JM is stating that he should be playing in the forward line in the Reserves, not in the back line. He did not state that he was going to be a star, in fact I don't think he is up to it either.
But if he EVER is going to play in the firsts (with our injury history, anything could happen), it will be as a forward not back, so play him where we will potentially require him.
Spot on.
As JM said, why is Pears playing forward line in the reserves though? if it is for the future then surely he has to play back as when Fletch retires either he or Carlisle will be required down back.
Wtf is all this "JM knows more about coaching than Bomber does" rubbish coming from?
You seriously believe a random from the internet has a better grasp of what's required than a dual premiership coach?
Just astonishing sometimes this place.
I dont think anyone actually said that.
I've only just read this thread and I think the major fallacy with JM's article is that it's basically saying "If we understand Bomber's motives, then he's doing it wrong".
We leaves it open to me that we (JM in this case) just don't understand bomber's motives.
I know Bomber said he's juggling tactics vs strategy, short term v long term etc, but I think in this case we are reading too much into it.
Bomber is also juggling personalities, development, injuries, contracts.
I'd also argue that Bomber is only 1 member of the match committee, has no say at all in when players will return from injury, and has even less input with where players will line up in the VFL (Skippy will take what he says on board, probably passed on second hand, but on the day it might not work out).
Having said that I think it's good that he's got a lot in the pipeline for the future. If Pears does get called upon as a defensive forward, at least he will have had some experience up there in the VFL for a few weeks. There's no reason why Pears can't play an Ambrose type role.
No offense to Ambrose, he could be anything, but so far he's played like a defender up forward, just spoiling and bringing it to ground. It's not like he's been marking on the lead in each quarter. I'm definitely on his bandwagon, I think he should be a lock until he gets 20 games into him minimum. Don't forget without those 3 goals against the Hawks he'd have a lot less support on Blitz, hell, he was just about to get dragged.
As for Steinberg, well he was a forward, and then they moved him back, and then they played him fwd in the pre-seaon, and now he's gone back again. It's not like he hasn't had an extended run up forward, so he should be more than ableto have a crack if he gets the call up.
Our ideal backline might currently be:
Fletcher Hooker Baguley
Hibberd Hurley Demspey (bench:Gleeson)
But aside from Baguley (and arguably Fletch) they aren't the most durable bunch going around. Chances of them all being fit for 3 games in a row is pretty unlikely, and same goes for our fwd line. The more guys we have that can plug holes the better.