Buckley talks about how much he likes to spread the goal kicking around not be so reliant on the same players. Look who we're getting most of our goals from... it's clearly not them and I'm starting to think that it's no longer part of the game plan to kick to them. Apart from kicking the first goal on the weekend, White never touched the ball for 90 mins. There's no excuse for that. Our goals came from our mids who created the opportunities for themselves running forward or from stoppages. I don't doubt that the both of them are really low on confidence but the team know they have other options now. Is it the game plan that's preventing them from having an influence, other players getting in better positions to score, are we scoring more from turnovers, on the run and stoppages. On the weekend, White and Cloke were nowhere to be found. We should be asking ourselves why? How much of it is a confidence issue and how much of it is game plan? Or a flooded forward line? Big key forwards demand the ball, White and Cloke don't. This is worrying. |
|
|
|
 |
jackcass 
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| I don't really care where our goals come from as long as we end up with more of them than our opposition. Would be nice to see Cloke and White getting among the goals more frequently but certainly isn't an issue when you are winning. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw 
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| ^^^ I am very concerned about White's lengthy spells failing to impact the play. About 2 quarters against the Crows (leaving Blair as the hit-up target, which was a tragedy) and, according to one report I read, 72 minutes on Saturday (and, given that Blair gave him a goal in the opening seconds, you'd think it wasn't just a confidence thing). Such lengthy spells are starting to become less like drifting in and out of the game and more like a gap year. |
|
|
|
|
3rd degree 
Joined: 22 Jun 2004
Location: John Wren's tote
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies4shaw wrote: | | ^^^ I am very concerned about White's lengthy spells failing to impact the play. About 2 quarters against the Crows (leaving Blair as the hit-up target, which was a tragedy) and, according to one report I read, 72 minutes on Saturday (and, given that Blair gave him a goal in the opening seconds, you'd think it wasn't just a confidence thing). Such lengthy spells are starting to become less like drifting in and out of the game and more like a gap year. |
Agreed Blairy should not be a hit up target , as good as he is he often hard to see . White and Cloke both owe our side a lot more.
_________________
" Ohhh Banksy and out comes the Note Book".
www.facebook/the hybernators |
|
|
|
|
MJ23
Joined: 28 Feb 2011
Location: Sydney
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies4shaw wrote: | | ^^^ I am very concerned about White's lengthy spells failing to impact the play. About 2 quarters against the Crows (leaving Blair as the hit-up target, which was a tragedy) and, according to one report I read, 72 minutes on Saturday (and, given that Blair gave him a goal in the opening seconds, you'd think it wasn't just a confidence thing). Such lengthy spells are starting to become less like drifting in and out of the game and more like a gap year. |
I dont think there has been enough made of the impact Goldy coming out of the forward line made. There was heaps said about how well the backline came together and were resilient however loosing that mobile defensive tall forward really hurt our whole set-up.
There has been a few comments made that Trav gets 2 players on him so the team should make better use of the pies player who should be free. I think this is what the OP is talking about and there is no doubt at times theyre happy for Trav to be a decoy. Maxy when asked how many goals should Trav be kicking in a year asked a question right back about how many he kicked in our GF year. The answer was 30. The point was clear - we are a better team with a spread of goal kickers.
As for white, I think playing both Witts and Grundy effects his ability to work into the game. The ball delivery both quality and quantity was poor and any tall forward would have struggled. There were not many repeat entries either for him to work off his man. The move of him into the ruck in the last though was telling. Not only did he win some great taps from the boundary throw if but they went to advantage. He made some great pressure acts including tackles in the middle also.
