Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 5678910 LastLast
Results 97 to 108 of 117

Thread: Changes for Rnd 10 V Hawthorn.

  1. #97
    Quote Originally Posted by Ludwig View Post
    Hawthorn are taking 4 tall forwards into the game: Roughead, Gunston, Vickery and Willsmore, and although Sicily is not particularly tall, he plays tall because of his high marking capability. Additionally, McEvoy likes to go forward and would have to be picked up by Sinclair, who is a poor defender.

    It's a clever ploy by Clarko, as trying to get us with height mismatches in their forward line is probably their only chance of winning. I doubt it will work because we have too much class around the ground, but no need to provide an opening for them.

    I suppose we could always throw Reid down back if it's a problem.
    I have to agree with Industrial Fan. It would play unto our hands if Clarkson played all those talls together in the forward line. As soon as the ball hits the deck, we would be away.

  2. #98
    Aut vincere aut mori Thunder Shaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    My secret laboratory in the suburbs of Melbourne
    Posts
    3,839
    Quote Originally Posted by AB Swannie View Post
    I have to agree with Industrial Fan. It would play unto our hands if Clarkson played all those talls together in the forward line. As soon as the ball hits the deck, we would be away.
    Yes ... especially if we use the same tactics that Collingwood used to destroy the Hawks in the second half last week: move the ball as fast as they can and expose the Hawks' lack of pace.
    "Unbelievable!" -- Nick Davis leaves his mark on the 2005 semi final

  3. #99
    No Glouftsis. She's umpiring Melbourne v Suns. We've got Rosebury, Fisher & Donlon. Their names don't mean much to me. But I daresay someone has some bitter memories they can bring out?

  4. #100
    Ludwig, dare I say you are becoming Barry-like in your devotion to no-ruck-theory? Perhaps we can ditch Horse's whims for proper modern ruck-free footy next time we play at the glorious ANZ?

  5. #101
    Senior Player
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    1,567
    Quote Originally Posted by Ludwig View Post
    It was very kind of Longmire to give the Hawks a fighting chance by burdening our side with 2 lumbering ruckmen. But even with their extra man advantage, we should still win easily.

    He wouldn't want to embarrass his mate Clarko by playing Aliir and having proper matchups for their forwards. Maybe Longmire thinks playing with a handicap will help his chances of winning another Coach of the Year Award.

    I really admire Longmire for his charity.
    McEvoy and Vickery?

    Sent from my SM-T805Y using Tapatalk
    We have them where we want them, everything is going according to plan!

  6. #102
    Veterans List Ludwig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Chiang Mai
    Posts
    9,310
    Quote Originally Posted by Scottee View Post
    McEvoy and Vickery?
    Hawthorn are a poor example, because they're not a strong side. But we should go with Tippett and Reid v McEvoy and Vickery, which ought to be a better than breakeven situation for us, and we can easily take them on most other positions around the ground.

    My qualm is with Longmire's insistence on playing 2 ruckmen, with the mistaken notion that this will somehow lead to a stoppage dominance. It's been shown quite consistently in recent times that this is not the case. So it warrants questioning whether we would be better served by having an extra midfielder or tall defender in lieu of the weaker of the 2 ruckmen, in our case this would be Sinclair.

    The extra tall in our forward line only clogs things up and often Sinclair just gets in the way, or draws a defender to the contest. Tippett has been most effective playing in the ruck and drifting forward, often getting a mismatch. McEvoy is quite good at this tactic as well.

    The only thing that will save the ruckman is the end of the centre bounce, which would give a greater advantage to taller ruckmen. All the recent rule changes have been detrimental to the ruckman position and we need change our thinking on how the stoppages should be handled. Longmire is an intelligent coach and I think he will get it right in the second half of the season.

    I'm not too concerned about this game. We could play Derickx and Galloway in the ruck and still win by 10 goals.

  7. #103
    Carpe Noctem CureTheSane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Knoxfield, Victoria
    Posts
    5,032
    So just play Tippett in the forward line all day.
    Problem solved.
    The difference between insanity and genius is measured only in success.

  8. #104
    Senior Player Bloody Hell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    3,085
    Quote Originally Posted by Ludwig View Post

    The only thing that will save the ruckman is the end of the centre bounce, which would give a greater advantage to taller ruckmen. All the recent rule changes have been detrimental to the ruckman position and we need change our thinking on how the stoppages should be handled.
    Give it time.

    If we were playing Bulldogs this weekend with Dunkley as the second ruck, and Sinclair was putting his knee in Dunkley's throat and fisting the ball forward 30m, things would quickly change.
    The eternal connundrum "what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object" was finally solved when David Hasselhoff punched himself in the face.

  9. #105
    Veteran Site Admin
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    16,393
    The third man up rule change hasn't been detrimental to ruckmen.

  10. #106
    Veterans List dejavoodoo44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    7,329
    Quote Originally Posted by 707 View Post
    I'm backing our back six against any combination of forwards Hawthorn deploys.

    Puopolo thoroughly backed on the Hawks chat sites as one of several who has done little this year. Not surprised as the head high rule change means he's no longer getting the frees for ducking.
    Yes, I quite like it when the relentless duckers of the past, still can't help having a go. They collapse the knees, attempt to force the contact high and duck their heads. And now, instead of getting a free, they either give up possession or get a free paid against them. And they often get an actual whack in the head, because, 'hey, he ducked, it's a free shot'.

  11. #107
    Reid is playing swing more then ever of late
    This allows us to have a more mobile backline by not picking a 3rd or 4th tall defender

    Hence tippo forward more and a great target at the SCG

  12. #108
    Veterans List
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    11,125
    Selwood is still dropping the knees and getting frees. There as an obvious one last night. Howler of a decision.

Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 5678910 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO