Is Jack Silvagni the ultimate medical sub? It is hard to think of a position on the ground that he couldn't cover (or assist in a suitable reshuffle) if we lose a soldier mid game. Back, forward, ruck, on ball. Think of the alternatives: Honey, Dow, Setterfield, Martin, Motlop etc. No real flexibility in the heat of a hard fought finals campaign. He might just end up being the ace in the pack!!
He needs to be in the 22.
Your best medical sub is a utility who is not in our best 22 like Setterfield, Stocker or Kemp.
Yeah probably the ultimate sub given the roles he can play....still rather him in the 22 though but we move on.
If Hewett had been ready to come back in this week, who would've gone out?
Yeah probably the ultimate sub given the roles he can play....still rather him in the 22 though but we move on.
If Hewett had been ready to come back in this week, who would've gone out?
Setterfield
Is Jack Silvagni the ultimate medical sub? It is hard to think of a position on the ground that he couldn't cover (or assist in a suitable reshuffle) if we lose a soldier mid game. Back, forward, ruck, on ball. Think of the alternatives: Honey, Dow, Setterfield, Martin, Motlop etc. No real flexibility in the heat of a hard fought finals campaign. He might just end up being the ace in the pack!!
Martins probably not a bad sub idea imho, rarely plays 4 quarters, some might argue he rarely plays at all but there is no doubting his talent and imho he could be that Stuey Dew type player who kicks 3 goals in a quarter and wins you a final as that X factor type player. The other player if fit who I would consider is Ed Curnow.....yep he is older now but still was playing good consistent footy before injury and you know he will give you effort and might be able to take out that opposition mid who is tearing us a new one and bring you back in the game if we were struggling..
Yeah probably the ultimate sub given the roles he can play....still rather him in the 22 though but we move on.
If Hewett had been ready to come back in this week, who would've gone out?
Motlop
We've been using Walsh, Kennedy and Fisher more forward when all the mids are all in the side together, we'd need space forward of centre.
I said Jack should be the sub to this game coming up as he gives us cover in every area.
It might even help his game a bit as players will be slightly more fatigued and slower by the time he comes on which will help given he is lacking in that area.
I don't mind the idea of Martin being a sub as well. Someone who provides a spark and turn a game is handy.
Think you can lock this thread now. Like I said Jack is better than Durdin and Owies combined.
This was a rested dressed up in omitted.
His impact was pronounced when he came on. Had it a lot quickly provided that link between midfield and forward and got on the end of one himself.
This was a rested dressed up in omitted.
His impact was pronounced when he came on. Had it a lot quickly provided that link between midfield and forward and got on the end of one himself.
In balance, you can't talk about the SoJ positives and ignore the negatives, late in the game SoJ's direct opponent was twice involved pressing forward in chains of play that resulted in the Crow's goaling.
In balance, you can't talk about the SoJ positives and ignore the negatives, late in the game SoJ's direct opponent was twice involved pressing forward in chains of play that resulted in the Crow's goaling.
I'll take JSOS's attitude pride in the jumper and cop a few errors every now and then, he would have been more useful rucking than Pittonet as Jack could have given us another midfielder.
I found it a strange game to drop him given Adelaide run one genuine ruckman only and part time forwards like Himmelberg and Thilthorpe as the 2nd rucks, conditions suited Jack being a slow track where contests were the name of the game and you know Jack will give that everytime.
This was Voss from Brisbane coaching Imo.....looked paralysed in the box when Adelaide were all over us, couldnt fathom what to do about the Keays/Saad tagging debacle and needs to get more inventive to change the course of the game IMO when we are struggling. Granted he lost some troops but I'm not sure how he thought having extra talls in the team was going to work and the triple threat of Charlie, TDK and Harry down forward wasnt what you want on a slow weather affected ground.
I'll take JSOS's attitude pride in the jumper and cop a few errors every now and then, he would have been more useful rucking than Pittonet as Jack could have given us another midfielder.
I found it a strange game to drop him given Adelaide run one genuine ruckman only and part time forwards like Himmelberg and Thilthorpe as the 2nd rucks, conditions suited Jack being a slow track where contests were the name of the game and you know Jack will give that everytime.
