what forward line ?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • dimelb
    pr. dim-melb; m not f
    • Jun 2003
    • 6889

    #31
    If we kicked 13 goals nobody would be complaining about a dull game!
    He reminds him of the guys, close-set, slow, and never rattled, who were play-makers on the team. (John Updike, seeing Josh Kennedy in a crystal ball)

    Comment

    • liz
      Veteran
      Site Admin
      • Jan 2003
      • 16733

      #32
      I agree that our forward set up was inept yesterday - though probably less so than in round 1. We had far more scoring opportunities, even allowing for around 5 of the behinds being rushed (most in the 3 point sense of "rushed").

      Some credit has to go to Watt and Firrito who both had excellent games (as indeed did some of our backmen).

      I don't think a raw inside 50 count means very much. Sure, long term you might be able to derive average conversion rates but there are inside-50s and inside-50s. Not all are equal. I got the impression that we were getting it in deep enough to be dangerous, but were just too slow doing so.

      Some of the way the players are being used looks a little confusing at the moment, and not necessarily playing to their strengths. I'm not sure if it's my imagination or not, but O'Keefe does seem to have been stationed more as a forward since the loss of Hall. But he's flailing around the 50m mark, not leading particularly purposefully, and when he is able to mark, he's outside his scoring range. And we're losing his run up and down the ground, where he is often a valuable link man, and where he manages to progressively lose his man as the match wears on because he's worn him out. Either let him play the role he's evolved over the past few years, or station him close to the square where he's the player most likely to take a mark in heavy traffic.

      And yet Davis is the one who seems to be playing mostly deep, amongst the traffic. Davis is a pretty good one-on-one mark most of the time but is rubbish in the packs because he has no leap and is short. Yet roaming around between 40m and 50m - maybe even further out - he stands more chance of receiving the ball one-on-one and normally (ie not yesterday) stands a decent chance of converting most of his set shots.

      Comment

      • swan63
        On the Rookie List
        • Apr 2008
        • 4

        #33
        Agree - O'Keefe getting ball far too far out to score / Davis can't get the ball - can't agree with one on one scenario, Harley killed him previous wk / need a big fwd who can take a pack grab - I'm not sure Spider is answer - better perservering with Big Bad Jesse

        Comment

        Working...