Vogels to CHB

[giant]

Where's the "deja vu all over again" emoticon?

[NMWBloods]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Vogels to CHB

Originally posted by barry
Stop sooking bloods.

Are you a politician or do you just cheat on your partner a lot as you are a master of twisting the truth - have a look at your post and work out who is 'sooking'...

Thats drawing a long bow.

In general you play your better KPP up forward, and lesser ones down back. Its easier to learn disaplin (sp?) than flair.

'Discipline'
My point is that we are meant to have this great forward line (when all are fit again). Our problems have been a KPP in the backline and a couple of midfield guns. With the KPP in the backline, wherever he comes from, it would be a boon to us.

St Kilda probably play the most open attacking style of game in the comp, and their defense is ordinary.

Yep, and they come under pressure when the midfield doesn't deliver because they do not have a strong defensive unit. Add Penny back into that backline and it improves a lot.

If Vogels turns out to be as good as you believe (or just better than LRT) then he belongs up forward. Thats our key weakness at the moment IMO. With O'keefe doing nothing, we are one forward down at the moment.

This is all 'at the moment'. I said I think Vogels in the forward line is best now. However, in the future he may fill in the CHB spot we need, perhaps with Vogels, plus we will get Davis back and O'Keefe will hopefully return to form plus one of the ruckmen can rest in the goal square.

[Sean]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Vogels to CHB

Originally posted by NMWBloods
I still think this is a little misleading wrt the ability of our backline. As well as they've done, much of the credit goes to our scrambling, lockdown style of play.

We watch Barry, B2, Schauble, LRT etc every week and how often do they get beaten one on one? Sure our gameplan has something to do with it but we seldom lose because our defence is beaten. For example the Eagles slaughtered us through the midfield - they only got one goal from a mark inside 50. Our defence probably beat their forwards quite comfortably that day.

If we opened the game up more, such that the ball came into the D50 more often or with better delivery or with more space, then I think some of our defenders and our overall backline might be found wanting.

You could be right IF we did but we aren't going to at this stage. In my opinion we don't play the way that we do to protect or defence - we do it to protect our midfield and it's lack of skills compared to other sides.

With a couple of better KP defenders, we might be able to open the game up more and thus try more to win by kicking more goals rather than stopping our opponents. Of course, the ability of our midfield to execute this strategy becomes an issue too.

Indeed - having better KP defenders would be great but moving Vogels back will change nothing. I'm actually sure that he would do a good job - in fact I think he would be better than LRT but he is more valuable as a forward at this point.

[NMWBloods]

See above.

[Schneiderman]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Vogels to CHB

Originally posted by barry
In general you play your better KPP up forward, and lesser ones down back. Its easier to learn disaplin (sp?) than flair.

Moving Chad Cornes and Justin Leppitsch from CHF to CHB did wonders for both teams.

And I think Scott Lucas had more impact at CHB than CHF last year.

For KPPs:
The ruck is now fine. Lots of options.

Barry Hall is our CHF. We can rotate any player we like into FF with the way the modern game is being played (especially at the SCG).

Our CHB is the next position we need to fill by the end of this year. If we are to be a threat in the finals this year or next, our best candidate needs to go there ASAP. I think Vogels might potentially be better than LRT, so I say give him a stint or two. Thankfully we have apparently abandoned the Goodes project.

Our FB position is a worry, but between Schauble, C Bolton and L Barry we seem to be coping. Hopefully over the next couple of years we find a 200 gamer to slot in down there.

[barry]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Vogels to CHB

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Are you a politician or do you just cheat on your partner a lot as you are a master of twisting the truth - have a look at your post and work out who is 'sooking'...

Playing the man is doing you no service Bloods.

'Discipline'
My point is that we are meant to have this great forward line (when all are fit again). Our problems have been a KPP in the backline and a couple of midfield guns. With the KPP in the backline, wherever he comes from, it would be a boon to us.

No, our backline has been pretty good. We tried Goodes and Saddington, and now we are trying LRT. But through all that our defense has held up well. Schauble's injuries have been a blessing in disguise as its made others stand up.

Our weekness has always been midfield and ruck. Ruck is sorting itself out. Midfield is coming along.

Whats opened up this year is forward line. Its been horrible. We have relied on Hall to do it all. Only MOL this week. Still no 3rd tall, and no crumbing FP.

[B]

Yep, and they come under pressure when the midfield doesn't deliver because they do not have a strong defensive unit. Add Penny back into that backline and it improves a lot.