This was Voss from Brisbane coaching Imo.....looked paralysed in the box when Adelaide were all over us, couldnt fathom what to do about the Keays/Saad tagging debacle and needs to get more inventive to change the course of the game IMO when we are struggling. Granted he lost some troops but I'm not sure how he thought having extra talls in the team was going to work and the triple threat of Charlie, TDK and Harry down forward wasnt what you want on a slow weather affected ground.
Limited troops and limited options. A hangover of having too many talls.
Jack can play anywhere, but he can't play on many....thats the problem.
For team balance, i'd drop TDK and play Pittonet and Jack this week.....and if that doesn't work, try TDK and Jack again the next week.
Limited troops and limited options. A hangover of having too many talls.
Jack can play anywhere, but he can't play on many....thats the problem.
For team balance, i'd drop TDK and play Pittonet and Jack this week.....and if that doesn't work, try TDK and Jack again the next week.
I think they'll continue to play Pitto because they have to play him, he needs games under his belt.
Marchbank might come in this week, and will add to our mobility, we can't be left with SoJ trying to stand Himmelberg type players it will destroy our setup and wreck his career.
Pitto looked underdone, TDK looked sore, and I agree the weather didn't help but you can't travel with 42.
The loss of Durdin is going to hurt, we are back in the same place we were with Owies missing for a few weeks. If Hewett comes in we might be able to get Fisher spending more time forward, and that could help.
This might sound odd, but I'd consider bringing Dow in to replace Motlop, if the MC accept that Motlop has to be carried then it may as well carry Dow who at least brings a stronger physical presence and can function as a genuine midfield option. I realise Dow won't be a step up in defensive run, but with Hewett questionable, Kennedy concussed and Fisher needed elsewhere to me it's either now or never for Dow.
I think we need someone with a bit more pace as sub, SoJ isn't a bad choice if the cards fall the right way, but last night they didn't and it made things worse on the ground. Maybe Kemp is the right sub choice, despite my reservations about him as a defender he is more effective in D50 than SoJ, and can still play forward or even a wing or mid rotation, and Kemp's got most of our medium / talls covered for pace.
Did we miss a trick last night not givinng SoJ a mid rotation as a chop out for Cripps, could Cripps have rested forward and let SoJ have a run in combination with Pitto and TDK?
Limited troops and limited options. A hangover of having too many talls.
Jack can play anywhere, but he can't play on many....thats the problem.
For team balance, i'd drop TDK and play Pittonet and Jack this week.....and if that doesn't work, try TDK and Jack again the next week.
Dont mind the ruck combo mix and match idea, do we have the issue now where TDK and Pittonet may both play their best footy as first ruckman? and while TDK has the skills to play forward can you play three real tall forwards every week and have Jack in the team too.
In balance, you can't talk about the SoJ positives and ignore the negatives, late in the game SoJ's direct opponent was twice involved pressing forward in chains of play that resulted in the Crow's goaling.
You were wrong, move on.
Dont mind the ruck combo mix and match idea, do we have the issue now where TDK and Pittonet may both play their best footy as first ruckman? and while TDK has the skills to play forward can you play three real tall forwards every week and have Jack in the team too.
Yes. Neither Pitto or TDK are proficient enough to play anywhere else other than first ruck. Carrying both is hurting our running game.
If Jack was a little quicker/more agile, we may be more likely to cover for him with the other 2.
Yes. Neither Pitto or TDK are proficient enough to play anywhere else other than first ruck. Carrying both is hurting our running game.
If Jack was a little quicker/more agile, we may be more likely to cover for him with the other 2.
I wonder if TDK might be worth trying in defense...
I wonder if TDK might be worth trying in defense...
Get some lessons off his brother.
You were wrong, move on.
Himmelberg happened.
Yes. Neither Pitto or TDK are proficient enough to play anywhere else other than first ruck. Carrying both is hurting our running game.
If Jack was a little quicker/more agile, we may be more likely to cover for him with the other 2.
I think it's just one tall too many in the conditions, it sort of worked earlier in the season when BigH was on a roll, roving stoppages like an onballer, yet we still had some very close escapes that SoJ boosters are happier to ignore us falling across the line after being almost overrun.
But that was also in suitable conditions, a dry fast MCG. Last game was greasy conditions not suited to carrying so many talls, and the Crows were able to dictate control over the whole playing surface, our MC need to be smarter and not formulaic, leave the formulaic emotive rubbish to the fans.
