Surprised Ralph even knows who Ambrose is tbh.Guys…go easy… Ralphy knows a lot. He even knows that Paddy is a firefighter-turned-AFL player.
Paddy’s done very well for a top up.
The same Blitzers who are whingeing about Ambrose now, were whingeing about Cale Hooker five years ago. They didn't understand backline work then and the've learnt nothing about it in the meantime.Like Hooksy, Paddy’s going nowhere: he’s too valuable to us.
I’m pretty sure the knocks on hooker where injury related and specifically did the hammies cripple him ( um you know like they did pears).
Hooker always had the smarts and intercept marking however.
Ambrose doesn’t.I rate Ambrose and think if they can find a spot for him that’d be great, and i hope he develops into a player.
It shouldn’t be as a key defender though, as he just isn’t smart enough essentially to cover his inexperience atm.
He may be able to stop his opponent in a contest, but once the ball hits the ground, again he just doesn’t have the composure that’s needed down there.That and hurley, hooker and hartley should be above him in the pecking order, and rightly so.
If he plays rd 1, as a kpd, then either one of the 3 above are injured, or it raises a serious red flag about worsfold IMO.
How can you think he’s a player, but not as a defender? He’s already not made it as a forward (and ruckman), plus he’s shown more in defence than anywhere.
Where do you see him playing then?
Plus, how have you missed that hooker will play forward?
Hurley is ahead of him, Hartley (probably) is, but that’s it. He’s fighting it out with Mitch Brown really, and he’s got him covered.
4 years ago our defence was top 3 in the AFL. This comprised almost all high quality intercepting players, ground level intercept specialists Baggers, Hibbo, Fletch, Dempsey , intercept marking specialists Hooker, Carlisle, Baggers, Hibbo, Fletch, this meant we were able to play a zone defence and not rely on lock downs ( except maybe Baggers on the best small forward if they were a threat)
Things have changed a lot.
We lost the intercepting power we once had, So there are 2 options. bring in good intercept marking players, or develop them.We have 4 -5 potentially good younger ones: Dea, Gleeson, Hartley , Brown, McGrath but as yet they are not good enough to emulate the defence of 5 years ago.
In the meantime we have to follow a lockdown strategy and move to the zone only when the press is on. This means using Ambrose as pure lockdown, Hartley to transition to intercept marking, Baggers to lockdown and MCGrath to learn to lock down, then become a ground level interceptor.
Ambrose is good. You need an Ambrose. What he lacks in finess he more than makes up for in harassing and scaring the ■■■■ out of good forwards.
Lacks in fitness?
Finesse
French, innit
■■■■■■■ cheese eating surrender monkeys
Ambrose is good. You need an Ambrose. What he lacks in finess he more than makes up for in harassing and scaring the ■■■■ out of good forwards.Yep
Tim is right Ambrose won’t give you offence but what he will give you is negating the best forward.
And that’s why, looking at last year with the amount of inside 50’s the opposition had, his performance against top forwards was quite amazing.
Maybe the best way to assess his value is to not only judge his own output, but include the negating goals and possessions from the average of the opposition player to his own stats.
So if Ambrose gets 8 possessions, and brings down a players average by 2 goals and 8 possesions, his stats could be viewed as
8 possessions/ 8 possesions 2 goals saved.
Looks pretty different doesn’t it?
1 Like
The same Blitzers who are whingeing about Ambrose now, were whingeing about Cale Hooker five years ago. They didn't understand backline work then and the've learnt nothing about it in the meantime.Like Hooksy, Paddy’s going nowhere: he’s too valuable to us.
I’m pretty sure the knocks on hooker where injury related and specifically did the hammies cripple him ( um you know like they did pears).
Hooker always had the smarts and intercept marking however.
Ambrose doesn’t.I rate Ambrose and think if they can find a spot for him that’d be great, and i hope he develops into a player.
It shouldn’t be as a key defender though, as he just isn’t smart enough essentially to cover his inexperience atm.