_________________
"Even when Im old and gray, I wont be able to play but Ill still love the game"
Michael Jordan |
|
|
|
|
jackcass
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| MJ23 wrote: | | Pies4shaw wrote: | | ^^^ I am very concerned about White's lengthy spells failing to impact the play. About 2 quarters against the Crows (leaving Blair as the hit-up target, which was a tragedy) and, according to one report I read, 72 minutes on Saturday (and, given that Blair gave him a goal in the opening seconds, you'd think it wasn't just a confidence thing). Such lengthy spells are starting to become less like drifting in and out of the game and more like a gap year. |
I dont think there has been enough made of the impact Goldy coming out of the forward line made. There was heaps said about how well the backline came together and were resilient however loosing that mobile defensive tall forward really hurt our whole set-up.
There has been a few comments made that Trav gets 2 players on him so the team should make better use of the pies player who should be free. I think this is what the OP is talking about and there is no doubt at times theyre happy for Trav to be a decoy. Maxy when asked how many goals should Trav be kicking in a year asked a question right back about how many he kicked in our GF year. The answer was 30. The point was clear - we are a better team with a spread of goal kickers.
As for white, I think playing both Witts and Grundy effects his ability to work into the game. The ball delivery both quality and quantity was poor and any tall forward would have struggled. There were not many repeat entries either for him to work off his man. The move of him into the ruck in the last though was telling. Not only did he win some great taps from the boundary throw if but they went to advantage. He made some great pressure acts including tackles in the middle also. |
I agree. There is still confusion in the leading patterns. You often see them all leading at the same time to similar areas. That forward line chemistry takes a while to bed down.
I don't think it's a "forwards" issue though. We've had a stable midfield but our defense has been a revolving door of changes. The purpose of having that +1 in defense is to allow a player to get freed up to run and carry. That in turn allows predictable leading by the forwards. We just haven't been able to settle the defense which impacts the cohesion of the run and carry. The return of Seedsman and Sinclair would also help that with their speed and ball use. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I see the merit of your respective observations, MJ23 and jackass - but I can't help but think that not touching the ball for 72 minutes is a little beyond the pale. Frost may have done better than that - and he missed half the game concussed.
Meanwhile, Witts kicked a goal at ground level and was the target for other attacks that led to goals, including with his work at ground level. I accept that there can be confusion etc and I wouldn't be so troubled if it was just the one poor game from White but it really isn't. The guy runs like a gazelle - I don't see any reason (other than work-rate or, if you prefer, aerobic fitness) why he couldn't get to the fall of the ball at all when he was up forward. |
|
|
|
|
MJ23
Joined: 28 Feb 2011
Location: Sydney
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^ Dont get me wrong, I said last week coming into this game that we probably needed to "rest" a tall and nominated White or Witts. I qualified that by saying that if we were playing any other team that could be the case but with the eagles talls it wouldn't happen.
Yes what Witts offered in that occasion was fantastic however the ball was kicked to him. I didn't see White have the ball kicked deliberately to him too often, particularly where it wasn't over his head and that could be his positioning etc.
Up until 3/4 time Id be dropping White as well.
After though watching what he did in the last, in the ruck I couldn't help but think how great he can be when involved in the game and what the factors were that lead him to hardly touch the ball before that.
I think this week is the perfect time to rest one of the two Rucks, play White as a forward/ruck and bring Karnesis in.
_________________
"Even when Im old and gray, I wont be able to play but Ill still love the game"
Michael Jordan |
|
|
|
|
gurugeoff
Joined: 09 Oct 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| MJ23 wrote: | ^ Up until 3/4 time Id be dropping White as well.
After though watching what he did in the last, in the ruck I couldn't help but think how great he can be when involved in the game and what the factors were that lead him to hardly touch the ball before that.
