Goodes at CHB

[dendol]

On todays outing, Im not sure how he is progressing. He got outmarked at least 3 times in a body-on-body contest with young De Luca and Norman - both very skinny, but were able to out-mark him. Roos was even forced to move him to CHF, and gave C Bolton the job on De Luca, despite giving away so much height.

Its still very early days, I know, but I'd still prefer him to play ruck-rover, or play as the ruckman at stoppages, where there isnt as much crash and bash. He is never going to win a Brownlow at CHB. His true value is his ability to find space when playing on less mobile ruckmen, or creating mismatches in height and strength when tagged by a midfielder.

[Schneidergirl]

I see where you are coming from, but aside from todays game I've thought he has been pretty good at CHB.

I think I'll leave it up to Roos to determine the best position for him
:)

[RogueSwan]

As I have mentioned on another thread, I just don't think he is a defensive player. He is creative and attacking and a bit too unaccountable for his man.

[NMWBloods]

He needs to play as a ruck rover and be given his freedom - just lacks the discipline needed as a defender.

[Mike_B]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
He needs to play as a ruck rover and be given his freedom - just lacks the discipline needed as a defender.

Ditto for me, especially once Schauble is back. We can definitely use his skills, particularly his ability to keep his arms free to give off the handball around the ground playing as ruck rover with the option of pushing forward or back as the loose man in defence.

[Foreign Legion]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
He needs to play as a ruck rover and be given his freedom - just lacks the discipline needed as a defender.

I agree NMW - problem is - who do we put in the backline to replace Adam?

Goodesy is a long term ruck rover - he'd win another Brownlow there I reckon.

As an aside: we are bloody lucky we recruited Craig Bolton when we did - a much underrated player.

Cheers

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Foreign Legion
I agree NMW - problem is - who do we put in the backline to replace Adam?

Unfortunately no one at the moment - just have to hope Schauble is back soon. Although I'd like to see James get another go.

Edit to fix typo!

[Bleed Red Blood]

I was talking about this with my Dad, suggesting that Goodes is such an important player that if he isn't performing in an area, he should be moved, my Dad didn't think so, "gaining experience in all area's of the ground"

[Captain]

Yep Goodes doesn't look comfortable at CHB. He was completely out positioned on numerous occassions by smaller opponents.

He needs to play on the ball for mine and have no accountability. One of our biggest strengths and threats is having the opposition tear their hair out over who will play on him. When he is at CHB they can almost dictate terms.

[EMJ]

Radio fm 101.7 in Sydney said late this arvo Schauble could be back next week.

[Nico]

What you all fail to recognise is that this bloke is carrying an injury that resticts his mobility. I winced everytime he got the ball thinking he would completely break down.

He is doing a sensational job just getting on the ground. Get used to it because unless a miracle operation is invented soon he may be set to play this way for the rest of his career.

[RogueSwan]

Originally posted by Nico
He is doing a sensational job just getting on the ground.

No one is doubting that, we are justing commenting on the way he plays in defence, just appearing too unaccountable.

I get nervous watching him try and twist and turn, hoping that he won't do any more any more damage.

He seemed pretty to have good mobility early on in the game, showing the ball and weaving through the opposition.

[sharpie]

I would be surprised if Goodes has had any real training at CHB during preseasons. That is the time he can really learn how to play the position. He would have been training as a ruckman or loose roving player throughout last preseason I would think. Regardless of his injury, I doubt you can learn a completely different style of play in the weeekly training sessions between games in the middle of a season. He needs a solid preseason learning how to cope with his knee and learning the CHB trade.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

I agree with many of you when Schauble returns we get two bonuses,

Firstly it means the backline can be stabilised. We could even bring back James and give him another shot down back ~ only this time he won't have to establish himself on the biggest and best opposition forward.

Secondly it means we put Adam Goodes back on the ball where he belongs, he looks lost on the forward line and he's far too loose on the backline. On the ball he can trust his reading of the play and return to Brownlow form (yes I know he's injured but the injury is too slight for an operation).

Also given that big Jason Ball is going to need a break soon (back spasms not good) it may give the Swans a chance to see what a Doyle/Goodes ruck partnership would be like.

Doyle takes the centre square bounce then moves forward to provide some height up there, and Goodes gets to run around the ground.