I think it's just one tall too many in the conditions, it sort of worked earlier in the season when BigH was on a roll, roving stoppages like an onballer, yet we still had some very close escapes that SoJ boosters are happier to ignore us falling across the line after being almost overrun.
But that was also in suitable conditions, a dry fast MCG. Last game was greasy conditions not suited to carrying so many talls, and the Crows were able to dictate control over the whole playing surface, our MC need to be smarter and not formulaic, leave the formulaic emotive rubbish to the fans.
I would have rested TDK not JSOS...the latter goes well on a slow track and gives you another midfielder.
The extra ruck in the conditions was a mistake..
Unfit Pittonet and persisting with an under delivering TdK wasn't a good start. Chuck in serial offenders in Setterfield and Plowman, cull heart and soul JSoS and lose a worker early in Durdin. Not a good formula. Cerra is another who has done F all since coming back and needs a rocket.
Just watch us bring back chronic underachiever Martin next week. Anybody else familiar with how this is going to play out?
Cerra isn't a match changer winner, more a good link delivery link player. He hasn't been damaging since he came back and it's thrown more pressure on Cripps and Walsh too.
Some bottom teams you need more grunt than class to knock them over.
We missed Hewett, lost Kennedy and needed Stocker in the team to give us more grunt and options.
Peter Ryan in The Age gave his opinion on how dropping Jack was a mistake and imo the supporters got this one right and the selectors and coaching staff ballsed it up before and during the game.
Nicks is smarter than he looks given what has to work with...
Hindsight is a bloody ripper. I don't know anyone who fails hindsight.
JSOS is a different beast to just about anyone else on the list... he brings huge sentimentality, along with a great attitude and footy IQ. If his name had been Ignatius Mangohead, there might not have been quite the backlack. But his name is Jack Silvagni.
Bringing back Pitto was a little disruptive, though totally understandable and for the best. It disrupted the forward line with a 3rd tall and put JSOS into a medi vest.
I still think experimenting with TDK in defense would be worth a try. Pitto and JSO changing in the ruck. BrisVegas have some dangerous tall forwards, and Weiters seems to be struggling for form and Gov is still learning. Maybe Young has a spell. We've gotta give BrisVegas something to think about. Get a little more creative at the MC.
I think it just needs time. Pittonet, DeKoning and Silvagni played together in the first few rounds, and it seemed to work quite well then. Maybe with injuries and the like they will take a while to get in sync. Or maybe the team just had a bad night.
Yep. We have a few under done returning from injury who arent in form. We have a few off the boil to go with it.
We have not had a settled team all season. When we get going we can challenge everyone but on the weekend the synergy was missing and it showed. We turned it over a lot. So its not like we were beaten by a side because we couldnt get our hands on the footy.
We were too confident. We thought we were going to walk through them.
Not gonna get any easier for the backline this week with Daniher, Hipwood, McStay, Cameron......maybe Saad gets the job on Cameron?
Not gonna get any easier for the backline this week with Daniher, Hipwood, McStay, Cameron......maybe Saad gets the job on Cameron?
Need a player for McCarthy too, very good mark for his size.
The other player to watch is Zac Bailey, it's one of those games where I don't see either team being able stop the other teams forward line if they get enough supply. Cripps will probably get Berry for company, I'm confident we can win this game if we select the right team and do our homework on matchups.
I'm sure Fagan will tag Saad so this is a test for Voss and his ability to devise alternative ways to free up Saad.
Stocker would be an automatic selection for me this week...
Need a player for McCarthy too, very good mark for his size.
The other player to watch is Zac Bailey, it's one of those games where I don't see either team being able stop the other teams forward line if they get enough supply. Cripps will probably get Berry for company, I'm confident we can win this game if we select the right team and do our homework on matchups.
I'm sure Fagan will tag Saad so this is a test for Voss and his ability to devise alternative ways to free up Saad.
Stocker would be an automatic selection for me this week...
Zac Bailey went to hospital coughing up blood, I suspect he would miss. The others will prove enough of a handful although Joe was terrible after qtr time this v Rich. I reckon teams will look at what Keys did to us and will try and replicate that.
I think it just needs time. Pittonet, DeKoning and Silvagni played together in the first few rounds, and it seemed to work quite well then. Maybe with injuries and the like they will take a while to get in sync. Or maybe the team just had a bad night.
