Post-draft Best 22


#1406

I prefer Ambrose over Hartley also.

But if Hartley can iron out a few issues in the preseason then his kicking would be a massive advantage to the side.

So much competition for spots. Love it.


#1407

I also think if Mitch Brown can get his body right then he could have a big say in our backline. He was pretty serviceable before going down last season.


#1408

I thought he was underrated when he played.

Will be tough to crack first team but can definitely provide support.


#1409

If there is, we don’t play one.
With that said a few guys played as or started as forwards who we would like to see develop into mids - Zerrett (albeit under a different setup), Fanta, Tippa, Begley, Lang, and I daresay Stringer.


#1410

Langford & Begley (or possibly Colyer) in, Hartley & Lav out for mine.


#1411

Don’t know what to make of Cals side.

I’m sure he knows as well as anyone the importance of midfield rotations yet he has four talls on the bench.

That’s a very tall side.


#1412

He probably did 18 of these sides in an afternoon, don’t overthink it


#1413

Gleeson and LAV ain’t KPP’s, and if you switch Cal’s side around to have it as it should look with Ambrose, Gleeson & Stewart starting all the players he has named is very close to how it will likely be.

Just swap Langford in for LAV


B: Mark Baguley, Michael Hartley, Michael Hurley

HB: Martin Gleeson, Patrick Ambrose, Conor McKenna

C: Andrew McGrath, Dyson Heppell, Brendan Goddard

HF: Devon Smith, Joe Daniher, Orazio Fantasia

F: Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti, Cale Hooker, James Stewart

Foll: Tom Bellchambers, Jake Stringer, Zach Merrett

I/C: David Zaharakis, Darcy Parish, Kyle Langford Adam Saad


Against teams when we play a smaller backline & drop one of the kpd’s then Green to come in IMO, and Smith to move into main midfield rotations.


#1414

Not bad.

My side would beat yours though😄


#1415

We played gleeson as the third tall defender most of this year.


#1416

Not really. It’s basically the same 22 as most have. He just has the talls on the bench instead of being on the field. And the rotating mids on the flanks instead of the bench.
You might take 1 mid sized forward/mid and replace it with a small forward, though most prob wouldn’t, but that’s about the extent of it.


#1417

He’s got two key defenders on the ground and two key forwards which in my opinion is enough.

He hasn’t tried to disguise his disliking of Langford. I would put him in over Laverde just because he can play midfield or forward.

I would have Franga on the bench also.


#1418

He’s got Hurley, Hartley, Ambrose as KPD.
Hooker, Daniher, Stewart as KPF.
This is not a Cal thing, this is a you vs everyone thing. I’m not saying you’re wrong, but that is our typical structure last year and what most would have.
I would also have Frang and Lang in.
Just out of curiosity, you say you want only 2 kpd and you say you want Frang in. Are you saying you’d play just Hurley and Francis as kpd?


#1419

Ambrose was out for a big portion of the year and it’s no surprise that when he came back in we really struggled to get the ball out of defence.

I would be surprised if we go with the three at the back again.

As for the forwards I don’t mind if we have the three talls as long as a small defensive player is included. Laverde for mine was one taller player to many and I would prefer either green or hopefully long performing that role.

And Francis for mine will replace Gleeson at some point next year. Hopefully early.


#1420

Gleeson will be amongst the first picked next year.


#1421

To briefly reference a post of mine from a month ago;
Particularly when considering the backline there are two different best 22’s.
One for matching tall forward lines, one for matching a Richmond with only one tall forward.
Just maybe our coaches take this into account at selection.
To avoid this circular argument re talls in the backline it’d help to specify.
It’s also why Gleeson’s versatility keeps him ahead of blokes like Hartley - sometimes you need a Hartley, sometimes you don’t.
In terms of Francis, it’s not Gleeson whose spot is at risk in the backline (I’m a Francis fan but the thought of the opposition sending a mobile twisty flanker to Big Red is a bit scarey)
If Francis plays back then it’s either for Hartley whose role is taken by Ambrose, or for Goddard as the floating spare distributor, where his intercept marking/ spoiling and kicking can set up counter attacks.


#1422

Yeah I suspect it will happen moreso now given some opposition may move towards running smaller fwd lines.

Looking at the top sides though…

Crows still will play the 3 talls + Lynch (med)

Cats will send Taylor to defence but maintain the 3 talls inc Crameri*+ Menzel (med)

GWS looked to drop it back to 2 talls (after Mummy got injured) and got better results from that towards end of season. Mainly as they lacked the quality small fwds to pressure enough around Patton, Cameron & Lobb.

And Rich got away with just 1 & a rotating Dusty/Caddy as their medium target from midfield, however likely would go back to 2 if Griffiths fit again.

Sydney will also keep their 3 tall fwd structure. In the final vs Syd we had all 3 of our kpd & Gleeson, probably part of reason he was so prominent as was able to drop off and help out. Our lack of midfield pressure meant he had plenty to do.

*Plays tall


#1423

Tom Lynch has 3cm in height on Crameri, so if you’re including Crameri as a tall for the Cats, you should be including Lynch as a tall for the Crows, or vice versa (i.e., both mediums).


#1424

Height wise you are correct. The way I see it Crameri plays tall however.

He has the strength to go up against a main kpd. When he was our leading goal kicker he often got the opposition best kpd.

If it was a Hawkins, Stanley fwd/ruck & Crameri fwd line I sure wouldn’t want Gleeson matched up on Crammers. But he could cover Menzel.


#1425

For the flanker…
FrancisGIF2
(Pity he can only do this once a game!)