Ted 2nd Ruck LRT back to Full Back

[GongSwan]

Mummy might borrow Jude's war face

[ScottH]

Mummy might borrow Jude's war face

I think it's not such a silly idea to plonk either Pyke or Mummy at FF. They would draw a good defender or 2, give Sammy a bit of support and relief, and if they can bag a few goals, bonus. Then you have the luxury of throwing them into the ruck if needed

[DamY]

I think it's not such a silly idea to plonk either Pyke or Mummy at FF. They would draw a good defender or 2, give Sammy a bit of support and relief, and if they can bag a few goals, bonus. Then you have the luxury of throwing them into the ruck if needed

Like!

[crackedactor]

I think it's not such a silly idea to plonk either Pyke or Mummy at FF. They would draw a good defender or 2, give Sammy a bit of support and relief, and if they can bag a few goals, bonus. Then you have the luxury of throwing them into the ruck if needed

Agree that Pyke at FF could be worth a gamble. Not so much for scoring gaols, but for bursting through the pack of defenders and making things easier for Reidy and Co.
Also if we play mummy, he could be a good back up while Mummy gets some match fitness.Not sure about Seaby filling FF, does not have enough mobility.

[Ratna]

Agree totally with playing Mummy and Myke out of FF. Both playing half of their minutes in the ruck and half of their minutes at FF. If this was the case I would like to see them as stay at home FFs as much as the game allows.

On the original idea I agree that we need Ted as a backman (generally), but if LRT is playing 2nd ruck I wouldn't mind to see both Ted and Reg swapped forward sometimes with LRT going back when he is resting. Not necessarily as plan A, but with the way our fordward line has been functioning trying plan B and C is worth a try when the situation demands. I think all three are probably best suited back, but if there is a match up that could be exploited or to change things up to keep the opposition honest it may be worth a go from time to time.

[Melbournehammer]

Being awake at 3am is likely to cause shortness of temper, but

Would people actually watch our games ?
When was the last time we had a ff stationed inside 50 when the ball is at the other end ? Look at the photo from the st kilda match thread. That is how we play. We bring all of our talls to within a kick of the contest. Most of our better passages of play have been when bursting off crumbs at that point with players streaming forwards because nothing was in front of them.

But it is also our problem because on the wings there is just a big pack including our so called second ruck or ff. they are already getting in the way of Reid and others.

People have got to stop thinking about the players because neither Jesse nor lrt nor spangher, nor pyke,Walsh etc are going to make a lickspittle of difference if all we are going to do is have our three talls compete with their three talls plus two small defenders for crumbs, while our two smalls are still inside fifty helping out the other 10 or so already in there.

And reg did get moved forward against the tigers. He led well and presented, but our midfield got slaughtered. The players dropped were our two rucks !

[jono2707]

Good point Melbournehammer - it seems like this is the current trend in how the game is being played by pretty much all teams - push right up the ground with plenty of open space behind. It certainly doesn't seem to be helping key forwards and you could probably say that few teams currently have properly functioning forward lines. Plonking someone at full forward isn't really an option at the moment with this sort of structure being the current trend as a more mobile forward line seems to be where it's at for a lot of teams....

[GongSwan]

It is a good point about game style and structure, having 12 players in d50 is not a good look, we are not prepared for teh quick kick out of defence which so often happens under pressure and was obvious in teh Tigers and Saints games. Someone needs to stay at CHF and we need a couple of wingmen out there who can take the ball and run with it. Still comes back to winning the contested ball and composure enough to find a target. We've done ok with Jetts, but if he's the only avenue, it's not that hard to shut one player down.

[Matimbo]

Being awake at 3am is likely to cause shortness of temper, but

Would people actually watch our games ?
When was the last time we had a ff stationed inside 50 when the ball is at the other end ? Look at the photo from the st kilda match thread. That is how we play. We bring all of our talls to within a kick of the contest. Most of our better passages of play have been when bursting off crumbs at that point with players streaming forwards because nothing was in front of them.

Couldn't agree more. In both the Tigers and Saints games, when we went inside 50 it was into a huge traffic jam of players so we had a low ratio of conversion-to-goals. This was compounded when their backs got the ball - with so many of our players in the traffic jam, they had a much easier rebound than should have been the case. When going into their inside 50, they often gave good space to fwds on a lead. Watching these games, it is glaring how the opposition seems to score much more fluently. This is supported by our Rebound stats. Even in the games we have won this season, we have either lost or only just broke even on this stat. Change the game style first or player changes will just be shuffling the proverbial deckchairs.