On a nice 25 degree day with the track dry then you can go the extra tall to stretch the opposition but it has to be horses for courses and on a slow weather affected evening track we should have gone a bit smaller and Jack was ideal as the second ruck also giving us a taller midfielder type. Its not like the Crows play the dual specialist ruckman either so imho the club made a terrible decision both dropping Jack and playing 2 x specialist rucks and have to own it..
Just in case more people think team balance doesn't matter, and that they can pick and play whichever favourites they like, it doesn't get much clearer than the attached timeline!
13:07 Corey Durdin off, sub on, .................... too top heavy, too slow, too much the same, game over, the run has left the building!
(https://www.carltonsc.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=6058.0;attach=1284;image)
Yeah we looked great before he went off.
Durdin was dominating too. He finished with a supercoach score of 1.
We were too confident. We thought we were going to walk through them.
The loss we had to have?
I'd have to say I'd be a little skeptical about the height imbalance theory - I'd say it was one factor among several, a minor factor IMO. If you're swapping out 2 or 3 smalls for talls, then yes, no doubt, but not 1.
Listening to Voss post game, he mentioned desire, ground ball and contested ball. He said we lost too many critical battles, and were out muscled by a side with greater desire and work rate. He didn't seem too concerned when questioned about 3 talls, height balance etc.
I'd have to say I'd be a little skeptical about the height imbalance theory - I'd say it was one factor among several, a minor factor IMO. If you're swapping out 2 or 3 smalls for talls, then yes, no doubt, but not 1.
Listening to Voss post game, he mentioned desire, ground ball and contested ball. He said we lost too many critical battles, and were out muscled by a side with greater desire and work rate. He didn't seem too concerned when questioned about 3 talls, height balance etc.
Lets try it this way.
Who is more likely to win those contested ball and ground balls?
Tall slow players, or mids who have limited rotations??
or
Small faster, well rested players?
Pittonet, TDK and Jack are not going to be chasing down too many groundballs, whereas Hewitt, Durdin etc might.
Its not specifically about 'height' but the attributes that go along with it.
Jack is good off the ground.
Jack is good off the ground.
compared to other ruckman, yes.
Compared to other midfielders, not so much.
....and god forbid he has to chase down a loose ball, because speed wise, he won't get there first.
People expect him to be his father....when he's probably closer to his grandfather in the way he plays.
That's still pretty useful.
People expect him to be his father....when he's probably closer to his grandfather in the way he plays.
That's still pretty useful.
Yep agree with that Lods. Even when they call for him to go into Defense. Aside from doing a job on Nat Fyfe, and pin hitting down back when hes followed a man down there, has he ever played back for Carlton in his career? I cant remember it.
He is VERY much like Serge in the way he played. Ben was supposed to be like the old man, but we cut him loose because he doesnt have the Silvagni ticker even though he got the ability.
I'd have to say I'd be a little skeptical about the height imbalance theory - I'd say it was one factor among several, a minor factor IMO. If you're swapping out 2 or 3 smalls for talls, then yes, no doubt, but not 1.
Listening to Voss post game, he mentioned desire, ground ball and contested ball. He said we lost too many critical battles, and were out muscled by a side with greater desire and work rate. He didn't seem too concerned when questioned about 3 talls, height balance etc.
I think Vossy has covered most of the reasons. Did he also mention over-using the ball and not providing opportunities for handball receives?
Our small forwards are great at putting pressure on opposition defenders and helping out in the midfield and in defence, but they're not troubling the scorers. When you have an advantage with your tall forwards, in terms of both quantity and quality, opposition defenders shouldn't be marking a lot of kicks inside 50; marking contests should be won by our talls or brought to ground. Our small forwards aren't capitalising on those opportunities and it's generally Charlie or midfielders that do the crumbing. In that context, playing Jack, Tom and Pitto is the best option ... but not necessarily an underdone Pitto.
I think Vossy has covered most of the reasons. Did he also mention over-using the ball and not providing opportunities for handball receives?
Our small forwards are great at putting pressure on opposition defenders and helping out in the midfield and in defence, but they're not troubling the scorers. When you have an advantage with your tall forwards, in terms of both quantity and quality, opposition defenders shouldn't be marking a lot of kicks inside 50; marking contests should be won by our talls or brought to ground. Our small forwards aren't capitalising on those opportunities and it's generally Charlie or midfielders that do the crumbing. In that context, playing Jack, Tom and Pitto is the best option ... but not necessarily an underdone Pitto.