I think this week is the perfect time to rest one of the two Rucks, play White as a forward/ruck and bring Karnesis in. |
talk about stealing my thunder. I was about to write exactlty this. Witts out, Karnesis in. The following week, Grundy out, Witts in. |
|
|
|
|
WarrenerraW
Joined: 18 Apr 2008
Location: Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| jackcass wrote: | | I don't really care where our goals come from as long as we end up with more of them than our opposition. Would be nice to see Cloke and White getting among the goals more frequently but certainly isn't an issue when you are winning. |
I'd argue that it is a great issue for us no matter where and who we're getting our goals from. They are an integral part of our line up and structure and need to have an input whether that be on the score board or in general play. At the moment they seem like dummies or decoys. One of these days they're going to need to make a contribution like the rest of the team is. I just want more input from them. Unless they're injured, there's no excuse for them not to be more involved. |
|
|
|
|
WarrenerraW
Joined: 18 Apr 2008
Location: Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| 3rd degree wrote: | | Pies4shaw wrote: | | ^^^ I am very concerned about White's lengthy spells failing to impact the play. About 2 quarters against the Crows (leaving Blair as the hit-up target, which was a tragedy) and, according to one report I read, 72 minutes on Saturday (and, given that Blair gave him a goal in the opening seconds, you'd think it wasn't just a confidence thing). Such lengthy spells are starting to become less like drifting in and out of the game and more like a gap year. |
Agreed Blairy should not be a hit up target , as good as he is he often hard to see . White and Cloke both owe our side a lot more. |
Blair and Elliott are our main targets up forward now, not White and Cloke. This is disturbing because they're the ones who should be feeding off White and Cloke when they bring the ball to ground. White and Cloke need to lift their game. |
|
|
|
|
WarrenerraW
Joined: 18 Apr 2008
Location: Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| An injection of some extra speed in the midfield and across half back wouldn't go astray because it would allow Cloke and White the chance to pressure the defense into one on one contests (most times) if we were able to get the ball in quick enough. |
|
|
|
|
melliot
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| At $800k a season, that's an expensive decoy. |
|
|
|
|
jackcass
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| WarrenerraW wrote: | | jackcass wrote: | | I don't really care where our goals come from as long as we end up with more of them than our opposition. Would be nice to see Cloke and White getting among the goals more frequently but certainly isn't an issue when you are winning. |
I'd argue that it is a great issue for us no matter where and who we're getting our goals from. They are an integral part of our line up and structure and need to have an input whether that be on the score board or in general play. At the moment they seem like dummies or decoys. One of these days they're going to need to make a contribution like the rest of the team is. I just want more input from them. Unless they're injured, there's no excuse for them not to be more involved. |
I'm not suggesting I wouldn't prefer Cloke and White kicking regular bags of goals, just think it's more important to have a wide spread of contributors. As has been mentioned elsewhere, Cloke only kicked 30 goals in 2010 and it didn't diminish what we were able to achieve.
And as I've stated elsewhere in this thread, I think issues with our defense and midfield are more critical to resolve. |
|
|
|
|
WarrenerraW
Joined: 18 Apr 2008
Location: Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| jackcass wrote: | | WarrenerraW wrote: | | jackcass wrote: | | I don't really care where our goals come from as long as we end up with more of them than our opposition. Would be nice to see Cloke and White getting among the goals more frequently but certainly isn't an issue when you are winning. |
I'd argue that it is a great issue for us no matter where and who we're getting our goals from. They are an integral part of our line up and structure and need to have an input whether that be on the score board or in general play. At the moment they seem like dummies or decoys. One of these days they're going to need to make a contribution like the rest of the team is. I just want more input from them. Unless they're injured, there's no excuse for them not to be more involved. |
I'm not suggesting I wouldn't prefer Cloke and White kicking regular bags of goals, just think it's more important to have a wide spread of contributors. As has been mentioned elsewhere, Cloke only kicked 30 goals in 2010 and it didn't diminish what we were able to achieve. |
I'm all for the team having more goal kickers but Clokey and White just need to lift in general. That's fine if they're not going to pressure the scoreboard if others are more capable but they need to be more attacking in general play by taking more marks and setting up their teammates. Play them up the ground. There's no excuse for them only having 4 possessions and 1 or 2 marks a game. I just want more input from them. |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
