Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Ziebell, Martin and Gibbs (Read 7578 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Ziebell, Martin and Gibbs

North has found success with throwing Ziebell forward at various times and backing him one on one with an opponent, with reasonable success. Likewise Richmond with Martin.

Could we look at mixing our forward line around at times by doing the same thing with Gibbs. He's strong one on one, clean overhead and has a good goal sense.

We need to think outside the square more often!

Re: Ziebell, Martin and Gibbs

Reply #1 –
Quote from: townsendcalling on
North has found success with throwing Ziebell forward at various times and backing him one on one with an opponent, with reasonable success. Likewise Richmond with Martin.

Could we look at mixing our forward line around at times by doing the same thing with Gibbs. He's strong one on one, clean overhead and has a good goal sense.

We need to think outside the square more often!

Always been a fan of rotating Gibbs forward but with our midfield in decline we are forced to play him onball more often.....Gibbs is more like Deledio when he plays forward and
leads well and makes good position. Ziebell is a good contested mark and Martin of course is mr Dont argue and like a Bull when its one on one and impossible to stop.
Tom Bell has been the one Mick has tried forward looking for the dont argue style to kick some goals...its worked once to good effect but generally our delivery and Bell's nous
hasnt made it work often enough.
You need that variety though and the mid who can mark the footy and get one on one near the goals is a feature of the game now...Nat FYfe is another who plays onball but is super dangerous when going forward
with his marking ability....

Re: Ziebell, Martin and Gibbs

Reply #2 –
Quote from: townsendcalling on
North has found success with throwing Ziebell forward at various times and backing him one on one with an opponent, with reasonable success. Likewise Richmond with Martin.

Could we look at mixing our forward line around at times by doing the same thing with Gibbs. He's strong one on one, clean overhead and has a good goal sense.

We need to think outside the square more often!

I think most including MM would agree with you, yet it is purely necessity that has dictated Gibbsy's role to date rather than idealism. We need blokes like Bell, Buckley, Cripps, Docherty even Walker and Everitt to excel in their roles consistently. Gibbs shifting through the midfield as a forward flanker is "All Australian."
IN WADA WE TRUST

Re: Ziebell, Martin and Gibbs

Reply #3 –
I think Gibbs is fairly weak overhead personally.

Just on Martin, to think we could have picked him up for 600k instead of Daisy, still young with his career ahead of him.
Ignorance is bliss.

ONWARDS AND UPWARDS!

Re: Ziebell, Martin and Gibbs

Reply #4 –
The horse has bolted and spilt the milk Carrots.

Re: Ziebell, Martin and Gibbs

Reply #5 –
Yep. What a steal that would've been though!
Ignorance is bliss.

ONWARDS AND UPWARDS!

Re: Ziebell, Martin and Gibbs

Reply #6 –
Quote from: PassIt2Carrots on
Yep. What a steal that would've been though!
Yes, it would have been nice.
I'm still p*ssed at myself for not pushing him as a draft choice when he was bottom aged: he'd won the Pio's B & F and looked reasonable. I know I don't have any say with WH or any other recruiter, but if I'd made enough noise I could have ....
Spilt milk and in my own back yard. If I keep that up I'll start believing I can actually influence our recruiting. What an insane thought.  >:D
Live Long and Prosper!

Re: Ziebell, Martin and Gibbs

Reply #7 –
Quote from: PassIt2Carrots on
I think Gibbs is fairly weak overhead personally.

Just on Martin, to think we could have picked him up for 600k instead of Daisy, still young with his career ahead of him.

What would you have been willing to trade for him? Given Daisy didn't require a trade.

Re: Ziebell, Martin and Gibbs

Reply #8 –
Quote from: emtwenty on
Quote from: PassIt2Carrots on
I think Gibbs is fairly weak overhead personally.

Just on Martin, to think we could have picked him up for 600k instead of Daisy, still young with his career ahead of him.

What would you have been willing to trade for him? Given Daisy didn't require a trade.

The first rounder we got for Betts? That we gave up for Daisy? If not enough then throw in Hampson. So no Docherty I guess.
Ignorance is bliss.

ONWARDS AND UPWARDS!

Re: Ziebell, Martin and Gibbs

Reply #9 –
Quote from: crashlander on
Quote from: PassIt2Carrots on
Yep. What a steal that would've been though!
Yes, it would have been nice.
I'm still p*ssed at myself for not pushing him as a draft choice when he was bottom aged: he'd won the Pio's B & F and looked reasonable. I know I don't have any say with WH or any other recruiter, but if I'd made enough noise I could have ....
Spilt milk and in my own back yard. If I keep that up I'll start believing I can actually influence our recruiting. What an insane thought.  >:D

Stranger things have happened Crash!! :P

If you go back to the Thomas thread I called it.....Martin for 600k>>>>>Daisy. Of course back then I thought we'd only need 600k for Daisy.
Ignorance is bliss.

ONWARDS AND UPWARDS!

Re: Ziebell, Martin and Gibbs

Reply #10 –
In hindsight emtwenty, would you now take Martin over Daisy?
Ignorance is bliss.

ONWARDS AND UPWARDS!

Re: Ziebell, Martin and Gibbs

Reply #11 –
Another thing to ponder emtwenty, no one wanted him so with a 4 year 600k deal bounty put on him, we may have got him free in the PSD. Now that is the kind of shrewd operating that's required to be a successful club. In that scenario we lose Betts but gain Martin and keep two first rounders! I can guarantee if you that was the case, all in here would be laughing at Daisy and his form, not sticking up for him. :))
Ignorance is bliss.

ONWARDS AND UPWARDS!

Re: Ziebell, Martin and Gibbs

Reply #12 –
Quote from: PassIt2Carrots on
Quote from: emtwenty on
Quote from: PassIt2Carrots on
I think Gibbs is fairly weak overhead personally.

Just on Martin, to think we could have picked him up for 600k instead of Daisy, still young with his career ahead of him.

What would you have been willing to trade for him? Given Daisy didn't require a trade.

The first rounder we got for Betts? That we gave up for Daisy? If not enough then throw in Hampson. So no Docherty I guess.

We were never getting a first rounder for Betts. We would've got what St Kilda got for Dal Santo. And that would never have got Richmond to give us Martin. If you were Richmond would you have traded Martin for a pick in the 20s? I doubt it.

Re: Ziebell, Martin and Gibbs

Reply #14 –
On the Gibbs thing. Ratten played him off half back, we screamed for him to play midfield. Now he plays midfield we think maybe he should play forward. OP is right, he could be a half decent forward, but we only have one of him.

On Daisy I'm keeping my powder dry until I see him do a full pre season. I think from the clubs point of view he has exceeded expectations this year.
Eat more chooks