I don't recall Voss mentioning those. I think he was pretty grumpy about being overpowered at the contest, and that was the focus of his presser.
I've got nothing against Durdin (in fact I rather like him), but what we saw on Saturday night was an 18 man problem. Durdin would've made no difference.
I haven't watched much of the Crows, but what I saw on the weekend matches the word around the traps, which is that they are a tough, honest, blue collar team, who for once also looked polished as well. Their best game for the year, and our worst IMO.
I'd have to say I'd be a little skeptical about the height imbalance theory - I'd say it was one factor among several, a minor factor IMO. If you're swapping out 2 or 3 smalls for talls, then yes, no doubt, but not 1.
Listening to Voss post game, he mentioned desire, ground ball and contested ball. He said we lost too many critical battles, and were out muscled by a side with greater desire and work rate. He didn't seem too concerned when questioned about 3 talls, height balance etc.
Precisely. What The Vossmeister identified was all about attitude. And we need look no further.
When you lose, and lose badly, you're too tall, too small, too slow, shizen game plan, too soft, too many spuds... etc. Symptoms of a slack attitude, to be blunt.
This thread was started about 15 months ago, and it's interesting to see how things have changed.
There are, as best as I can tell, two main theories about the ideal sub : one, a fast, burst player, who can take advantage of a fatigued opposition, with pace, chase down and line breaking ability. And two, a utility player, who can play a variety of positions, creating minimal disturbance to structures. The former is more strategic, the latter is more contingency. Jack clearly falls into the latter category. The club generally plays him as 3rd tall or 2nd ruck, and I think Jack Martin and Tom De Koning respectively, are viewed by the club as being ahead of JSOS. And I agree. I read an article where Dermott Brereton stated that JSOS has no real home, and when combined with his limited mobility and athleticism, means he will be down the pecking order IMO. He is undoubtedly a solid handy footballer, but he is being eased out by better options. I think the sub role would suit him to a t.
It is a standard football truism that you need genuine, AFL level players beyond the best 22 to win a flag. This clearly means that in any premiership team, there will be worthy, deserving players that miss out. It sucks, and I wish it were different, but I can't see any other way.
In the overall narrative of our 2024 season, what happens with Jack Silvagni will be very much a minor plot line IMO, but also oddly intriguing.
In the overall narrative of our 2024 season, what happens with Jack Silvagni will be very much a minor plot line IMO, but also oddly intriguing.
Yes largely agree, an intriguing distraction.
If our fate hinges on the rise or fall of SoJ we must truly be the child of the Cephissus' abuse of Liriope!
He's in our top 25-30 imo.
I don't think he is a sub but a starting talent tbh - his best position would be a link-man between defence to forward with his endurance and work rate. He's a hard match up for a half back flank and his skills are excquisite.
If we are at the point next season where a handy player like Jack Silvagni is a sub or on the fringes of the best 22, there's only 2 possibilities IMO :
- the MC is incompetent or corrupt,
- our list is healthy, in form and deep.
There's no doubt in my mind as to the more likely possibility.
Fox Footy has published our "best 23" for 2024. Apart from including Elijah Hollands, they have gone with one ruckman, Tom De Koning, with Jack Silvagni as third tall forward and second ruckman. That's only going to happen if Marc Pittonet is injured and our developing rucks aren't ready to play at AFL level.
AFL.com has a more convincing "best 22" with Tom De Koning and Marc Pittonet sharing the ruck duties and Jack Silvagni nowhere to be seen. However, I'm not sure that whoever picked that team appreciates Jack's ability to find space inside 50, to mark on the lead, and his value when giving Charlie or Harry a break, as well as making the opposition sending a competent tall defender to him ; I don't really want to see Matty Cottrell lining up on a key defender. On the flipside, we don't want Jack playing against a defender who will run off him.
If Jack is in form, he plays as our third tall forward and one of Matt Owies, Jesse Motlop and Lachie Fogarty misses out.
I'm not opposed to the idea of Jack as the sub. He has the versatility to be the ideal contingency sub as well the ability to have an impact as a strategic sub. I'm not convinced that a strategic sub needs to be speedy player to have an impact.