However I'm repeating myself as you see from an earlier post (May 10) . . .


Without Goodes in the ruck, (which provides us with a fourth midfielder at bounces ~ he roves a lot of his own taps) we loose a lot at clearances. And if the opposition taggs Kirk, as Richmond did, then we're really stuffed.

So why isn't he in the ruck where he can be run into form?
Probably Roos believes his frame won't take the buffeting, that he will lose his spring from too many collisions (ala Dermott Brereton). In this he's probably correct ~ but CAN he however play anywhere other than the ruck?

I believe like many of you he should be returned to the midfield, he should spend half of each quater in the ruck (about all he can stand), the rest of the game should be spent either in the forward line "resting" (although not long because he really has phenomenal aerobic capacity) or as someone suggested in the preseason he should spend time on the ball. Not however at centre square bounces.
I think I'm right now.


Five days later they sent Goodes back to the centre square and he did his knee, I was right then and I think I'm right now!

[Sid]

There is absolutely no doubt that his best position is rucking. I just remember all those marks he took when we were kicking out of their square, and wherever he appears around the ground, theres something to do for him.

But i guess we'll see how he goes after schaubs comes back.

[cressakel]

Originally posted by Ruckman
I agree with many of you when Schauble returns we get two bonuses,

Firstly it means the backline can be stabilised. We could even bring back James and give him another shot down back ~ only this time he won't have to establish himself on the biggest and best opposition forward.

Secondly it means we put Adam Goodes back on the ball where he belongs, he looks lost on the forward line and he's far too loose on the backline. On the ball he can trust his reading of the play and return to Brownlow form (yes I know he's injured but the injury is too slight for an operation).

Also given that big Jason Ball is going to need a break soon (back spasms not good) it may give the Swans a chance to see what a Doyle/Goodes ruck partnership would be like.

Doyle takes the centre square bounce then moves forward to provide some height up there, and Goodes gets to run around the ground.


However I'm repeating myself as you see from an earlier post (May 10) . . .


Without Goodes in the ruck, (which provides us with a fourth midfielder at bounces ~ he roves a lot of his own taps) we loose a lot at clearances. And if the opposition taggs Kirk, as Richmond did, then we're really stuffed.

So why isn't he in the ruck where he can be run into form?
Probably Roos believes his frame won't take the buffeting, that he will lose his spring from too many collisions (ala Dermott Brereton). In this he's probably correct ~ but CAN he however play anywhere other than the ruck?

I believe like many of you he should be returned to the midfield, he should spend half of each quater in the ruck (about all he can stand), the rest of the game should be spent either in the forward line "resting" (although not long because he really has phenomenal aerobic capacity) or as someone suggested in the preseason he should spend time on the ball. Not however at centre square bounces.
I think I'm right now.


Five days later they sent Goodes back to the centre square and he did his knee, I was right then and I think I'm right now!

Goodes has been found out the last three games by his inability to jump, spoil and double back on his opponent while in defence. If a medal was given out for the worst on ground, Goodes would have nine Downlow votes in the last three games.

As I mentioned above, Goodes has lost his ability to jump and contest in packs and to quickly turn when outpositioned. Therefore, I would play Goodes on the wing, instead of on the ball in a ruck-roving capacity, as he won't have to compete in rucking contests or will he be bullocked and have to turn quickly when the ball bounces in all angles at Centre bounces. As Goodes hasn't lost his sublime ability or endurance, I believe the wing would be the best position at this stage of the season. There is no pre-requisite on the height of wingers therefore, I believe by playing Goodes on the wing the opposition coach would be severly woried about his influence on games and would therefore have a very talented player manning up on Goodes.

Saddington was used in this role, even though the team sheet listed him everywhere else, for at least three games before going down with a knee injury - which I believe was very effective and caught the opposition off guard.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Originally posted by cressakel
Goodes has lost his ability to jump and contest in packs and to quickly turn when outpositioned.

There seems to be a great deal of uncertainty about exactly what abilities Adam has lost.
You've mentioned vertical power and horizonal stability, another poster suggested leg speed.

Does anyone actually know? He seems to have lost them all yet the injury is purportedly insufficiant for an operation so is his prob physical or mental?

It's not that I disagree with your wing suggestion, I just wonder what capabilities has he really lost and which ones have disappeared (just as they did prior to the knee injury when he was wasting space on the forward line.

