Great game LRT

[Mike_B]

Originally posted by barry
We have an abundance of talls which is why Schuable and Saddington cant get a game. Vogels is behind both of those "talls".

We have an abundance of mediums (for want of a better description). I wouldn't exactly say guys like Barry, Dempster, C Bolton, Kennelly et al would be classified as your typical talls.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Originally posted by Schneiderman
...where we are over-abundantly talented compared to our backline.

Generally speaking forwards are by their nature more talented than defenders {I can hear the gnashing of teeth already}. We began this season (in fact we begin most seasons) with the same problem in both our defence and forward lines, we had only 1 realistic option as a key back (Schauble) and key forward (Hall). The improvement in LRt hasn't helped much in this area because Schauble seems to be in decline (or whatever).

Originally posted by Schneiderman
Again from the Swans website: "A key position defender, Vogels played with the Geelong Falcons before winning the Hampden League best and fairest with Terang-Mortlake in 2004 and then being invited to train with the Swans in the lead-up to the rookie draft."

You still want to quote the swans site even after we've already discussed how innacurate it was about Campbell? I think it's just about as accurate on Vogels, indeed I was surprised when I was first told about Vogel's past because the kid looks like a forward (moving to the right spot, kicking goals with assurance etc).

Originally posted by Schneiderman
I say try him at CHB. And to be really fair he should get as much a shot at it as LRT.

I also say try him at CHB but in the reserves, it can't do any harm and may assist his development as a forward and there will probably be times in his career when he'll need to be versatile. But as competent key forwards are harder to find than key defenders lets not scratch Vogels as a forward hope.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Originally posted by barry
We have an abundance of talls which is why Schuable and Saddington cant get a game. Vogels is behind both of those "talls".

I think we have now (and have always had) a dearth of true talls, in fact I'd suggest Saddingtons whole career is evidence that . . .
a) We're short of talls.
b) There's more to being a tall than height (if you get my meaning).

[Sean]

Originally posted by barry
We have an abundance of talls which is why Schuable and Saddington cant get a game.

We have one tall in defence and one forward. Goodes is tall enough to be a tall but actually plays as a "medium".Schauble & Saddington can't get a game because they are considered not good enough - it has absolutely nothing to do with an abundance of talls.

As Mike said, our side is full of mediums and that is one thing that will stop us winning a flag - come finals time it's the talls that will make the difference and we don't have enough.

Vogels is behind both of those "talls".

Why? Vogels was selected ahead of Schauble before his injury and Saddington hasn't played as a KPP all year.

[barry]

Originally posted by Sean
We have one tall in defence and one forward. Goodes is tall enough to be a tall but actually plays as a "medium".Schauble & Saddington can't get a game because they are considered not good enough - it has absolutely nothing to do with an abundance of talls.

I dont buy that. I think the main reason that Schuable is not getting a game is because his inclusion would make us too top heavy.
We are running two ruckmen off the bench who rarely play anywhere else. We have Goodes playing midfield when he's a "tall". We have LRT, Hall and Oloughlan as tall KPP. And Leo Barry, and Bolton playing "tall".
For a running side, thats fairly tall.

As Mike said, our side is full of mediums and that is one thing that will stop us winning a flag - come finals time it's the talls that will make the difference and we don't have enough.

I thought our side was derth of mediums. A lot of talls, a lot of shorts, but few in between.....compared to other sides.

Why? Vogels was selected ahead of Schauble before his injury and Saddington hasn't played as a KPP all year.

I was under the impression Schuable and Saddington had played more senior games than Vogels this year. I could be wrong.

[Sean]

Originally posted by barry
I dont buy that. I think the main reason that Schuable is not getting a game is because his inclusion would make us too top heavy.
We are running two ruckmen off the bench who rarely play anywhere else. We have Goodes playing midfield when he's a "tall". We have LRT, Hall and Oloughlan as tall KPP. And Leo Barry, and Bolton playing "tall".

Mickey, Leo & B2 aren't talls, they are mediums.

I thought our side was derth of mediums. A lot of talls, a lot of shorts, but few in between.....compared to other sides.

In defence, Barry, Bolton, Dempster, Kennelly. Forward we have Mickey, O'Keefe & Davis plays as a medium although he's probably actually a small.

I was under the impression Schuable and Saddington had played more senior games than Vogels this year. I could be wrong.