He may be able to stop his opponent in a contest, but once the ball hits the ground, again he just doesn’t have the composure that’s needed down there.That and hurley, hooker and hartley should be above him in the pecking order, and rightly so.
If he plays rd 1, as a kpd, then either one of the 3 above are injured, or it raises a serious red flag about worsfold IMO.How can you think he’s a player, but not as a defender? He’s already not made it as a forward (and ruckman), plus he’s shown more in defence than anywhere.
Where do you see him playing then?
Plus, how have you missed that hooker will play forward?
Hurley is ahead of him, Hartley (probably) is, but that’s it. He’s fighting it out with Mitch Brown really, and he’s got him covered.
I said i rate him, as in i like his mongrel and hardness at the ball and man.
I’d try in in the midfield some how.
and i havent’ paid much attention, if hooker is legit going forward, then wow to that, but then ok hurley and hartley are still ahead of him, and if we need a 3rd tall i’d be making sure francis is able to play.
he may be able to spoil or maul an opponent in a marking contest, outside of that he is a liability and lacks the composure down back, he’s not alone there, but you can’t have him and gleeson in the same backline, you’ll just leak too many goals.
Geez DP, you really haven’t been paying attention if you missed Hooker going forward. That’s pre-season day 1 stuff right there 
Look, I’m not sure Ambrose is a long term solution, or just a stop gap until Francis can run a lap without collapsing a lung, or until Ridley comes through, or whatever.
If his disposal and awareness doesn’t improve even somewhat, it’s likely to be the stop gap option. But as of right now, heading into round 1, he seems an obvious bet to be taking Gunston or Roughead.
If that's the Ralph quote I'm 100% certain he meant that Moore was one of the rising stars of the comp.I heard Ralph say this on radio. It is quoted verbatim in the printed article. You might be right. If so, it just shows how some so called journalists are sometimes unable to put a mouthful of words together to express what they mean.
It also doesn’t make sense for a forward to play on a defender, so i think you’re both right.
Does Ambrose have a disposal issue? I haven’t really seen it.
Sure, he isn’t taking the most attacking options, but I haven’t particularly noticed him coughing the ball up regularly.
To appreciate having Ambrose as a defensive option, we need look no further back than the 2014 elimination final where we had to rely on Ariel Steinberg to curb the influence of Ben Brown.
Being able to take a key tall out of the equation in a final can be the difference between winning and losing, and I don’t think Ambruise has a reputation for coughing the ball up or poor disposal, just not providing enough counter attack.
I can tell you now I would have settled for not enough counter attack on the 6th of September 2014 when we were 33 points up early in the 3rd quarter.
Does Ambrose have a disposal issue? I haven't really seen it.Sure, he isn’t taking the most attacking options, but I haven’t particularly noticed him coughing the ball up regularly.
Because he hardly disposes of the ball.
To appreciate having Ambrose as a defensive option, we need look no further back than the 2014 elimination final where we had to rely on Ariel Steinberg to curb the influence of Ben Brown.Being able to take a key tall out of the equation in a final can be the difference between winning and losing, and I don’t think Ambruise has a reputation for coughing the ball up or poor disposal, just not providing enough counter attack.
I can tell you now I would have settled for not enough counter attack on the 6th of September 2014 when we were 33 points up early in the 3rd quarter.
Who can tell, but as I recall, Fletch was out injured. Had Fletch or the 2016 Ambrose been in there we might just have won that final ( In 2016 Ambo played on Ben Brown and held him to 1 goal.) Stein was a poor match up on Ben Brown, giving away 8cm, whereas Fletch was a much better player and a good matchup against Brown for height.
The same Blitzers who are whingeing about Ambrose now, were whingeing about Cale Hooker five years ago. They didn't understand backline work then and the've learnt nothing about it in the meantime.Like Hooksy, Paddy’s going nowhere: he’s too valuable to us.
I’m pretty sure the knocks on hooker where injury related and specifically did the hammies cripple him ( um you know like they did pears).