[cressakel]

Originally posted by Ruckman
There seems to be a great deal of uncertainty about exactly what abilities Adam has lost.
You've mentioned vertical power and horizonal stability, another poster suggested leg speed.

Does anyone actually know? He seems to have lost them all yet the injury is purportedly insufficiant for an operation so is his prob physical or mental?

It's not that I disagree with your wing suggestion, I just wonder what capabilities has he really lost and which ones have disappeared (just as they did prior to the knee injury when he was wasting space on the forward line.

Good point.

Goodes has had a problem over the years with getting everything right mentally before his obvious physical abilities shone through on the ground in all sorts of positions.

Maybe that is why he played so well to begin with at CHB but now has tapered off somewhat. Therefore, Roos should advise every 3-4 weeks that he will be playing a new role and the challange to play well in that particular position will mean a high level of performance is given during the initial 2-3 weeks in that position.

[sharp9]

Can't say I agree with ALL this negativity. He's no Chad Cornes right now, but there have been significant occasions in recent weeks when he has chipped in with fantastic efforts that will hopefully become the norm not the exception. Haven't watched the tape but, from memory, there were three really important contested marks or spoils from him in the last q (when we got our scoring going) and he turned defence into attack just as would hope he would do.

As for being outmarked by Fisher etc....well that shouldn't happen to a player of his quality and I reckon he will get the hang of it very quickly.

My best 22 definitely has him at CHB

Bevan Schauble C. Bolton
Barry Goodes Kennelly
Crouch Williams Mathews
Davis Hall O'Keefe
Nicks O'Loughlin Schneider

Ball Kirk J. Bolton

Doyle Saddington Fixter Maxfield

No room for Buchanan, Ablett, McVeigh, Fosdike, LRT, James if everyone is fit and firing.

[penga]

Originally posted by sharp9
As for being outmarked by Fisher etc....well that shouldn't happen to a player of his quality and I reckon he will get the hang of it very quickly.

fisher is a bloody good mark... wouldnt that also have something to do with goodesy being outmarked by him? or is it that goodesy had to punch the ball?

saddington was crucufied for being outmarked by fisher... do we see a trend? it might have something to do with fisher actually being pretty good!!! :rolleyes: :mad:

if goodesy was marking bazza and bazza took a mark, would it be coz goodesy didnt control the situation like he should have OR bazza can actually take a mark?

[NMWBloods]

Goodes doesn't seem (at this stage) to have the defensive ability to spoil his opponents, which is something that Saddington has been criticised for. Schauble, C Bolton and Barry usually are able to put a lot of pressure on their opponents during marking contests, either punch the ball or hitting the arms. Everyone can get outmarked, however it depends on how often and how it looks.

[penga]

Originally posted by NMWBloods


:D

my point was, that fisher is a good mark and it should not be seen as a given that goodesy will beat him hands down...

more respect needs to be shown on this board for a lot more of the opposition's players

[Mark]

Originally posted by Ruckman
There seems to be a great deal of uncertainty about exactly what abilities Adam has lost.
You've mentioned vertical power and horizonal stability, another poster suggested leg speed.

Does anyone actually know? He seems to have lost them all yet the injury is purportedly insufficiant for an operation so is his prob physical or mental?

It's not that I disagree with your wing suggestion, I just wonder what capabilities has he really lost and which ones have disappeared (just as they did prior to the knee injury when he was wasting space on the forward line.

Cruciates along with colaterals give the knee/stifle strengh from shearing pressure. So basically, they stabilise the joint from sideways and front-back pressure. Cruciates tie across in an x across the joint (side to side) and also from back to front. The grade of his pcl tear is such that an operation only returns the current amount of stability anyway (ie no perfect cure !).

Hope that makes sense, hard to explain without using jargon.

So to answer question, his knee will feel loose, and will have a degree of inflamation. Very much now a mental and physical injury. He can build up muscles around joint to give the "feeling" of increased stabilty but it is again a mental thing. All injuries are different but until he is comfortable with it, it will affect most parts of his game.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by penga
:D

my point was, that fisher is a good mark and it should not be seen as a given that goodesy will beat him hands down...

more respect needs to be shown on this board for a lot more of the opposition's players

I completely agree with that - some people seem to think most other teams' players are inferior to ours.

