Jonathan Patton
(plus Mason Redman)
How about a forward line that actually plays in the forward zone and contests all the inside 50 entries.
Every week Joe has had 2or 3 opponents, so where the dark are the other Bomber forwards?
And we do need a forward coach
And play Tippa and Walla there.
Is part of the problem when you donât move the ball quickly enough you end up with zero options forward and then by the time there is a sort of option thereâs about 30+ players all waiting for it to come in?
Get the ball in there quicker. By time we chip it around several times the opposition have flooded numbers back and it's alway 1 on 2 or 3.
This is pretty much it, plus a couple more to help joe shiw
I can confirm that we are working extremely hard behind the scenes to get Patton.
Wait for 2017. In: C. Hooker.Hard for defenders to double team Joe when Cale is in there as well.
then we end up having the same problem. Another top defender who is having to play forward. It hurts our backline. Hooker is better served to the team in defence. We need to trade for a forward
This isnât actually true. What you mean is that Hooker is a better defender and thus given that fact you are extrapolating that his presence there improves the team the most. However this doesnât take into account our structural KPF weakness and the fact that sometimes a player playing a role that doesnât maximise his individual abilities still provides a greater overall gain to the team.
Having said that I donât think it would hurt our backline, Hartley already looks good and that is with a cobbled together team and him having little experience at AFL level. Will he be as good as Hooker? Probably not, but the difference between them when Hartley has another 30 or so games under his belt shouldnât be enough to make or break our defense. And unlike Hurley, Hooker is actually a dangerous marking target up forward so he has worth there. But I wouldnât mind if we looked at trading someone in (Patton reasonably cheap?).
Bring in as a forward coach the only bloke who knew how to lead to the ball coming into the forward line in the last X years.
Of course I am talking about our last accomplished CHFâŚ
âŚDavey.
Delivery from the midfield. It often comes in haphazard or far too slowly.
Wait for 2017. In: C. Hooker.Hard for defenders to double team Joe when Cale is in there as well.
then we end up having the same problem. Another top defender who is having to play forward. It hurts our backline. Hooker is better served to the team in defence. We need to trade for a forward
This isnât actually true. What you mean is that Hooker is a better defender and thus given that fact you are extrapolating that his presence there improves the team the most. However this doesnât take into account our structural KPF weakness and the fact that sometimes a player playing a role that doesnât maximise his individual abilities still provides a greater overall gain to the team.Having said that I donât think it would hurt our backline, Hartley already looks good and that is with a cobbled together team and him having little experience at AFL level. Will he be as good as Hooker? Probably not, but the difference between them when Hartley has another 30 or so games under his belt shouldnât be enough to make or break our defense. And unlike Hurley, Hooker is actually a dangerous marking target up forward so he has worth there. But I wouldnât mind if we looked at trading someone in (Patton reasonably cheap?).
I see what your saying, but playing Hooker forward is a short term solution imo. We need a long term one. If we were going to be competing for the flag in the next few years i would say give it a go. I agree that Hooker is a very dangerous marking target, one of the best marks in the comp. My main concern is his goalkicking- its not quite Joe levels bad, but its not very good.
Patton if injury free would be perfect for us. It allows Hooker to stay back where he is most suited, and Patton is a legit marking option and a pretty good kick for goal(no idea if its true, but it suits my argument).
Get the ball in there quicker. By time we chip it around several times the opposition have flooded numbers back and it's alway 1 on 2 or 3.This is pretty much it, plus a couple more to help joe shiw
I know Carlton kept flooding back but nothing irritates me more than when a player marks 50m out and goes backwards 40m. We then chip it around 4 or 5 more times and the ball ends up where the initial player marked it a minute beforehand still 50m out!
Get the ball in there quicker. By time we chip it around several times the opposition have flooded numbers back and it's alway 1 on 2 or 3.This is pretty much it, plus a couple more to help joe shiw
Joe always has 2-3 on him, where are our loose men?
Iâd love to see them trial BJ down there as a stay at home forward and tell him he is not to leave the 50m arc. He has a good grab and kick and seriously think he is cooked as a mid
Get the ball in there quicker. By time we chip it around several times the opposition have flooded numbers back and it's alway 1 on 2 or 3.This is pretty much it, plus a couple more to help joe shiw
I know Carlton kept flooding back but nothing irritates me more than when a player marks 50m out and goes backwards 40m. We then chip it around 4 or 5 more times and the ball ends up where the initial player marked it a minute beforehand still 50m out!
and by that stage the opposition have flooded back in numbers
Get the ball in there quicker. By time we chip it around several times the opposition have flooded numbers back and it's alway 1 on 2 or 3.
To be fair, that only happens about half the time.
The other half, they chip the ball BACKWARDS until there is a skill error (which happens as someone else pointed out in 1 of 6 of our possessions) and we give up a goal to the opposition.
And also to be fair, we did this too many times with the 12 in the side too.
http://resources3.news.com.au/images/2011/11/24/1226205/378863-jonathon-patton.jpg
Really, the answer is a Bulky low endurance KPP who has had two knee reconstructions. Unless we get him for less that a third round selection we should run for cover.
the solution
âThe Solutionâ would edge out âThe Packageâ as worst nickname.
"The Solution" would edge out "The Package" as worst nickname.
shut up or heâ;ll break your jaw.
Iâd give anything for Lobb from GWS. What an absolute freak talent.