This is all 'at the moment'. I said I think Vogels in the forward line is best now. However, in the future he may fill in the CHB spot we need, perhaps with Vogels, plus we will get Davis back and O'Keefe will hopefully return to form plus one of the ruckmen can rest in the goal square.

I cant see any need to move LRT unless we have someone to replace him who is guaranteed to do a better job. Putting an untried bloke at CHB is a risk not worth taking.
I see no value in rearranging the deck chairs again.

[Schneiderman]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Vogels to CHB

Originally posted by barry
Putting an untried bloke at CHB is a risk not worth taking.
I see no value in rearranging the deck chairs again.

Two things:
1. I wont bother checking, but I hope you haven't and wont complain about accepting mediocrity being a downfall at the Swans. Because this opinion smacks of exactly that.
2. Where do you get the idea that Vogels is untried? I'm sure Voges38 can confirm it, but I bet you Luke has played more games at CHB than LRT. And I bet you he has done better job at it to. Why not try him out at AFL level? Considering the average (note I dont think it is poor) performance of LRT in that role, what do we have to lose?

Yes we can wait till Davis returns to plug the forward gap, or try out Saddo there again (remember last year before the injury). But dont ignore the option just because you are afraid it may not work out

[barry]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Vogels to CHB

Originally posted by Schneiderman

Our CHB is the next position we need to fill by the end of this year. If we are to be a threat in the finals this year or next, our best candidate needs to go there ASAP. I think Vogels might potentially be better than LRT, so I say give him a stint or two. Thankfully we have apparently abandoned the Goodes project.

And what are you going to do when Vogels doesnt make it at CHB ?

A revolving door policy doesnt do anyone any good. Ask Richmond. LRT needs to be persisted with this year, and into next before any decision is made.

[Sanecow]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Vogels to CHB

Originally posted by barry
A revolving door policy doesnt do anyone any good.

Except in captaincy, apparently.

[barry]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Vogels to CHB

Originally posted by Schneiderman
Two things:
1. I wont bother checking, but I hope you haven't and wont complain about accepting mediocrity being a downfall at the Swans. Because this opinion smacks of exactly that.
2. Where do you get the idea that Vogels is untried? I'm sure Voges38 can confirm it, but I bet you Luke has played more games at CHB than LRT. And I bet you he has done better job at it to. Why not try him out at AFL level?

Please dont tell me you are comparing a player playing CHB in the AFL against the likes of Lucas, Pike, etc to one playing CHB in the hampten league playing against Keith the dairy farmer.

LRT looks pretty hot down in Canberra too.

[NMWBloods]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Vogels to CHB

Originally posted by barry
Playing the man is doing you no service Bloods.

Amazing that someone who can dismiss other people?s views by a deflective personal attack can make this hypocritical statement. Also the same person who accuses people of saying certain things and never back it up when challenged.

?Stop sooking?
?You my friend, are a LRT hater. Only the twisted bitter mind filled with vengful hate?
?You are madder than a cut snake.?
?that is possibly the dumbest thing I've read on here for a while?
?an LRT-hater like yourself?
?You either have a feel for the game or you don?t?
?only a pedant would argue against?
?didnt look any further...like you?

I cant see any need to move LRT unless we have someone to replace him who is guaranteed to do a better job. Putting an untried bloke at CHB is a risk not worth taking.

Huh?!? LRT was an 'untried bloke' - not just at CHB but at AFL!!

[barry]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Vogels to CHB

Originally posted by NMWBloods


?Stop sooking?

A fair call, you were.

?You my friend, are a LRT hater. Only the twisted bitter mind filled with vengful hate?

Note the word "friend".

?You are madder than a cut snake.?

Sometimes your arguments are of that vareity. Again fair.

?that is possibly the dumbest thing I've read on here for a while?

It was.

?an LRT-hater like yourself?

Perhaps a little harsh, but fair.

?You either have a feel for the game or you don?t?

Obvious.

?only a pedant would argue against?

And a pedand did.

?didnt look any further...like you?

Dont know what context that was in.

[Sanecow]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Vogels to CHB

Originally posted by barry
And a pedand did.

'pedant'.

[ROK Lobster]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Vogels to CHB

barry has becoming boring. His arguments in defence of LRT are hollow and based on the assumption that the great blond uncoordinated bumbler will discover his inner footballer and become a champ. Having realsied that this is not much of an argument he has descended to trolling, stirring Bloods for a reaction day after day.

[ROK Lobster]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Vogels to CHB

Originally posted by Sanecow
'pedant'.

Gold.