Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Goaltracker (Read 52982 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Goaltracker

Reply #30 –
The media seem to look at our goal tally and then state with great confidence that it is because we have a bad forward line. This is a little too simplistic for me.

The biggest contributing factors to our goal tally are:
A - our midfield
B - Bolton's game plan

We are out-gunned in the midfield by pretty much every club in the comp (outside the core 4).

E.g. line the Saints up against our second tier: Samo / Fisher / Wright / Kerridge / Daisy / Cunningham/ Smedts VS. Koby Stevens / Mav Weller / Montagna / Gresham / Savage / Ross / Steele / Acres / Dunstan.... the list goes on. Outside our top 4 our mids drop away quicker than any other team in the comp.

That's why Bolton doesn't like to handball and move the ball quickly because we can't pull it off just yet and we'll get burnt on the turnover. He dabbled with in the JLT and we clearly weren't up to it and regularly got torn apart.

I agree though... Kreuze / SOS / etc. missing sitters doesn't help!

Re: Goaltracker

Reply #31 –
Good post Jeza and very largely agree!

No Graham.

We are two emerging/established good to very good mids short, no question.

Even if SPS and Cuningham make the grade....

I'd like to see Pickett played as a mid in the 2s - that is what e always was, first and foremost but i guess he needs to get his fitness to a minimum level...
Finals, then 4 in a row!

Re: Goaltracker

Reply #32 –
I think the focus will turn to the mid field starting with this year's drafting and trading.
Reality always wins in the end.

Re: Goaltracker

Reply #33 –
Quote from: Lods on
The thing I'm finding difficult to understand is the "impression" or "reality" that we have abandoned the forward line.
There appears (to me) to be no attempt at all to shake it up.
It's basically the same week after week....and showing no sign of progressing.
None of the forwards from the VFL are getting a run.
None of the guys playing back are being given an opportunity up forward.

Why not swap Weitering for Marchbank in the forward line for a game.
Give Plowman, Macreadie, Williamson...even Alex Silvagni (to shake it up)a run up forward.

Welcome to 6 months ago!

Said it time and time again. We had the worst forward line in the comp last year and did NOTHING to improve it in the off-season.

Why people expected anything different is beyond me.

I still can't believe how good our run with injuries has been this year. If i was told we were going to be basically injury free, i would've expected much more going on the scoreboard up to this point.

Re: Goaltracker

Reply #34 –
Possible reasons :
1. Our recruiters stuffed up
2. Tanking
3. No decent KPF or small forwards available, once we used our various draft picks to fulfill other priorities
4. Belief that the young ones waiting in the wings will come good.

EDIT :
5. A belief (ahem) that our current senior forwards were sufficient.

Re: Goaltracker

Reply #35 –
Quote from: PaulP on
Possible reasons :
1. Our recruiters stuffed up
2. Tanking
3. No decent KPF or small forwards available, once we used our various draft picks to fulfill other priorities
4. Belief that the young ones waiting in the wings will come good.

EDIT :
5. A belief (ahem) that our current senior forwards were sufficient.

IMO, only 3 is acceptable...and even then you could take a chance on someone with a rookie spot.

Re: Goaltracker

Reply #36 –
Quote from: kruddler on
Welcome to 6 months ago!

Said it time and time again. We had the worst forward line in the comp last year and did NOTHING to improve it in the off-season.

Why people expected anything different is beyond me.

I still can't believe how good our run with injuries has been this year. If i was told we were going to be basically injury free, i would've expected much more going on the scoreboard up to this point.

There's a subtle difference in our observations.

My point is that we don't seem to be doing anything with the list we have to address those forward problems.
There are numerous options we could try but we send out the same structure week after week.

Re: Goaltracker

Reply #37 –
Again... it is too simplistic to blame the forward line. Our midfield is undermanned and incapable of breaking through the flood / press. Our forwards are never one on one.

Re: Goaltracker

Reply #38 –
Quote from: jeza on
Again... it is too simplistic to blame the forward line. Our midfield is undermanned and incapable of breaking through the flood / press. Our forwards are never one on one.

But surely there have been games and quarters this year when we've been well on top of the opposition yet the forward set-up has still failed to produce.

