Tweet
Just wondering on others thoughts of this player as i really enjoy his hard at it style.I believe that in time Buchanan and Schneider would be the perfect double act as swapping midfielders-forward pockets.Have heard people suggest Buchanan should be in the back half but dont really understand that as hes such an attacking player,also i seem to remember i think in 2002 he was played mainly as a FP and had great success till he was injured.
-
daniel f -
I could see Buchanan and Schneider playing in that old-fashioned way, where one is the rover and swaps with the other in the forward pocket.
However, I think they both need to improve their kicking at goals. They miss too many easy ones.Last edited by NMWBloods; 21 July 2004, 01:18 PM.Captain Logic is not steering this tugboat.
"[T]here are things that matter more and he's reading and thinking about them: heaven, reincarnation. Life and death are the only things that are truly a matter of life and death. Not football." -
I really like Monty. I still remember his horizontal mark from 2 years ago. Fabulous. I think he's played well this year.Dream, believe, achieve!Comment
-
Re: Buchanan
i think he would be good as a back pocket as wellOriginally posted by daniel f
Have heard people suggest Buchanan should be in the back half
one day down the track a tad, id like to see both of them in the middle, buccy gets the ball to schneids, 60m pass lace out to *insert future full forward here*
C'mon Chels!Comment
-
Agree. I think Monty has great potential and is wonderful to watch.Comment
-
Re: Buchanan
Not sure about that, my recollections were that he wasn't much good as a goalsneak (kicked almost no goals and looked a far from nippy) in 2002.Originally posted by daniel f
also i seem to remember i think in 2002 he was played mainly as a FP and had great success till he was injured.
I think that's why his form this year has pleased people so much, he may still not be all that crash hot in the forward line but he does far better in the packs than anyone had expected, quick hands.Comment
-
Not counting the veterans I would pencil Monty in at number 3 midfielder (after Captain and Jude) if I were selecting the side. Importantly he offers someting DIFFERENT from our normal midfielders who are, let's face it, a pretty dour bunch.
Monty has real pace and can get the ball out of packs better than any other player on the team right now.....McVeigh is heading that way too, but he lacks Monty's physical maturity."I'll acknowledge there are more talented teams in the competition but I won't acknowledge that there is a better team in the competition" Paul Roos March 2005Comment
-
I like that idea.I think it is better to have your best midfielders stay on the field when they are resting specially when they have the skills and aptitude to play in the forwards.Originally posted by NMWBloods
I could see Buchanan and Schneider playing in that old-fashioned way, where one is the rover and swaps with the other in the forward pocket.
However, I think they both need to improve their kicking at goals. They miss too many easy ones.Comment
-
who is the better player of the twoTheres not much left to sayComment
-
They have different attributes.Originally posted by swansrule100
who is the better player of the two
Schneider looks to have a more explosive burst of speed (when fit), probably plays more instinctively and has a longer, more penetrating kick. He is probably more likely to produce flashes of brilliance than Monty.
Monty is fitter, stronger (at the moment) and has shown better in close skills thus far than Schneider has.
No reason why both can't become pretty good, regular AFL players.Comment
-
hope ur rightTheres not much left to sayComment
Comment