[undy]

Originally posted by sharp9
Can't say I agree with ALL this negativity. He's no Chad Cornes right now, but there have been significant occasions in recent weeks when he has chipped in with fantastic efforts that will hopefully become the norm not the exception. Haven't watched the tape but, from memory, there were three really important contested marks or spoils from him in the last q (when we got our scoring going) and he turned defence into attack just as would hope he would do.
::


I was talking to a Port fan about this - he reckons that when Cornes zones off his man, he often ends up picking up another player in that line of offence/defence, so he still in a similar (CHB) role. I'd guess the rest of the Port backline are more used to this style of play than the Swans. Its pretty hard to play as a defender - you are focussed on your player in a man-on-man defence role but have to be aware of someone else switching, but I don't think its beyond our backline.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Originally posted by Mark
Cruciates along with colaterals give the knee/stifle strengh from shearing pressure. So basically, they stabilise the joint from sideways and front-back pressure. Cruciates tie across in an x across the joint (side to side) and also from back to front. The grade of his pcl tear is such that an operation only returns the current amount of stability anyway (ie no perfect cure !).

Hope that makes sense, hard to explain without using jargon.

So to answer question, his knee will feel loose, and will have a degree of inflamation. Very much now a mental and physical injury. He can build up muscles around joint to give the "feeling" of increased stabilty but it is again a mental thing. All injuries are different but until he is comfortable with it, it will affect most parts of his game.

Thankyou very much.
So it won't improve with time?
Does this mean he shouldn't be playing in a key position?

[Mark]

Originally posted by Ruckman
Thankyou very much.
So it won't improve with time?
Does this mean he shouldn't be playing in a key position?

Million dollar question !, due to limited/lack of direct blood flow to knee capsule any repair is extremely slow. Repair can also take a number of forms, some of which are undesirable (footywise). Very much a wait and see situation IMHO.

That really only leaves mental side of things as far as KPP goes, and that is up to Adam !

[Boodnutz]

I don't want to sound like the voice of doom here, but I believe there is a real chance that Adam could fade out of the game altogether over the next 2-3 years.
There's two issues here - 1)how sound is his knee?2)can he really develop as a defender?
Given that most players are carry long term injuries of some sort I don't know that the knee is the major factor. The key factor is whether or not he has a future in defence. I know he needs time to develop but the early assessment would be in the negative. How valuable is he really to a defensive team? He's constantly outmarked and outpositioned, but because he's Adam Goodes we give him time to improve that people like say, Heath James do not get.
Pavelich is in the same position. For both of them the time is now here to show whether they can cross over and compete at the same level as say, a Jonathon Brown in a key position or whether they will remain tall midfield runners who just pick off easy possessions and look good.
There must be a few players in the team who look at the freedom he used to get when allowed to roam free and say to themselves "wish I had the same freedom as he gets, I'd get just as many grabs". And they'd probably be right.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Originally posted by Boodnutz
Pavelich is in the same position.

Well almost, Adams knee notwhithsatnding, your correct, the pair of them are between positions. Pavlich looked destined to be a great key defender yet he's being played as a midfielder (what a waste) Adam of course has been tried down back up forward and neither is convincing.

Perhaps in time he can become a good key position player, however I don't think he will ever be as great as if he were a follower.

Nor do I believe playing a key position is any less perilous for his knee than the ruck (please note previous comment on centre square).

I believe the ruck is where he belongs, I fear he may well "fade-away" when played elsewhere (like Salmon and Barnes at Essendon).

IF, if, if that is the case, then will he (or the coach) have the nerve to ever play in the ruck again?

Other ruckman have come back from worse knee injuries, it will be interesting to see how his career goes.

[sharpie]

Originally posted by Boodnutz
I don't want to sound like the voice of doom here, but I believe there is a real chance that Adam could fade out of the game altogether over the next 2-3 years.
There's two issues here - 1)how sound is his knee?2)can he really develop as a defender?
Given that most players are carry long term injuries of some sort I don't know that the knee is the major factor. The key factor is whether or not he has a future in defence. I know he needs time to develop but the early assessment would be in the negative. How valuable is he really to a defensive team? He's constantly outmarked and outpositioned, but because he's Adam Goodes we give him time to improve that people like say, Heath James do not get.
Pavelich is in the same position. For both of them the time is now here to show whether they can cross over and compete at the same level as say, a Jonathon Brown in a key position or whether they will remain tall midfield runners who just pick off easy possessions and look good.
There must be a few players in the team who look at the freedom he used to get when allowed to roam free and say to themselves "wish I had the same freedom as he gets, I'd get just as many grabs". And they'd probably be right.

