#26 Cale "Thank You Mr" Hooker


#3846

As Marty Posted the forward line will only work if Hooker does move forward if Daniher, Stewart and Stringer lead and miss lower their eyes. Hooker works because we bomb it in and he doesn’t get outmarked and then he brings it to the ground. Stewart does lead a bit Joey doesn’t anymore. Not sure about Stringer. The person who most naturally leads and should do it starting deep is Fanta. He has good hands and very fast off the mark. Start him deep out of the goal square.


#3847

Well, not if he never plays on him…


#3848

We did fix our forward line last year, and it was a thing of beauty. But we didn’t recruit an intercept marking defender last year, we recruited Stringer. And anyone who thinks we can simply add Stringer to last year’s forward line and it will just continue to work as it did is wrong. As is anyone who thinks Stringer can play significant minutes in the midfield this year.


#3849

You make an interesting point.
Not saying it’s right, but it’s certainly interesting.
Linking the issue to Stringer…I think you take quality at a good price when it presents.
Not sure.


#3850

Exactly


#3851

Taking Stringer wasn’t a problem.

I think as far as intercept marking defender, you are missing Gleeson. He was very good at that last year and we are missing him this year due to injury. Our backline looks much better balanced with him there.

You have Gleeson there I reckon you find Saad is more free to create run off the backline as well as also intercepting more which he does quite well.


#3852

That’s a decent point, that we need to “break” the working system to fit Stringer in, so that we may as well send Hooker back as part of that breaking. It is certainly true that Stringer doesn’t work at all well on his defensive side, so we’ve added a small who (to date) is adding limited damage and is weakening the defensive pressure. We’ve also not had Colyer, who for all his faults had speed and does work very hard.

I’m not sure if moving Hooker back is the best response to bringing Stringer in, but I can see the argument


#3853

One word:

ZERK


#3854

Forgive me I haven’t read through this thread but pretty sure the discussion is Hooker to play back??
So if I have this correct, most clubs are opting to play small/defensive forward line, however we are want a backline of Hooker, Hurley, Brown, Hartley, Baguley or Ambrose on any given game?

Gee wiz opposition forwards must be trembling with fear of our pacey backline.

Horses for courses.


#3855

True but I think in the instance of Port, who have a tall forward line, having a tall backline is probably okay.


#3856

If you’re gonna have stupid opinions read the thread.


#3857

You did write ‘or’, didn’t you?
You pressed the buttons yourself, right?


#3858

That’s why we kept Myers in the team.


#3859

Welcome BACK!


#3860

Well who would have thunk it?!


#3861

Welcome back to the back


#3862

Such a fantastic player.


#3863

like riding a bike


#3864

Please just keep him there.

So farking valuable back there.


#3865

Only early days but we look so much more balanced across the whole park with hooker back.

His reading of the play is second to none