Goodes...

[midaro]

...please give him a go in the ruck.

[midaro]

Goodes won a Rising Star award... as a ruckman.
Goodes won All-Australian 2003... as a ruckman.
Goodes won a Brownlow... as a ruckman.

Why don't we play him as... a ruckman?

[Charlie]

I don't care whether he's in the ruck or not... but PLEASE PUT HIM IN THE MIDFIELD FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!!!!

[Foreign Legion]

Clearly injured at the moment.

[ugg]

He just looks really lost at the moment wherever he's meant to be playing today. Maybe the thinking is not to have him physically battered by playing against the likes of Ottens and Stafford, to the point where he's totally exhausted come finals time.

[NMWBloods]

If that's the thinking then our coaching panel have lost the plot!

[midaro]

Originally posted by Foreign Legion
Clearly injured at the moment.

... you got some info?
To me, he looks to be moving very well - when he gets near the ball (which hasen't been often).

I think it has more to do with us trying to blood Doyle. There's some chance Ball is going to retire at the end of the year, so we do need a second ruckman (with Goodes).

But playing Doyle is (and has) cost us some drive from the centre (which isn't our strong point anyway).

[Charlie]

Roos said something like "it's very important for our structure to have Goodesy down there (forward)."

Garbage. As it is, we're missing out on his creativity in the midfield, whilst we have Hall and Goodes both going for marks and ending up spoiling each other. Or, alternatively, it ends up an uncontested mark for Richmond... which I can only put down to a lack of communication.

Too many cooks in the kitchen!

Put Goodes in the middle, and keep him there. Needn't worry about him getting tired, because he hasn't been near it enough to work up a sweat.

That will solve the problem. Davis, O'Keefe and Saddington know how to stay out of Bazza's way, while still doing plenty themselves. Goodes doesn't.

[Foreign Legion]

I asked a member of the coaching panel about him last week - very tight lipped. If you watch him live (not on TV) when he doesn't have the ball his speed and mobility looks bad.

That looks to me as if he has a leg or groin injury. Davis is the same - ok for a short burst but can't sustain it because of pain.

[midaro]

Originally posted by Charlie
Too many cooks in the kitchen!

Absolutely.
We have one of the elite forwards in the competition, but for some reason the coaches seem to want to play him CHF and have him getting possession on the wing.

Let's learn from Neitz & Melbourne. Put Barry Hall in the goal square and look for him.

[Newbie]

Maybe they are trying to save Goodes for September. Goodes is not running out the year playing the ruckman at all time. He was looking very tired second half of last year. Just a theory with no evidences to back up .

[Mike_B]

Originally posted by Newbie
Maybe they are trying to save Goodes for September. Goodes is not running out the year playing the ruckman at all time. He was looking very tired second half of last year. Just a theory with no evidences to back up .

If they can't get things sorted soon, there won't be a September!

[desredandwhite]

IMHO he looks injured. Was constantly off the pace and metres from the contest today. Simply doesn't have the athleticism that is his trademark.

[Red]

Originally posted by Charlie
Roos said something like "it's very important for our structure to have Goodesy down there (forward)."

Garbage. As it is, we're missing out on his creativity in the midfield, whilst we have Hall and Goodes both going for marks and ending up spoiling each other. Or, alternatively, it ends up an uncontested mark for Richmond... which I can only put down to a lack of communication.

Too many cooks in the kitchen!

That will solve the problem. Davis, O'Keefe and Saddington know how to stay out of Bazza's way, while still doing plenty themselves. Goodes doesn't.

Couldn't agree more on the above points. Saddo's actually a pretty good forward -- good goal sense, good kick at goal. They should leave him there for longer.

Put Goodes in the middle, and keep him there. Needn't worry about him getting tired, because he hasn't been near it enough to work up a sweat.

Gonna keep working on you over this, Charlie.

Goodes is quick for a big guy, but slow for an on-baller. Big guys (even fast ones) do not chase down nippy little guys very well -- trust me I speak from experience here.

So we have two ruckman-sized guys in the middle, meaning the opposition have an extra quick there.

Scenario #1: Little opposition guy gets the ball, runs away with it. Goodes/Doyle/Ball lumbers away after him, looking silly.

Scenario #2: Goodes/Doyle/Ball takes possession in the middle, little opposition guy catches him with it, we get pinged at worst, in-effective disposal at best.

Maybe those scenarios are a little drastic, but the point I'm trying to make is with two ruckmen in the middle, we'll be too slow.

So do we play the extra ruckman up forward? Same problem as Goodes up there -- they're in the way. Play them in defence? Unfortunately neither Ball or Doyle are much chop in defence. They're too slow even for opposition forwards!

Solution? Simple -- Goodes in defence. Leave the forwards to it, the midfield quicks to it, and use some of that brilliance where it's <i>really</i> needed.

[Charlie]

I'm sorry, but I can't agree with you that Goodes is too slow.

Pace is an advantage, but you can trade a yard of pace for height, and make no mistake, Goodes is one of the fastest tall guys in the league. A little extra height in exchange for a little less pace works for Pavlich. It works for Koutoufides. It's worked before for Goodes - he played on the wing in his best games in 2002.

You need a mix. 2 tall guys, 2 fast guys and 2 pack rats is a good mix. Especially when one of the tall guys is Adam Goodes.

Your post seems to read like a 'where do we put this guy so he's out of the way' post rather than a 'how do we best use his freakish talent' one.