He gets a pretty serious injury - you write him off.
He is forced to play a position he probably has had no real training time to learn - you write him off.

But the best one is that you say Heath James was given no time to improve. Really? So what was he doing for all those years on the sidelines? Recovering from injuries? Isnt that what Goodes is doing now, except he is playing through his obvious discomfort.

Give him a decent preseason learning the CHB craft and getting used to his knee before writing him off.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Originally posted by sharpie

Give him a decent preseason learning the CHB craft and getting used to his knee before writing him off.

Yes it'll be interesting to see what happens. A pity he couldn't learn the admittedly far more complicated Key Forward craft in a preseason or two.

He was / is / has been / will be a truly remarkable ruckman (A modern day Cazaly).

[Boodnutz]

Write him off? I don't think I said that. I said there is a real danger he could fade out of the game. To me, he looks confused when playing in defence. That mind set change may come to him in time or it may not. And yes, a pre-season without the pressure of playing for points may help him adjust.
In relation to Heath James, I referred to game time. I haven't compared stats for Goodsey and James but I would be surprised if there was much variation between them re marks, kicks, tackles, goals conceded etc. From seeing general play, their effectiveness is much the same. Goodsey's in the team, James is out. I assume there is a judgement made that Goodes represents a better prospect in the medium term at least. I rate the coaching team highly and so I respect that judgement, but you wouldn't make that decision based on performances this season.

[dread and might]

i reckon once schauble and james are back in the side, goodes will become the ruck rover type that many on here have discussed.

[swansrule100]

most sides have at best 2 good tall forwards bolton and barry could stop them leaving goodes free

we should try someone else there goodes is ok there, but he is a superstar when he is further up field if he moves and dominates wont need chb half as much anyway

[Nico]

I am going to sit down and watch the replay tonight. Match of the Week at 8.30pm, and look at Goodesy again just to confirm how good he is.

I am still shaking my head at the comments that he could fade away in a year or 2. A few of us on the board understand the seriousness of his injury but others just don't seem to get it.

Goodes is so talented and dedicated that a lesser person probably would have put up the white flag by now.

The only reason he will fade out is if he can no longer continue with his injury. If he faded out because we could not find a position for him he would be the greatest trade of all time, and the Swans the dumbest administration of all time.

[dread and might]

there was at least one passage of play this round and last where goodes wins the 50/50 ball and sets up a great passage of play through brilliance, only to see poor disposals by others leading to nothing. his ability to "make time" once he has the ball has not diminished. people seem to want him to never make mistakes, no matter where he plays.

[dendol]

I guess I brought up the subject because I remember him getting outmarked at least 3 times by De Luca, who is alot skinnier and less-experienced. In a body-on-body contest, I expected Goodesy to be able to effect the spoil, then beat De Luca at ground level. If he couldnt beat a skinny kid, then how will he go against the more established CHF's?

Like I said, its still early days yet. He has one of the best CHB's of all time in Roos to teach him the trade. If Roosy reckons he's CHB material, who am I to say otherwise?

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Originally posted by Nico
A few of us on the board understand the seriousness of his injury but others just don't seem to get it.

Well I'm glad your so "in the know"

You don't however pass on much info (unlike "Mark" above, thanks again).

My question for either of you (or anyone else) is this . . .

His injury isn't operable because it's condition is better than it would be after an operation (or so the Swans said)
and
many players (including ruckman) have comeback from knee problem (up to multiple reconstructions)
so
Why is Adam not playing so poorly?

Is it lack of confidence in his ability to play CHB?
Is it lack of confidence in his knee?
Is Nico's pronouncements more correct than the Swans as to the seriousness of the injury?

[Boodnutz]

I think Dendol has hit the nail on the head. It is the one on one defensive contests that I think he struggles with. These are the contests that usually are particular to key position players where the ball comes in, normally with some time to develop a body on body contest. He regularly lost out with these to Deluca on Saturday and has done with most opponents this year. My belief is that you can only teach so much this type of play. Much of it is instinctive.