Re: Goaltracker

Reply #39 –
Quote from: jeza on
Again... it is too simplistic to blame the forward line. Our midfield is undermanned and incapable of breaking through the flood / press. Our forwards are never one on one.

I agree, at least partially. Get the ball in quickly enough and the forwards do have more one on one opportunities. We still lack depth in our midfield.

Alot of our forward line though is young, or in Levi's case, plays two roles, where he actually performs best so still has to focus on both roles, so not alot of experience there. From what i've seen we have two potentially very good young key forwards in McKay and Kerr, that may well hold up our forward line for years, but they need to develop. I'd soon play another one, either McKay, Kerr, or even Jaksch, to partner up with Weitering, and let Levi focus on the 2nd ruck role. Might slow things a touch run-wise, but I'd prefer we get games into the young key forwards to help their development along.

Re: Goaltracker

Reply #40 –
Which is kind of the point I'm trying to make.
Yes, the midfield needs work.... that's a separate consideration.
I'm not even overly concerned if changes we make to the forward line doesn't produce short term results.
But for heavens sake try something different.

Re: Goaltracker

Reply #41 –
Quote from: Lods on
There's a subtle difference in our observations.

My point is that we don't seem to be doing anything with the list we have to address those forward problems.
There are numerous options we could try but we send out the same structure week after week.

Well yes and no.

We don't seem to be doing anything with it...because there is little that can be done without hurting our long term plan.

We are already using Weitering as a permanent forward despite Bolton saying he would only spend brief periods there.

A stable back 6 is highest priority. That is working.
Beyond that..... :-[

Re: Goaltracker

Reply #42 –
Quote from: kruddler on
Well yes and no.

We don't seem to be doing anything with it...because there is little that can be done without hurting our long term plan.

We are already using Weitering as a permanent forward despite Bolton saying he would only spend brief periods there.

A stable back 6 is highest priority. That is working.
Beyond that..... :-[

If a stable back 6 is our priority then Weitering needs to be down back as well.
Long term  Rowe and Silvagni wont be around so we're really not putting our future backline out there.

All I'm asking is a bit of variation and experimentation in the forward line.
We're not efficient now so we really have nothing to lose.
To just throw our hands up and say we're not doing anything because we have no options is pretty defeatist.
At least give players like McKay and Kerr a taste....even if it's only a game or two

Re: Goaltracker

Reply #43 –
Quote from: Lods on
If a stable back 6 is our priority then Weitering needs to be down back as well.
Long term  Rowe and Silvagni wont be around so we're really not putting our future backline out there.

All I'm asking is a bit of variation and experimentation in the forward line.
We're not efficient now so we really have nothing to lose.
To just throw our hands up and say we're not doing anything because we have no options is pretty defeatist.
At least give players like McKay and Kerr a taste....even if it's only a game or two

Not sure Weitering will be down back long term. If we have Marchbank, Plowman, Macreadie, Williamson and Docherty there, thats 5. Rowe can play there for another 3-4 years and in the meantime we will draft someone else.

Up forward, Weitering, McKay and Curnow.....Jack and Ben...are our options, none of them certain, especially since Ben isn't on the list yet and McKay hasn't played a game.

Look, i agree we should bring someone in. I agree we should be trying things. But, we have limited options with the direction we are taking.

Re: Goaltracker

Reply #44 –
Going back to jeza'a point, if we (hypothetically) dispensed with our forward line, and brought in the Crows forward line (Jenkins Walker Betts), and kept everything else the same, what would happen ?

Would they sit in the F50 like spare pr!cks at a Jewish wedding, waiting for half decent delivery (or any kind of delivery), and not look nearly as potent as they do now ?

Would we see an ability to kick higher scores ?

Do our mids subconsciously feel the substandard nature of our forward line (and behave accordingly), and once this change occurs, would they work harder for more and better F50 delivery, because they see a better return for their efforts ?

Is there something in the Crows style and advanced stage of development, that gives them the ability to score 135 points a game ? is it ball speed, is it leg speed, is it cohesion, is it the cattle, is it the coaching ?

If Bolton took over the Crows, would they still be where they are now, playing the way they play ?

Lost of questions that I'm just throwing out there folks.