David, if I've understood your post, your 6 forwards would be : McKay, Curnow, Martin, Silvagni, and 2 out of Moltop, Owies and Fogarty. Is that right ?
Fox Footy has published our "best 23" for 2024. Apart from including Elijah Hollands, they have gone with one ruckman, Tom De Koning, with Jack Silvagni as third tall forward and second ruckman. That's only going to happen if Marc Pittonet is injured and our developing rucks aren't ready to play at AFL level.
AFL.com has a more convincing "best 22" with Tom De Koning and Marc Pittonet sharing the ruck duties and Jack Silvagni nowhere to be seen. However, I'm not sure that whoever picked that team appreciates Jack's ability to find space inside 50, to mark on the lead, and his value when giving Charlie or Harry a break, as well as making the opposition sending a competent tall defender to him ; I don't really want to see Matty Cottrell lining up on a key defender. On the flipside, we don't want Jack playing against a defender who will run off him.
If Jack is in form, he plays as our third tall forward and one of Matt Owies, Jesse Motlop and Lachie Fogarty misses out.
I'm not opposed to the idea of Jack as the sub. He has the versatility to be the ideal contingency sub as well the ability to have an impact as a strategic sub. I'm not convinced that a strategic sub needs to be speedy player to have an impact.
What both those best 22(3)s have in common is what i've been referring too all year. Team balance and being mindful of NOT being too tall.
You can't play 2 rucks, 2 key forwards and Jack.
Whichever way you want to slice it, thats what it boils down too.
You wanna play Pitto as 1st ruck, TDK and Charlie as KPPs, then you can play Jack.
You wanna play Pitto as 1st ruck, TDK as backup forward, and Charlie and Harry....then Jack should probably miss out (although i think it makes us too immobile.
You wanna play TDK as 1st ruck, Jack as backup and Charlie and Harry as KPFs, then Pitto misses out. TDK probably needs to improve his ruckwork and work around the ground, but i think this is the likely long-term plan.
Thing is, i don't care who plays where and when, as long as it works for the team.
I've put up numbers, stats and many many paragraphs behind the pros and cons of each, and people accuse me of bias. Not so, just using the numbers to guide me in picking my best team......and its certainly not clear cut one way or another.
However, i do get my back up when someone proclaims
"its simple..." because its not. Or if someone says
"player x is better than player y at...." and stats say otherwise.
Have an opinion, but base it on some kind of logic and/or evidence. Even if its simply based on potential.
This is an article going back in time, to February of this year.
https://www.afl.com.au/news/878124/a-rucking-dilemma-blues-still-weighing-up-best-mix
The whole article is worth a read, even if it is old. The fact that team balance is important is a given, but there's fair bit that goes into it, and unfortunately much of the info is not available to us.
.........................The question on Carlton's lips internally as it seeks to decipher its perfect ruck mix for the season ahead is how tall is too tall? Can the Blues play with Pittonet, De Koning and Silvagni, along with key forwards Curnow and McKay, in the same team?...............................
"A lot of it depends on some of their physical characteristics and height is one of them. But speed comes into it, endurance comes into it, agility comes into it, then capacity comes into it," Voss said.
"The capacity for them to be able to play tall or small, they're all factors. One thing we do have on our side when it comes to the front-end is that there aren't many 204cm guys that move like Harry. It's the same with Charlie. The agility and movement and speed are on their side, despite what their height measurements say..............................
This is an article going back in time, to February of this year.
https://www.afl.com.au/news/878124/a-rucking-dilemma-blues-still-weighing-up-best-mix
The whole article is worth a read, even if it is old. The fact that team balance is important is a given, but there's fair bit that goes into it, and unfortunately much of the info is not available to us.
.........................The question on Carlton's lips internally as it seeks to decipher its perfect ruck mix for the season ahead is how tall is too tall? Can the Blues play with Pittonet, De Koning and Silvagni, along with key forwards Curnow and McKay, in the same team?...............................
"A lot of it depends on some of their physical characteristics and height is one of them. But speed comes into it, endurance comes into it, agility comes into it, then capacity comes into it," Voss said.
"The capacity for them to be able to play tall or small, they're all factors. One thing we do have on our side when it comes to the front-end is that there aren't many 204cm guys that move like Harry. It's the same with Charlie. The agility and movement and speed are on their side, despite what their height measurements say..............................
