Best 22 2021

[Ruck'n'Roll]

In aussie rules , almost no one my sons age refers to anyone as centre, rover and ruck rover.

Or "Followers"

[RogueSwan]

... Whether you like the name or not, I don't really care. But the roles exist. And a lot of strategies coaches implement are inspired by US sports. Zone defence is a great example from the NBA.

According to this page the VFL implemented it well before the NBA (seeing as zone defence wasn't allowed until this century)

[The Runner]

It was used in College ball for a while before the NBA finally allowed it.
I'd argue we didn't really see it in AFL until the 2000s. Man on man defence was definitely the most used method.

[graemed]

It was used in College ball for a while before the NBA finally allowed it.
I'd argue we didn't really see it in AFL until the 2000s. Man on man defence was definitely the most used method.

If you watch videos of the 70's and 80's you will see that Gary Ayres, Chris Mews, Peter Knights and others from that era all implemented a form of zone defence. It was less common but Tom Hafey certainly implemented a form of it when he was at the Swans.

[Ludwig]

Positional naming in every sport changes with time.

In aussie rules , almost no one my sons age refers to anyone as centre, rover and ruck rover. Its just midfielders. I do object to the term quarterback though , it is a little like referring to our full forward as a striker. It bears some resemblance to the role but really isnt the same. If you were to modernise that role it would be playmaking half back or intercept defender but for me that really just describes an atrtibute of that person in many ways rather than a role that may or may not exist on the field.

With zone defences, it makes sense to have player position names relate to the relational positions the players have on the field. So the positions relate to where the game plan would line up the players in respect to each other and the respective goals in an 'ideal' zone.

That's why I've been using the terms Fullback, Halfback, Centreback, Midfielder (for on-baller), Centre forward, Half forward and Full forward for how to organise the player positions. It's more of a generality than anything fixed. It doesn't preclude the use of terms like Wingman or Inside Mid to identify lateral positioning.

We can come up with substitutes for foreign terms, like quarterback, if we want to uniquely label a player attribute that applies specifically to Aussie Rules. For instance, we could use the term Counterback instead of Quarterback, for that defender that sets us the counterattack.

There's nothing magical about any of the names we use. Whatever terminology we decide to use as a footy community is perfectly fine and allows us to change and adjust with the times and how the game is played.

[Auntie.Gerald]

Sam Mitchell and Luke Hodge were qtr backs were they not?

Pivotal go to players setting up play ?

[Nico]

I am not talking about the word quarterback. I hate that word. What I was talking about is the action. The action of placing a player back who can intercept. The action. Why do you not read the bloody post properly. I never said anything about the word being used but about the actions they were describing attributed to the word.

In fact I stress how much I hate Americanisms and soccer terms being used in an Aussie game

Sent from my JAT-L29 using Tapatalk

I read your post again, and yes you are right. My apologies for misinterpreting your words.

[stevoswan]

I concur with the coaches bringing back ideas from overseas trips but I would say with some confidence that no AFL coach has ever used the term 'quarterback'.

Having said that, I'm all for new Australian terms for new 'positions/roles' in our evolving game, sure. Just not quarterback.

[Blood Fever]

Aren't we really just taking about the defender whose hands we want the ball in to deliver into the forward line. Malceski , McVeigh and now Dawson and probably Campbell eventually if we believe what the coach has said recently.

[Ludwig]

Aren't we really just taking about the defender whose hands we want the ball in to deliver into the forward line. Malceski , McVeigh and now Dawson and probably Campbell eventually if we believe what the coach has said recently.

First of all, I don't like using the term quarterback for Aussie Rules. It has such a specific role in gridiron that's not repeated in any other team sport, in that the quarterback has such a disproportionate control over the game compared with other positions.

I think there's also confusion about who would be the 'quarterback' in AFL. I would say that Jake Lloyd is our quarterback, since I would define it as the defender who is given primary responsibility to change the play from defence to attack. It's usually the defender with the most possessions. Rory Laird plays a similar role for Adelaide and Caleb Daniel for the Dogs, but a team doesn't necessarily have to have this kind of player role. If we played the kind of defence that didn't require Rampe to have key defender responsibilities, the role would probably split between Rampe and Lloyd.

I'm really surprised that Lloyd doesn't get tagged more often, because it would certainly slow down our transition game if he were tagged on a regular basis.

[Auntie.Gerald]

"strength in diversity". EM

[Ralph Dawg]

Is Hayden McLean about to have a break out season? One of our top improvers in the time trial and judging by Melican's praise in Cal's podcast yesterday, proving a handful in the trial matches.
If he establishes himself in 2021, along with McDonald, we hav our FF (chop out ruck) and CHF positions covered for the next 5-10 years.

[barracuda]

Is Hayden McLean about to have a break out season? One of our top improvers in the time trial and judging by Melican's praise in Cal's podcast yesterday, proving a handful in the trial matches.
If he establishes himself in 2021, along with McDonald, we hav our FF (chop out ruck) and CHF positions covered for the next 5-10 years.

Great question. I have seen a couple of the internal trials and he takes a couple of awesome contested marks right in front of goals each match. However in terms of ground play he doesn't seem to offer too much. If his role is to provide that marking contest deep in front of goals then he will play. If he has to provide other things then I am not a hundred percent sure.

[bloodspirit]

It is a great question! As I think I have mentioned before, I perceive McLean in 2020 as a Sinclair-lite, in that he was not quite as good in the ruck or forward as Chief is, at that stage. However, he's really young and got great ticker (like Sinkers) and improving all the time, so who knows.

I agree with barracuda that McLean is an impressive unit and I have seen him clunk some great marks at training (I saw Gould and Rampe struggling to mark him yesterday). However he isn't that mobile and between his moments of impact he is a bit quiet and doesn't apply as much pressure as other players. What was great to see is that he was one of the most improved in the time trial and so he is obviously working hard to improve.

The same question could be posed about Joel Amartey. Could he have a break out season? I was disappointed by his time trial a few weeks back but I think his physicality and game play is improving. Gould was also tangling with him yesterday and struggling to push him around. And, unlike McLean, he is really athletic and mobile and has a great leap. He was doing ok in the ruck (better than McLean thanks to his leap).

Either, both or neither of them could become a regular member of the best 22 if you ask me. Best case scenario: they both come on well and replace Sinclair and Hickey in the years ahead. TBH, I can't really see it unfolding that way - seems a real longshot.

[Ludwig]

I agree, bloodspirit. If we can get just one of McLean or Amartey to come through and pair up with McDonald, we could have that anchor in the forward line that will keep us competitive for the next decade. If both of them make it, we should be a perennial top 4 contender, given the amount young talent we have in both defence and the midfield.