Saddo 7, Vogels 5 & Schauble 4. Saddington appeared to be be playing as a flanker whilst Vogels seemed to play more as an actual tall in the forward line. Anyway, none are in the team at the moment so the one with more potential is more likely to keep his spot IMHO.

[barry]

Originally posted by Sean
Mickey, Leo & B2 aren't talls, they are mediums.

In defence, Barry, Bolton, Dempster, Kennelly. Forward we have Mickey, O'Keefe & Davis plays as a medium although he's probably actually a small.

I'm not denying the existance of mediums, but like I said, compared to other sides we are shorter and taller if you know what I mean.

Saddo 7, Vogels 5 & Schauble 4. Saddington appeared to be be playing as a flanker whilst Vogels seemed to play more as an actual tall in the forward line. Anyway, none are in the team at the moment so the one with more potential is more likely to keep his spot IMHO.

Schauble's treatment is a disgrace to the club. I doubt Vogels will get another game this year. No time for new experiements. Schuable and Saddo to come in if needed. Experience counts.

[Wil]

I think Vogels was an experiment to try and help the structure of the forward line while we were struggling. I think he has a future in the club as a "true" CHF if we ever wanted one.

He won't be seen as a back until after at least one preseason playing there. I wouldn't be suprised to see him tried at FB at North Sydney Oval.

Campbell looked good in the pre-season, it is disappointing if he will be dropped (I thought the same of Aaron Rogers though)

[NMWBloods]

To say we have an abundance of talls is ridiculous. We lack key position talls.

Barry and Bolton might be 'playing tall' but they are mediums and more than capable of participating in the running game. Having some talls to replace them would free them up for more running.

O'Loughlin is not a KPP - he's not overly tall or strong.

LRT is a 4th year player and Vogels is a 1st year player. Absurd to say LRT is far more skilled at AFL.

[Sanecow]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
To say we have an abundance of talls is ridiculous.

Well, Donkey isn't getting a game so we have one more than necessary

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Originally posted by Wil
Campbell looked good in the pre-season, it is disappointing if he will be dropped (I thought the same of Aaron Rogers though)

That's who I compared him to earlier in the season, only I'm afraid I didn't think much of either. They both looked the part with strong bodies. Campbell doesn't seem to have much of a leap and isn't a very sure ball handler.

Originally posted by NMWBloods
LRT is a 4th year player and Vogels is a 1st year player. Absurd to say LRT is far more skilled at AFL.

Did anyone really compare the two?

[barry]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
To say we have an abundance of talls is ridiculous. We lack key position talls.

We have a key position tall in the 2's who would probably walk into most sides, but cant get a game with us.

Barry and Bolton might be 'playing tall' but they are mediums and more than capable of participating in the running game. Having some talls to replace them would free them up for more running.

O'Loughlin is not a KPP - he's not overly tall or strong.

LRT is a 4th year player and Vogels is a 1st year player. Absurd to say LRT is far more skilled at AFL.

LRT is a better AFL player, and that is reflexed in games played.

[Diego]

Jesus such a long thread for a medicore player. wow.

[Schneiderman]

Originally posted by barry
LRT is a better AFL player, and that is reflexed in games played.

No he isnt and no its not. He has simply had more chances and has not overly disappointed with the role he has been given.

Look I'll be the first to admit he is a solid "defender". He makes a contest, applies himself consistently, runs all bloody day, and tackles really hard. He causes spillages and prevents oppositions from getting the ball quickly and effectively into the forward line. He is the epitomy of a "defensive tagger".

But if Kirk had stopped at being a "tagging midfielder" we would not be where we are now. He now ammassess effective possession and is often now the "taggee". If Bazza had remained a just really intimidating CHF, we would not be where we are. He has kicked more goals every year with us so far, and way more than he ever did at the Saints.

The question for LRT is whether he can become an offensive weapon too. The ability for all players in the team to be both defensive and offensive is what makes great sides. This isn't NFL, and we wont win a premiership if our entire team doesn't provide us with options across the park.

And currently LRT does not do the really damaging things a classy CHB does, like mark and kick to our players in the midfield. Or float down forward and nail a couple of goals every once in a while.

[Sanecow]

What I enjoy is that Roos has said it was LRT's best game of the year. I wish I had the audio of that to play back as LRT takes his shot at goal. Also, for the observant, who kicked the first goal of the game on the weekend?

The question for LRT is whether he can become an offensive weapon too.

Maybe not a weapon, but a tool certainly.