"We on the board"? Pardon me, cos I'm new here, but do we have board members able to give insights into the inner sanctum?

I also think Goodsey has got off lightly re scrutiny this season. He's a Brownlow medallist for heaven's sake, and a worthy one at that. Look at the examination Crawford got after failing to produce after his Brownlow season. If Adam was playing for a Victorian club his life would be hell at the moment. I know that's not fair, and he doesn't deserve it, but that's the reality.

I'd really like to see a bit more openness and discussion emanate from the Swans re some of these issues. I know clubs always like to put the best spin on situations but they'd help the profile of club by talking more about where individuals are at etc. In particular, I'd like to see much more comment from Nathan Gibbs. His knowledge of where players are at physically and mentally is superb. In a lot of ways, his comments in the media are the most valuable from any member of the club - Roosy included.

[Bart]

Question for everybody ? This is purely hypothetical. If Goodes best position is in the ruck and he can't ruck again for the rest of his career, yet we struggle to nail down an ideal position for him, what value with Goodes be at trade time given our need of a gun midfielder and defender. I ask this as I believe that we are going to have to pay heavily for our wishlist.

[Go Swannies]

My wishlist is pretty short - I wish Adam was playing with the authority he showed last year.

Trade Goodes - here we go again. Why not trade Kirk? Right now he'd have more value. Having risen to the peak of his profession, it's not surprising Goodes has gone through a slump - though he hasn't dropped back to the level he played at when Rocket was coach. At the start of the season he was trying to be too clever. Then he suffered an injury that has forced him to change the whole way he moves on the field. Surprise! It has taken him a while to get used to it - and he's become a lot more diffident in one-on-one contests. But he was back on the field very quickly and hasn't been letting us down: he just hasn't been breaking games open.

Watch the Carlton game again - some of his positional play was excellent. He is not good defensively playing against a specific target. But that was never his strength. As a rover his ability to read the play remains brilliant. When the team is back to full strength we won't have to use him to plug the gaps.

At least he's playing in a team doing better than either of his co-Brownlowers. And they aren't playing at the same level they did last year either.

Apart from manning up, he seems to be playing better in recent weeks - but still grabs his knee after every play. Let's hope he continues to improve as we run to the finals (hopefully) or we may even have to wait for next year.

If we traded Goodes who would we want in his place. The ideal would be someone big and fast with great athletic skill and excellent ability to read the game. It'd be perfect if it was someone with a proven record of performance like, say, a Brownlow. How about trading him for, um, Adam Goodes who fits all these criteria.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Bart
Question for everybody ? This is purely hypothetical. If Goodes best position is in the ruck and he can't ruck again for the rest of his career, yet we struggle to nail down an ideal position for him, what value with Goodes be at trade time given our need of a gun midfielder and defender. I ask this as I believe that we are going to have to pay heavily for our wishlist.

I think Goodes can be a gun midfielder (as he effectively showed last year), playing as a ruck rover or around-the-ground ruckman. So, I don't think a trade is needed.

[Nico]

Ruckman, I don't profess to be in the know. I am just stating my opinion as to how he is restricted by his injury and believe people are judging him harshly and comparing with his 2003 form, and still expect him to play as well.

I was a critic of him playing up forward and when he had previously played back was genuinely loose. If he was fully fit then we would be in a better position to judge his current ability as a backman.

Watching the replay he may have been outmarked a couple of times, but it was obvious he does not have the spring to jump and spoil from behind. He still played darned well and is a valuable player for the team. He seems to be trying to tweak his style to adapt to his injury.

Of course his best value is as an onballer but that is not possible right now.

[liz]

Originally posted by Go Swannies

At least he's playing in a team doing better than either of his co-Brownlowers. And they aren't playing at the same level they did last year either.



Agree with pretty much all your post but not that paragraph.

Buckley has been hampered by his hamstrings this year but has been playing very well when on the paddock. He was superb against us, and certainly gave Bolton the runaround.

I haven't seen much of Adelaide this year but the reports are that Riccuito is playing just as well as he did this year and is one of the current favourites for this year's BM.

[chammond]

Originally posted by Nico
Watching the replay he may have been outmarked a couple of times, but it was obvious he does not have the spring to jump and spoil from behind. He still played darned well and is a valuable player for the team. He seems to be trying to tweak his style to adapt to his injury.


