Carlisle is an AA defender, Hurley plays solidly in defence. I would be focussing on Bellchambers, Hardingham and Daniher as our main forwards. This means Fletcher needs to be thinking about the young players a bit more, in my opinion.
Hardingham is not the answer. It's taken teams less than 3 weeks to figure him out - put someone good in the air on him. We all thought he'd be the perfect match up - tough in the air, mobile on the ground. But Freo and the Saints have shown that actually if you nullify him in the air, he isn't proving any more mobile/agile than his opponent. He may be better when Carlisle/Belly/JD are all taking the three best marking forwards, but he ain't no Crameri and can't hold one of the 3 tall spots himself.
LOL who exactly thought or said this in the history of ever?
I assume you're referring to the "perfect matchup" comment I claimed others have said? I think its been obliquely said a lot by those either proposing Hardy forward or putting him as a permanent part of our forward line. Maybe "perfect" is slightly exaggerating, but they usually say he'll be hard to match up as opponents will need someone who is his height/mobile but he'll beat them in the air. Talk about his defensive pressure and marking ability. If you're referring to the Crameri comment, well a number of people in this thread have put him down as one of three key talls. Which in my view Crameri could do, Hardy cannot.
Hurley is a ■■■■■ forward. I said at the start of the year I think both are backmen but there is no point whining about Carlisle being moved a few rounds in when Hurley was given 2-3 years there.
The truth is our KPF planning has been pretty crap really.
Hurley is a ■■■■■ forward. I said at the start of the year I think both are backmen but there is no point whining about Carlisle being moved a few rounds in when Hurley was given 2-3 years there.
The truth is our KPF planning has been pretty crap really.
I agree to an extent... but I don't think we 'planned' for our gun number 2 draft pick 'franchise CHF' to be constantly broken and then traded away for next to nothing when he should be at the peak of his powers right now, and nor did we expect our 'diamond in the rough' 3rd tall to walk out after I think only his first(?) non rookie contract either. Both of these things happened before JD had a chance to develop. Throw Darcy Daniher in there as well, who had to retire at 21, but showed a few glimpses. Then there has been Hurley's wrist injury and not being able to string games together in the forward line to develop any form of consistency. We've been pretty unlucky with the KPFs, not merely bad recruiting or planning. If I remember correctly, we recruited Carlisle as a Fwd as well.
Hurley is a ■■■■■ forward. I said at the start of the year I think both are backmen but there is no point whining about Carlisle being moved a few rounds in when Hurley was given 2-3 years there.
The truth is our KPF planning has been pretty crap really.
I agree to an extent... but I don't think we 'planned' for our gun number 2 draft pick 'franchise CHF' to be constantly broken and then traded away for next to nothing when he should be at the peak of his powers right now, and nor did we expect our 'diamond in the rough' 3rd tall to walk out after I think only his first(?) non rookie contract either. Both of these things happened before JD had a chance to develop. Throw Darcy Daniher in there as well, who had to retire at 21, but showed a few glimpses. Then there has been Hurley's wrist injury and not being able to string games together in the forward line to develop any form of consistency. We've been pretty unlucky with the KPFs, not merely bad recruiting or planning. If I remember correctly, we recruited Carlisle as a Fwd as well.
I said this on blitz last season (or maybe even 2012) and got yelled at, but will put it out there again, given the last 5 minutes of the game: Carlisle, Hurley, Fletcher in defence and Hooker forward. Hooker is a great mark, good play reader, and a great competitor with a defensive mindset and he is always going to provide a contest and be dangerous. It is definitely a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul, but Carlisle and JD are simply not doing enough in F50 and Hurley and Carlisle look far more comfortable down back. We simply do not have a genuine tall 'presence' in F50 and that is killing us. No point letting the opposition kick only 80 points if we get it into F50 more than they do but still only end up with 60 points. Gotta get a really good tall in there, and Carlisle and Hurley will be more than serviceable in D50 (Hurley did ok tonight, just got killed on the turnover).