There is agility, and then there is agility for a big man.
We are not comparing our talls to other teams talls.....we know we stack up well.
We are comparing our talls, to the our own smalls....and the opposition smalls.
We saw it in the Lions game. Once the ball hit the deck, they swept the ball away and looked a million bucks and we didn't look like catching them. Thats what i'm conscious of trying to avoid.
One on one, i'll back our boys against anyone.
Its hard to make the point when talking in general terms, so try this for an exercise.
Put our forwards against our backs...proper matchups.
Weiters on Harry.
Kemp on Charlie
McGovern on Silvagni
How are we for agility now?
Our defenders would smash our forwards once the ball hits the deck. In fact, they smashed most of the AFL. We ended up finishing 4th for points against. But there was a standout 4 (50 points between them) and daylight to 5th.
Most other teams don't have a kemp/mcgovern duo to take on 3rd talls, but have a smaller more agile option....say Cincotta type.
How are we for agility then?
Look, we all saw it. Once we brought in more run and pressure, we turned our season around.
When it got to the Lions game, we picked a side more like we were playing when we were losing.
Our form was built on run and pressure and the taller you are, the less you can bring that....no matter how agile the big blokes are, they are not as agile as a smaller bloke.
Going back to the topic at hand....
That is why you don't have a ruck as a sub...and ideally, not a tall at all.
On occassions, Jack could be useful in that role, depending on who you have picked and how fit they are (or aren't) but thats an isolated case. You generally want run and pressure to be injected into the game.
Agility for a big man relative to other big men is all that matters, it's the opposition have to match up on them not a team-mate.
David, if I've understood your post, your 6 forwards would be : McKay, Curnow, Martin, Silvagni, and 2 out of Moltop, Owies and Fogarty. Is that right ?
@PaulP, assuming the whole list is fit and available, based on the 2nd half of our 2023 season, can you really see us playing both SoJ and Martin alongside H and Charlie?
I suspect that will look top heavy, and we'll either have SoJ or we'll have Martin, with Motlop, Owies, Cunnigham and another as our rotating smalls.
Personally, we will struggling to lever in the likes of Kennedy, Hollands and Hollands, given Acres is a certain starter. To get them in with Cerra, Walsh and Hewett I suspect means Cripps must at stages rest forward, and that is not going to happen on top of Martin and SoJ.
I can't see it being viable to have Cripps resting forward while SoJ rucks, in my opinion we need our strongest Mid combination in play when our weakest ruck is in the rotation. But then that seems to be punishing the better Mids, why don't they get an easier run with TDK or Pitto?
@PaulP, assuming the whole list is fit and available, based on the 2nd half of our 2023 season, can you really see us playing both SoJ and Martin alongside H and Charlie?
I suspect that will look top heavy, and we'll either have SoJ or we'll have Martin, with Motlop, Owies, Cunnigham and another as our rotating smalls.
Personally, we will struggling to lever in the likes of Kennedy, Hollands and Hollands, given Acres is a certain starter. To get them in with Cerra, Walsh and Hewett I suspect means Cripps must at stages rest forward, and that is not going to happen on top of Martin and SoJ.
I can't see it being viable to have Cripps resting forward while SoJ rucks, in my opinion we need our strongest Mid combination in play when our weakest ruck is in the rotation. But then that seems to be punishing the better Mids, why don't they get an easier run with TDK or Pitto?
I would play McKay, Curnow, Martin, Moltop, Owies and Fogarty as my forwards. One of the points I was trying to make is that assuming a fully fit list, the MC will have tough calls to make each and every week. There's plenty that are good enough to be in, but not enough places for them all. As they say, "it's a nice problem to have."
As they say, "it's a nice problem to have."
Years ago I wanted SoJ as a Mid rotation option, when he was dropped back to the VFL he played a Mid role quite well, he is big enough and strong enough over the footy to do the inside Mid or even replace Ed as a Tagger type role. When he 2nd rucks I see him more as a sub/alternate for TDK than Pitto, because of the similar mobility between TDK and SoJ, but if they are both available TDK has SoJ covered for size, speed, strength and contested marking as the 1st choice option.
I don't see SoJ 2nd rucking to TDK when Pitto is fit, because Pitto brings that complimentary style as the gorilla wrestler, but it of course depends on opposition.