Spot on . . . the way he's playing is a direct response to his injury.

Anyone who has "done a knee" (surely I can't be the only one on this board?) will tell you the biggest hurdle is not the physical recovery, but the mental trauma of feeling that you aren't able to rely on your knees.

The symptoms are obvious . . . no problem running in straight lines, but a strong aversion to a zig-zag or u-turn . . . a lack of strength in trying to push off from the damaged leg . . . soreness in the knee when bent past 90 degrees.

I think it's amazing that he even contemplates holding down a key position, let alone does a pretty good job at it. It's a stroke of genius on Roos' part to make the most of a bad turn by teaching Goodes a new position while he rehabilitates.

Had to chuckle at the idea that Goodes might be traded. Nearly as funny as calling Adrian De Luca a "skinny kid".

[Go Swannies]

Originally posted by lizz
Agree with pretty much all your post but not that paragraph.

Buckley has been hampered by his hamstrings this year but has been playing very well when on the paddock. He was superb against us, and certainly gave Bolton the runaround.

I haven't seen much of Adelaide this year but the reports are that Riccuito is playing just as well as he did this year and is one of the current favourites for this year's BM.

I was just pointing out that the Swans were 7th on the ladder while the Crows are 12th and the Pies 13th. Buckley and Goodes have both been hampered by injury and aren't playing at the level they were last year. Buckley is current at odds of 251 (the same as Jude, incidentally) and Goodes at 201. Roo is currently listed at 8. But from the games I've seen none of the three are breaking games open they way they were last year - and their teams' win/loss ratio reflects that.

[barry]

I watched part of the Carlton game again last night, and I think Goodes is playing CHB very well.

He outmarked/outpositioned his opponent more often than vice versa, and you need to remember that when the ball enters his vicinity, it is coming in to a position that advantages the opposing CHF.

Occationally he got outmarked when he should have been able to punch, but thats more about timing his punch than anything else, which could be quickly learnt.

CHB is my favourite position for Goodes. It just makes our side look fantastically balanced.

[NMWBloods]

I disagree at this stage - I think Goodes looks lost when competing one-on-one against opposing CHFs. He has shown this against Hawthorn and Carlton, and he also leaves his man open at the wrong times, as he showed against Collingwood. At critical times in games Roos has moved him away from CHB. I would prefer him to play a ruck rover role.

[chammond]

Ugg posted the link to this Advertiser article, but I found this extract really interesting (and encouraging) in light of this thread -

"Remarkably, Crouch has played since 2000 with a "popped" posterior-cruciate ligament ? the same injury that has hampered 2003 Brownlow Medallist Adam Goodes this year.

"I did the knee the same as Goodesy ? it doesn't repair but I managed to play through that," said Crouch, renowned for hard-running link-play with half-backs Goodes, Irishman Tadhg Kennelly and "leaping" Leo Barry.

"I had a scope to check it out but the ligament just doesn't repair, you can't re-attach it.

"All the other muscles have strengthened to compensate for it. I actually did it against Adelaide at AAMI Stadium in a tackle and played the next week against West Coast."

Despite dealing with a "loose" feeling behind the knee, optimist Crouch predicts a long career for Goodes who ruptured his posterior cruciate in a ruck clash West Coast's Dean Cox in round eight.

"Adam will have some pain for the rest of the season but after this year his knee will be fine," he said. "You learn that a few aches and pains are not that serious. You can just get on with it."

[liz]

That certainly is encouraging. Amazing that we were unaware of Crouch's mishap. He truly is an tough, no-nonsense player.

Also brings home how often players carry these injuries about which we have little idea.

[dread and might]

didn't leo play most of last season with painkillers for the ankle as a given?

i worry about how their bodies will be when they're 40 ish, especially considering how increasing professionalism makes it expected for a player to take the field if they feel they can put in 100%

i know they're paid well and all but....sheesh

[Mark]

Originally posted by dread and might
didn't leo play most of last season with painkillers for the ankle as a given?

i worry about how their bodies will be when they're 40 ish, especially considering how increasing professionalism makes it expected for a player to take the field if they feel they can put in 100%

i know they're paid well and all but....sheesh

Yes, i think we sometimes confuse 'toughness' with long term disability. It is a difficult one !