Completely agree. Hooker gets where the ball is; he's always in the play. The problem with Hurley as a forward is that for much of the game he's nowhere to be seen. Carlisle up forward is even worse; he's invisible for most of the game and occasionally gets a kick somewhere up around the wing. A good key forward is always presenting, always making a lead, always noticeable.
Obviously you can't judge on the basis of a five minute cameo in junk time, but at least when Hooker was up forward he got the ball and we got goals. Everything about the way he's built - big, strong boy who doesn't get muscled off the ball - and the way he plays in defence - read where the ball is going and get there first - suggests he's at least worth a proper try up forward.
His short passing game is crap: three turnovers for goals last night and even the passes that made it looked wobbly. But he can hoof it a fair way and reasonably straight. So maybe he could even kick goals. It would be a nice change to have a key forward who did that.
I still believe Hurley could be a great forward, he has at least shown glimpses of it. The opposition also seems to put a lot more effort into him forward than they do with Jake, which can only be a good thing for Joe. At the very least you know Hurls will crash a pack even when outnumbered and bring the ball to ground. The main problem with Hurley and form as a forward in the past was the constant interruptions due to injury. He looks so much more imposing and threatening as a forward than a defender. Playing in defence seems to limit his aggression and I feel that is a massive loss to the team. The only plus for mine is he doesn't seem to get injured every few weeks playing in defence. He body seems to be right now and he has the confidence from stringing 5 in a row together, I would have loved to have seen him swapped and thrown forward at half time last night.
Hooker forward..! What laugh....May aswell play Fletch forward too seeing as the sky is falling.....
Not saying do it but the switch last night late was impressive. Within 5 minutes everything he touched turned to gold.
Parking that in the memory banks for the future.
Why did they start Hurley, who is our third or even fourth best key defender (behind Hooker, Carlisle and Fletcher) on Riewoldt? Hooker had been getting the best forwards and doing a job on them. Riewoldt worked Hurley over up and down the ground, and was too good in the air close to goal.
I’ve always been in the Carlisle defence, Hurley forwards camp. One of the reasons for this is their personality. Introverts to the backline, extroverts to the forward line someone once said. Carlisle is best suited when he’s set a task. He’s not a proactive footballer, but as a defender you don’t need to be. Your decision-making is informed by your opponent. Hurley on the other hand can make things happen by force of personality. He’s not as good in the air as Carlisle, or as tall, but he always competes and creates a contest. As a forward you can through periods where the ball doesn’t come your way, but Hurley can will himself into the game, and turn it. He also crashes packs, which is a ■■■■■■ handy attribute for a forward.
This is going to be slightly uncomfortable...
We need Hurley and Carlisle both as key defenders with Pears as an optional.
This means Fletcher as great as he is, a club legend needs to take this into account.
Another nonsense post from Mootsy. Fletcher has been our best defender after Hooker this year. He can play forever if he wants.
Why can’t they be swapped around during the game when they are both being beaten? We needed to change something last night but our coaching staff just sat on their hands.
I’ve just looked through the papers this morning and can’t find the articles about Hird v Bomber. They have all gone quiet. Were we 5-0 this time last year??
Think I'll be reserving my judgement for at least half a season, not after a game where its obvious the team was flat and still recovering from whatever flu/illness that'■■■■■ the joint.
The thing with Hurley is that he always presented and crashed packs and at the least bought the ball to ground.
Carlisle doesn’t do that at all and only gets a touch when it is an uncontested mark.
Shouldn’t have swapped them in the first place but for the love of Christ we can’t keep it the way it is.
We can’t have Carlisle having 5 possession games!
We are meant to be a top 4 team and we can’t have this sought of ■■■■■ nullifying our forward 50 entries because we have a bloke who doesn’t want to be up there and has the work rate of an obese 12 year old.
It cost us the game last night that we didn’t have someone presenting but that is what Hurley will always give.
This isn’t NAB Cup anymore and these are premiership points on the line here each week and I’m afraid that through Thompson’s stubbornness it could cost us more points and make players go backwards.
Carlisle put in performance last night screaming: “I don’t want to be here and I want to play defence, so I am going to put in a ■■■■■ effort and hopefully it will sink in and I won’t be played forward anymore.”