What's our ideal best 23 for September?
Moderator: bbmods
-
Damien
- Posts: 5718
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 1999 7:01 pm
- Location: Croydon Vic
- Has liked: 3 times
- Been liked: 11 times
Love Leggy but it’s a no brainer for me between the two of them. Johnny Noble every day of the week. Noble gets so much more pill than Markov. Provides more overlap run too.RudeBoy wrote:The most difficult decision Fly will need to make imo, is whether to go into a finals campaign with Noble or Markov. There doesn't seem to be a spot for them both, given the form of other players in our defensive line-up. Noble worked his butt off over the pre-season to prove his worth to Fly, and for the most part, he has had a good season. He should be commended for responding to his dropping from our 2023 finals campaign, in such a determined and positive manner. However, his form seems to have dropped off a little, just at the time that other players, Markov among them, are returning from injury.
'Collingwood are the Bradmans of Football'
The Herald - 1930
The Herald - 1930
-
lazzadesilva
- Posts: 2206
- Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2003 7:01 pm
- Has liked: 2 times
- Been liked: 51 times
Extremely tough choice but having considered the pros and cons, I have decided to go with Nobes. I just have this gut feeling that he will play out of his skin to redeem the sadness of being dropped for the GF last season. Having not sulked or had a hissy fit, he put his head down and worked hard on his game. He deserves to play ahead of Markov, just.
I term the current Collingwood attack based strategy “Unceasing Waves” like on a stormy and windy day with rough seas. A Perfect Storm 
-
Gerry Cooper
- Posts: 856
- Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 7:49 am
- Has liked: 115 times
- Been liked: 33 times
I'm more Markov than Noble. Noble still is poor at shutting down his opponents. He is a fair attacking player and has made improvements in that sphere but his actual defending skills often aren't good enough and against better teams will cost us. Markov has better defensive skills as well as providing some run and attack. Markov gets my vote.
If the club do want to employ Noble's run - why not try him on a wing and keep Markov at half back? Works for me.
If the club do want to employ Noble's run - why not try him on a wing and keep Markov at half back? Works for me.
We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true.�
-
eddiesmith
- Posts: 12383
- Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 11:21 pm
- Location: Lexus Centre
- Has liked: 8 times
- Been liked: 16 times
Yep, there have been plenty of games where he has been quiet for 3 qtrs, but in the last when the game is there to be won, he’s the difference. That’s usually due to players tiring and no longer being able to run 2-3 players at him in contests and his height stands up.lazzadesilva wrote:Cox has been poor but geez, in a final he’s bloody hard to match up on and doesn’t need to play 4 quarters to have an impact. I assume his form will improve and he’s injury free, on the condition of which I would pick him.
We just don’t have anyone else on the list who can provide that 2nd ruck option.
Thankfully we have looked ahead and recruited his replacement, but in 2024 and in our window, Cox must play.
As much as I like the big fella, given his decline in consistency and reliable good performances over the past couple of years, coupled with the effects of his current serious injuries, I am more excited at the prospect of us storming into the finals this year with Cameron as our main ruck, and a tall forward line of McStay, Krueger and Checkers. Support ruck roles can be shared by Krueger, McStay and Frampton. There's obviously many weeks to go before we can make definitive calls on our preferred line-up, and Cox may yet force his way back into our side in good form. I guess I'm just doubtful that will happen.eddiesmith wrote:Yep, there have been plenty of games where he has been quiet for 3 qtrs, but in the last when the game is there to be won, he’s the difference. That’s usually due to players tiring and no longer being able to run 2-3 players at him in contests and his height stands up.lazzadesilva wrote:Cox has been poor but geez, in a final he’s bloody hard to match up on and doesn’t need to play 4 quarters to have an impact. I assume his form will improve and he’s injury free, on the condition of which I would pick him.
We just don’t have anyone else on the list who can provide that 2nd ruck option.
Thankfully we have looked ahead and recruited his replacement, but in 2024 and in our window, Cox must play.
-
Take_a_Screamer
- Posts: 1965
- Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2018 8:51 pm
- Location: Melbourne S.E.Suburbs
- Has liked: 1 time
- Been liked: 11 times
- Contact:
These Players WONT Make Collingwood's BEST 22 For FINALS...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcF19kOtMH0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcF19kOtMH0
People pumping up Kreuger as a ruck option should really take a minute to consider his history with injury. We gave up on Moore in the ruck because of his early fragility and yet we want to throw K in there (196cm) and hope he holds up. Give the guy a break (of the right kind...) and leave him in the forward line. McStay has much more experience in backing up in the ruck so, if not going with Cox, I think he should be the one playing cameo off the bench. The fact that he's missed so much football for the year would also make this a preferred option.
I personally think he'd be less likely doing further damage in 1v1 ruck contests than 1vX aerials / on the lead. It's a weird situation. Kroog = injury prone, McStay coming back from knee, and Cox coming back from knee and prior to that in a form slump. Feels like there are a few options...for shooting ourselves in the foot.