I think we'll regret not having spent more time developing SoJ for the Mid now that Ed has retired.
Martin is so versatile he's probably 3rd picked behind Charlie and H. He's plenty capable overhead, and can work Inside and Outside F50 stoppages as good as any genuine Mid, and he is a finisher.
Probably the weakest option around stoppages is Owies, but he more than makes up for that in the other aspects of play, he is also a finisher.
Motlop shows as much if not more potential inside F50 than the other smalls, but his general play is still well off the pace, but he gets another pre-season before we see him again, and that might bring a greater work ethic.
Agility for a big man relative to other big men is all that matters, it's the opposition have to match up on them not a team-mate.
There you go skimming again and not reading the whole post.
BTW, what happens after a behind?
What happens once there is a spoil?
What happens if there is a poor entry inside 50 that is not to our advantage?
In all cases, if we are too tall, the answer is the ball exits our forward line relatively easily once it gets into the opposition hands.
However, if we have some smaller, more agile forwards, the pressure rate increases and the likelyhood of a the ball exiting our forwardline decreases.
Voss wants Pittonet and TDK as his ruck combo and he wants Charlie, Harry and Martin(when fit) as his three prong forward setup.
There isnt any room for Jack anymore and he wont be playing many senior games unless we get injuries imho.
Jack would be in my best 22 but I cant see that happening under Voss and I dont think he will be sub too often either given most clubs dont make taller players subs unless they have injury doubts on key talls in the 22 and prefer an injection of pace or goalkicking small that can change momentum with quick goals.
I see Jack in no mans land as a footballer on our list, undervalued and a player who had to beg for a contract after receiving no interest from other clubs, take a min chips deal with the expectation of being a "break glass in case of emergency player".Imo he is way better than that and would do better at another club where he would play regular senior footy and have a chance to become a more valued player.
There you go skimming again and not reading the whole post.
I only have to address the issues that have some remote possibility of becoming a reality, the fantasy stuff I can ignore.
H and Charlie are generally faster and more agile than their direct opponents, SoJ being inside F50 does not add to our pace because he isn't there to replace a player slower than him, Martin, Motlop, Owies, Cunnigham, Fogarty and even TDK have him comfortably covered for pace. Probably the only F50 regular SoJ has covered for pace is Cripps, and in the past maybe Ed.
Excluding our later half of 2023, when we've lacked defensive run it's been the opposition Mids getting off the leash from our own Mids more than any other factor. Generally not our SFs in Owies, Cunnigham or Fogarty, perhaps Motlop because of effort not ability, certainly not Charlie, H, Martin, Acres, Hollands or Cottrell.
Perhaps it's impossible to play Cripps and SoJ in the same zone at the same time.
I only have to address the issues that have some remote possibility of becoming a reality, the fantasy stuff I can ignore.
Fantasy stuff.....like the opposition defenders having the ball?
Sure. See how that works out for you.
Fantasy stuff.....like the opposition defenders having the ball?
Sure. See how that works out for you.
When you deflect like this you lose all credibility around the various SoJ debates, we get that he is your preferred everything.
I think that I and others offer more solid general support of possible roles for SoJ then you do through your rather myopic rucking or F50 fantasies, you need to let it go, it's over, the proof is indelibly written in the end of last season.
SoJ has to now find that complimentary role for himself, like Cottrell has done, will it guarantee him a spot, probably not, but as long as he's always there and willing to be an option he's a possibility. As Voss states, when your chance comes you have to be ready to take it.
When you deflect like this you lose all credibility around the various SoJ debates, we get that he is your preferred everything.
You get nothing.
You haven't even read what i wrote.
I'm not deflecting, you are not reading. I can not continue a debate in which you are not reading.
David, if I've understood your post, your 6 forwards would be : McKay, Curnow, Martin, Silvagni, and 2 out of Moltop, Owies and Fogarty. Is that right ?
I haven’t got time for a detailed reply just now Paul but think along the lines of an eight man forward rotation rather than six forwards.
Two key forwards, third tall and medium lead up forwards, two small crumbers/pressure forwards and two midfielder/forwards.
I haven’t got time for a detailed reply just now Paul but think along the lines of an eight man forward rotation rather than six forwards.
Two key forwards, third tall and medium lead up forwards, two small crumbers/pressure forwards and two midfielder/forwards.
No worries.