#29 Patrick Ambrose


#3122

I heard that in the 80’s, all supporters were ex coaches.


#3123

but don’t most coaches lose each season? :thinking: :thinking: :thinking: :thinking: :thinking:


#3124

That’s why they are Ex coaches


#3125

Wtf do you know? You’ve never coached or played at the highest level. Come to think of it now, neither have I.


#3126

Yeah? Well you’ve never run an Internet forum so why are you commenting on one?


#3127

You now how we solve this? Give BSD his own thread where all the ‘experts’ can gather in one place to call the game like it is and keep the riff raff like you and me out.


#3128

Listen to Corrigan’s post JL2 presser. He said the injury to Hooker gives Francis or Ridley a spot in the backline. The implication was that Ambrose was already there - if fit and in form.
To answer your question, Hurley, Francis & Ambrose can play as talls or any of them can play on mid-sized forwards. There are certainly forward lines - pies & tigers - where I agree we wouldn’t want the 4 players you list in the back 6. But there are also forward lines where Hooker doesn’t have a clear matchup.
This debate will be resolved by form and fitness, as most hypothetical best 22 discussions are.


#3129

LOL.

A) Everything’s going great.
B) Yep.
C) Concur.
A) Even if we don’t win.
B) It’s about building a culture.
C) And that might take years. Decades, even.
A) But it will be worth it.
B) Yep.
C) Blitz sucks.
A) Yeah, it’s so dumb.
B) rolls eyes emoji Totally
C) Quiet in here today.


#3130

not enough ellipses, my man.


#3131

Thing is, hooker is more versatile than paddy, and also has more valuable weapons (intercept marking) and he plays on taller guys like brown, cox etc who Ambrose simply cannot compete against.

You can always play Francis, and probably Ridley too. But you can’t always play Ambrose imo


#3132

Agreed, Hooker’s contested marking in the defensive 50 is elite also.


#3133

BSD didn’t actually say you had to have coached ‘at the highest level “ to be an expert in his eyes.

So organising kick to kick with six year olds at a family Xmas is a quick pathway to AFL Guru status.
I’m sure you can all award yourselves some sort of internet accreditation to acknowledge this.
He’ll have to listen to you then.


#3134

Ambrose isn’t ten percent the player Hooker is.

I’d say he gets the gig ahead of Hartley as he doesn’t make as many mistakes. But he will require others to pick up the slack on his deficiencies that Hooker ordinarily brings whilst also stopping as well as Ambrose. Francis is going to have to intercept more, Hurley, Francis and Ridley are going to have to mop up around the contest when packs get busted. Somebody is going to have to become the organiser/leader down there.


#3135

Hooker is a much better footballer than Paddy. I don’t think anyone would dispute that.

But lets look at Hookers current weakness Speed is a massive issue. There are lots of forwards today who will out run him. Franklin outran Hooker. That was 5 years ago.

Hooker will need to match up on talls out of the goals square. He would not be able to follow Cameron, Riewoldt Gunston, Buddy, up the ground. But would be ideal against those “stay at home” types like Brown.


#3136

I would think that at the moment if any of Francis, Hooker or Hurley were out, Ambrose would probably get the gig and you are right, others would have to pick up the slack on his deficiencies.

Edit: Which begs the question: who is the bench defender? If Dea, Marty or Redman were fit, I would pick one of them depending on matchups.


#3137

I think acceleration is a problem with all our key defenders, including Ambrose - who also lacks the agility to go with the nimble “short” talls and the height to go with the larger 200cm forwards which makes finding favourable match ups difficult.

Hurley has a similar problem albeit he also lacks in aerobic capacity and strength, he is however a lot smarter and a genuine offensive option.

Hartley, aside from his height, has no real physical advantages - he isn’t quick, doesn’t have an elite tank and isn’t overly strong, which means he is usually exposed in some way by his direct opponent. He does have a good boot, which will suit the new kick out rule.

Hooker is our best defender imo. He has the strength one-on-one to outmark his opponent unlike any other defender I’ve seen but he is getting older and his body may be starting to let him down


#3138

Now we’re talking. :+1:


#3139

I know I don’t qualify as a coach, so a response is unlikely

But in all seriousness, do you see Ambrose, hooker, Hurley and Francis in the same defense and if so, how does it work?


#3140

Just a sprinkle of this and problem solved:


#3141

Gleeson is the missing piece to the puzzle despite his haters. Obviously doesn’t have the strength to take a big bloke, but that doesn’t matter if hurley, hooker and francis are all fit and in the side. He’s a good height and shown he can play even taller than his own height, but also moves well enough to take someone smaller. Good intercept mark, provides enough run out of the back 50 (at least more than ambrose) and his skills and decision making have only ever improved since coming to the club. Don’t know when he’s ready to play, but he’ll have to come through the VFL due to being out for so long. I do think there is a place for both him and ridley in the side, if they rotate bench and half back, or ridley onto a wing. Regardless, he’s very important.

Fully fit imo it should be:

Gleeson Hooker Mckenna
Saad Hurley Francis

With ridley and maybe a mcgrath rotating down back when needed.

But until then, Ambrose needs to play and imo it should be:

Mckenna Amrbose Francis
Ridley Hurley Saad