Vogels...could he be the key defender we need

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Originally posted by stellation
One thing that it does give is a KPP who could play deep in defence and, in need, take the kick-in with the new "hurry up" rules.

On the basis of what I saw at North Sydney (I know it was only 15 a side) the new kick-in rule is utterly horrible.

I can see players stepping back over the line deliberately when confronted with opposing forwards, then sprinting into the goal square and bringing the ball in wide.
It won't be a last resort anymore, I like seeing backmen fighting to clear the ball from deep in defence.

I guess it's what you'd expect when marshmellow's like Kevin Bartlett and Andy D are in charge of the rules committee and the AFL respectively.

[SimonH]

Originally posted by Ruckman
On the basis of what I saw at North Sydney (I know it was only 15 a side) the new kick-in rule is utterly horrible.

I can see players stepping back over the line deliberately when confronted with opposing forwards, then sprinting into the goal square and bringing the ball in wide.

Excellent point. Given the tendency of all teams these days to test the limits of the rules ad absurdum, the issue will soon not be 'do you have to wait until the umpire has waved his flags?' but 'do you have to wait until the umpire has finished signalling a point at all?' If it's the intention that a kick in from a behind becomes like a free kick or a mark (i.e. an entitlement to take a kick without being tackled, but not a 'time out' from the game), you're perfectly entitled to play on before the umpire signals that either of them has been awarded.

We could be faced with the very unedifying sight of a player under hot pressure taking a step backward over the goal line, then immediately running forward to the edge of the 10m square to take his kick in... and the players who were just about to legally tackle him having to reverse direction and quickly run away from him on pain of giving away a 50 metre penalty for interfering with the man kicking in.

The rule-makers seem to have forgotten that a behind is a score. The fact that it isn't the highest possible score is neither here nor there. The game has to stop while the umpires adjudicate on the topic (in consultation if it's a tight call), indicate that a score has been awarded and that it's all sweet to re-start. It's pretty hard to think of another ball sport that allows the players to keep playing while the umpires/referees are still working out whether a team has scored!

[Roscoe]

IMHO Vogels will not get a spot up front with so much competition

I like the option of Superted as our 4th or 5th attacker - he will not get a super defender after the opposition match up on Bazza , Mickey, ND and ROK

even though he virtually got us home on his own against Footscray (bloods,Rok and other pedandic @@@@s no comments about their new name or otherwise p*ss off to big footy).

The back half is his best option, but I think he needs a bit more mongrel - he is a little "soft" at times.

he was dropped after the semi against WCE last year in Perth
when we were robbed - and rightly so - a few of his efforts in tackling , chasing and contesting were not up to scratch

He has the skills - but what is in his head and his heart/guts ???

[ROK Lobster]

Originally posted by Roscoe
even though he virtually got us home on his own against Footscray (bloods,Rok and other pedandic @@@@s no comments about their new name or otherwise p*ss off to big footy).

Do you mean the Western Bulldogs?

[NMWBloods]

I thought maybe he was talking about Footscray JUST...

[liz]

Originally posted by Roscoe

he was dropped after the semi against WCE last year in Perth
when we were robbed - and rightly so - a few of his efforts in tackling , chasing and contesting were not up to scratch

He has the skills - but what is in his head and his heart/guts ???

Roos stated, though, that he was slightly unlucky to get dropped. And the fact that he was replaced by a smaller player, supports the notion that it was for team balance as much as anything.

Vogels was in his first year at AFL level. His age and physical development meant that he was a bit more advanced than a typical first year player, but it is still unfair to judge the long term capabilities and attributes of a player on what they deliver in their first handful of games.

[elroy67]

Originally posted by Roscoe
IMHO Vogels will not get a spot up front with so much competition

Interestingly, He is nominated as a key position defender in his profile on the club website.

[barry]

Vogels could be an ideal KP backman. It was never going to happen last year because of LRT ("Normy S") development, and we couldnt have two inexperienced players holding down both spots at once. Anyone still with lingering thoughts that Vogels should have replaced LRT in 2005 need only take a look at "Sensational Swans" or grand final dvd's.

Vogels may not get much of a go in 2006 either, but by 2007 I expect Leo Barry to hand over the reins of full back to Vogels, with Leo off to the pocket of half back flank.

I dont think Vogels has the skills to break into our forward line. He's well behind MOL, Hall, Okeefe and Davis in pecking order. But the trasistion to key defender is a opening for him.


Its amazing for a premier to have such exciting prospects the following year:
Eg. Vogels, Moore, Malceski, Doyle, Richards, etc.

[Thunder Shaker]

A defender that can play forward when needed. A bit like Hunter in the GF.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Originally posted by Thunder Shaker
A defender that can play forward when needed. A bit like Hunter in the GF.

That's exactly what I was thinking, a very usefull commodity.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Thunder Shaker
A defender that can play forward when needed. A bit like Hunter in the GF.

Or Leppitsch.

[punter257]

or silvagni

or bradshaw

[NMWBloods]

Or Dunkley... oops...

Maybe Shauble instead.

[Charlie]

Originally posted by barry


Vogels may not get much of a go in 2006 either, but by 2007 I expect Leo Barry to hand over the reins of full back to Vogels, with Leo off to the pocket of half back flank.

He will have to get a go, if he features in our long term plans. He turns 23 in a few months. He's not going to wait forever, and he *should* be out of contract at the end of the year. I see him as a full-forward down the track - O'Loughlin is likely to retire in 2008-9. But in the meantime we can certainly do with another option down back.

We are fortunate to have four young KPP options in Richards, Grundy, Vogels and Roberts-Thomson. If we can keep them all - and assuming, of course, they all develop as expected, then that is our spine for much of the next decade. Not before time, too, with Mick, Baz and Leo all 29 this year. I still fear we'll rue not taking another young tall as a backup in the '06 draft, but that can't be changed now. Hopefully the four of them all cement a spot so it doesn't become a problem. Releasing Leo back to a flank/back pocket would be a luxury.

[ScottH]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Or Dunkley... oops...

Dunkley went forward a few times, with some success.