I honestly can’t see us going with three tall forwards plus Stringer, and if we do, I can’t see Stewart playing ahead of Mitch Brown.
I also don’t think the new goal square will make any difference to us keeping/playing Hartley.
4 Likes
While I’d keep Hartley on the list, the longer goalsquare is the stupidest justification for keeping him around.
2 Likes
Anyone who watched us this season would know there is literally no chance we will play 3 talk forwards and Stringer again… we did that for 2 months and ■■■■■■■ stunk.
If fit I’d expect Joe, McKernan/Brown/Stewart, Stringer and the smalls.
6 Likes
So you’ve completely discounted the structure we used when we were playing well this year?
I was trying to replicate the forward line that thrived on Daniher delivering quickly deep into the forward 50 in 2017, but Stringer is the new element that can’t be left out, but also, on reflection, makes us too tall.
As @choppsuey has just chimed in, I should be looking to replicate the best of the 2018 as well as the 2017 forward line structure. So I acknowledge I should take out Stewart and either stick with Baguley or update with Guelfi.
So a better version would be:
B: Saad Hartley Francis
McKenna Hurley Gleeson
M: Zaharakis Langford McGrath
Bellchambers, Heppell, Merrett
F: Fantasia Daniher Baguley
Stringer, Hooker, Walla
I: Smith, Parish, Myers, Guelfi
E: Ridley, Redman, Begley, McKernan
But if I am looking to the future I like Guelfi replacing Bags and Redman on the bench.
I rate Smack, Brown and Stewart as tall forward options that each offer something different, but are all behind Stringer, and I crave seeing a fit Joe wheeling around and kicking it to Hooker once again, 100+ goal kicking combos don’t grow on trees.
I might be wrong, but I do think making all grounds 9m shorter as far as the kick in goes as well as wider, in terms of where you can kick it to, could make Hartley a lot more offensive. It will effectively bring us 20m closer to goal when you combine his range with the length of the goal square. When you combine this with our speed and marking power, quick long kick ins to our players advantage will make us even more potent compared to other sides I think. And if you say they will be too easy to defend, they will also create more space for medium length kicks because they will require the opposition to defend a much larger area.
But time will tell.
3 Likes
I highly doubt Hooker will play forward if we have some fit tall forward options.
Back 7 will be Hurley, Hooker, Francis, Gleeson, Saad, McKenna, Redman
Front 6 will be Daniher, McKernan/Brown/Stewart, Stringer, Fantasia, Walla, Baguley
That’s one extra tall then we played most of the back end of the season but still more mobile than the 1st 2months when were just way too tall.
Hooker’s relative lack of mobility basically rules him out of playing forward unless we have a stack of injuries.
Yeah, that’s an interesting point, and I kinda agree.
In the days before zone defences, he’d be as useless as ‘back from retirement version’ Mal Michael was on any player who could lead well. But these days, Hooker does one of two things:
- He stands in the square on the big gorilla forward, while others block the space to lead into.
- He just defends space and relies on his ability to read the ball.
His mobility is seemingly less of an issue in those situations, than it is trying to lock a ball inside forward 50.
But in saying that, and to respond to @SCarey, I personally think you can make an equally viable case to play Hooker at either end of the ground.
He’s good whichever end you play him.
1 Like
In Smack’s re-sign article he mentions that one key area he wants to focus on is defensive pressure.
He’s certainly more adept at ground level than Hooker & it’s so vital to bring that defensive heat in fwd half in modern game.
I want to give a metaphorical (and literal) kick fairly in the jatz crackers to anyone who picks a back 7.
Not saying we’re going to have a spare, but there will be rotation as has been noted.
oooohhhh, that hurt!!!
metaphorically speaking.
1 Like
I don’t get how adding 9 metre to the goal square makes any difference to congestion and does anything for Michael Hartley.
He never really kicked long from the backline regularly and was directed by Hurley or Goddard where to kick. Didn’t really play the Fletcher style and in his 41 games kicked 1 goal. Fletch kicked 71 goals in his 400 game career.
He is a great kick, but doesn’t use it as a weapon enough.
2 Likes
The way forward lines are lining up these days we need at least a couple of guys with enough toe to go with your Betts and Rioli’s.
Right now we have McGrath, Saad and McKenna who are proven at AFL level (leaving out Baguely who seems to have settled forward).
Unless another name gets thrown into the mix I can’t see either Saad nor McKenna venturing too far out of the backline.
Hooker, Hurley, Francis, Saad, McKenna, Gleeson with Heppell and McGrath to give a chop out if needed.
Won’t teams just set up for longer kicks? so it won’t really be a surprise?
Having the option to go short and long may stretch zones and webs, but that would likely benefit the shorter passes and the run and carry types. I reckon as long as you maintain unpredictability with kickouts, or in our case develop it, you will see kickins become a more prolific scoring source.
I think McKenna would be a better option for kickouts than anyone else, as with the extra space he’ll have less heat on his short passes, he can also hoof the ball long and he’ll have more space to run it out or take 15m then hoof it to the wing. He’d certainly be the least predictable, for better or worse.
I’m waiting for the first coach (probably Clarkson) to go a basketball style half court press to negate the new square size.
…which would mean that there is more space for the short option.
Yes, but that would be in a much larger area, given the shape of the ground.
Consider your nads squashed into pulp.
We used Goddard in the role because it ended up being the only role he could play against many opponents. He’s not here any more.
1 Like
Box protector? Is that what women are calling it now?
3 Likes