Hooker always had the smarts and intercept marking however.
Ambrose doesn’t.I rate Ambrose and think if they can find a spot for him that’d be great, and i hope he develops into a player.
It shouldn’t be as a key defender though, as he just isn’t smart enough essentially to cover his inexperience atm.
He may be able to stop his opponent in a contest, but once the ball hits the ground, again he just doesn’t have the composure that’s needed down there.That and hurley, hooker and hartley should be above him in the pecking order, and rightly so.
If he plays rd 1, as a kpd, then either one of the 3 above are injured, or it raises a serious red flag about worsfold IMO.
People on here endlessly harped on about hooker’s poor kicking and decision making.
It’s the blitz paradox, expect a breakout year from one unproven player, scewer another who doesn’t show any sign of improving…
Does Ambrose have a disposal issue? I haven't really seen it.Sure, he isn’t taking the most attacking options, but I haven’t particularly noticed him coughing the ball up regularly.
Because he hardly disposes of the ball.
Yeah but Samwoods is right. When he does get a kick he either chips it sideways to a safe option or kicks it long to a contest. I can’t remember too many direct clangers.
Does Ambrose have a disposal issue? I haven't really seen it.Sure, he isn’t taking the most attacking options, but I haven’t particularly noticed him coughing the ball up regularly.
Because he hardly disposes of the ball.
Yeah but Samwoods is right. When he does get a kick he either chips it sideways to a safe option or kicks it long to a contest. I can’t remember too many direct clangers.
To be fair Ambrose doesnt get many of the freeby disposals at kickins, . Usually more mobile players run wide to the pockets to take the sideways kick, and Ambrose hangs around goal as the tall option in case theres a turnover coming out of defence. Players like Matty Dea, Pops Kelly Marty Gleeson, Zaka, Zac Merret, etc come up to take part in chains out of defence . If Ambrose takes possession on the last line he will normally handball sideways to a faster player which is the safe option. Nor does Ambrose usually take the kickins . Fact is, there are more accurate kicks and more penetrating kicks in the side like Kelly.
As a consequence Ambrose records low metres gained and low disposal count when playing in the last line, If his opponent goes up the field, and he follows, Ambrose does kick more and plays more attacking footy across half back and through the centre,
One player who artificially boosts his disposals and metres gained stats is Heath Shaw, who invariably takes the kickin, kicks the ball to himself, takes a run and bounce then kicks long to the wing. This increases his stats a lot. Ambrose would increase his value just by doing this a few times in a game. and he would appear to be a much better player.
I don’t agree with having players that always go the safe option. At the JLT game we had a couple chances for some break aways from defence and instead of taking the slightly risky kick up the middle, it goes sideways and we’re corralled to the boundary. Even if he is a spud at kicking, just go for it.
I don't agree with having players that always go the safe option. At the JLT game we had a couple chances for some break aways from defence and instead of taking the slightly risky kick up the middle, it goes sideways and we're corralled to the boundary. Even if he is a spud at kicking, just go for it.
From another poor kicker, a safe kick to the boundary and a reset is better than a risky turnover kick up the middle.
Although with Leuy out of the ruck and us getting smashed in the cleanances a risky kick might have been better in the last half.
I don't agree with having players that always go the safe option. At the JLT game we had a couple chances for some break aways from defence and instead of taking the slightly risky kick up the middle, it goes sideways and we're corralled to the boundary. Even if he is a spud at kicking, just go for it.
There has not been a single side in the history of the game that hasn’t carried at least a couple of guys who wouldn’t always take the safe option
Not every key defender is going to be Dustin Fletcher or Matt Scarlett
I can’t stand the New England patriots - but you gotta admit they know how to be successful. They have a team motto of ‘do your job’ and everyone plays their role.
I am guessing that Ambrose is a ‘Do your job’ type of guy and the coaches love it. If he can keep his opponent to a goal or two a game, then who gives a rats toss bag about how many kicks he get or how flashy he looks!