Vogels and Grundy [Archive] - RWO - RedAndWhiteOnline.com

Bloody Hell

22nd July 2007, 03:55 AM

sWAns63

22nd July 2007, 04:22 AM

I don't think either would make very good defenders don't have good enough closing speed and their strength is lacking for strong opponents both to be in the forward line to fill gaps sometimes when the better players are injured like tonight.

Wazza

22nd July 2007, 09:53 AM

Swansinger

22nd July 2007, 10:04 AM

1. Vogels

2. Grundy

Have been a big fan of Vogels for a long time. Thought he was good tonight (except for the missed goal) - took a couple of contested marks and gave an option. For mine showed he can offer something to the side.

Reg looked out of his depth. Not sure he can make it as a defender.

I wonder what the heirachy is planning for these guys in the future. Reg FF - Vogels CHF (though he'd be a better HFF)?

Somebody needs to get in Vogels ear - or head ? - to tell him he IS a good player.
I feel he has not shown this yet - for my money he lacks confidence.

LUKE VOGELS YOU ARE A GOOD PLAYER

Reg is a forward - he gaves us nothing last night , but I have great hopes he will be a strong contributor - inside our ATTACKING 50.

Jeffers1984

22nd July 2007, 10:24 AM

The only way they can get experience in defense is if they play in the seniors full time. The Joke which is the reserves is hindering our defenders more than anything. LRT at least came in at a time when we were still with Port Melbourne while neither Reg (more of a full forward in my books) and Vogels (still not sold if he will make it at all) haven't had that luxury.

Plugger46

22nd July 2007, 01:14 PM

Vogels looks comfortable at the level, but Grundy looks completely out of his depth. Admittedly, it was a tough ask to come straight out of the canberra competition (where he's been played predominantly as a forward) and play as a defender in such a high pressure game.

Vogels is a keeper I think - jury is out on Grundy.

Robbo

22nd July 2007, 03:01 PM

Vogels looks like more of a footballer, has better hands and better footskills. He's a bit quicker aswell.

Grundy is trade bait, but I'm not sure anyone would want him.

TMSS

22nd July 2007, 04:09 PM

Vogels did a couple of nice things but goes missing for periods.

When he is missing its usually because he is on the interchange.
I think a few consecutive games would prove he has what it takes.
In my opinion leaving out Hall for the Richmond game would not only get him right but would provide this oportunity for Vogels to play. Also Vogels has played West Coast, Geelong and West Coast this year, tough opponents to find your feet against.

dendol

22nd July 2007, 04:16 PM

To be fair on Grundy, its hard to make any sort of statement about how good you can be when you come into the seniors for two or three games a season. Even if you play well, you know you are going to be dropped back into the Canberra league where the level drops to below U18.

giant

22nd July 2007, 04:20 PM

I think it's fair to say one of the learnings from last night is that Reg is not a defender. Don't think they had much choice in the absence of Tadhg, LRT & Leo - with Crouch also out that's 4 out of 1st choice defence missing.

ScottH

22nd July 2007, 05:26 PM

Grundy looked anything but a defender last night. Staker was just far too good for him.

dawg

22nd July 2007, 05:33 PM

Cant be to critical on either of them really, with the midfield well and truely getting the arses handed to them Vogels was never gonna see to much of it, and grundy in defence was really on the backfoot from the get go. They really need to given a constant run at this level before you can really judge if either of them are up to it or not.

Nico

22nd July 2007, 05:56 PM

Staker kicked 3 goals but I dont know that Grundy was on him for the full time. He worked very hard in the clinches. Staker had the drop on him a couple of times but so did Lynch on C Bolton. Those quick leads by forwards happen on the best of backs. Had 97% time on the ground.

Vogels for me drops too many marks and once the footy hit the ground last night wasn't real quick off the mark for his second efforts. 51% ground time didn't help his cause and for someone who was there to replace a key forward that doesn't make much sense. I can't work out why he wasn't at the top of the square to take the odd big mark, and he seemed to play way up the ground. In the 3rd Q at times we had no one in the forward 50 when the footy went in there.

liz

22nd July 2007, 06:06 PM

Grundy looked anything but a defender last night. Staker was just far too good for him.

Yep - and Staker's played 80 odd games, Grundy around 10 and none as a key defender. He's barely played a dozen quarters as a defender over the past two and a half seasons.

A lot of those 80 or so Staker games have been pretty ordinary too - including the 2005 GF where he was one of the Swans' best. Last night he was very potent in a side that was pumped and was pumping ball forward incessantly.

No-one is going to proclaim Grundy as our next FB based on that performance but equally well, it's daft to write him off on the basis of just that one game.

stellation

22nd July 2007, 06:19 PM

ugg

22nd July 2007, 06:31 PM

Not sure whether Staker was the right matchup. Although tall I wouldn't class Staker as a KP forward, more like a tall flanker. I think Kennelly has been matched up him before and that's probably a better matchup.

NMWBloods

22nd July 2007, 07:12 PM

I think Vogels and Grundy have both suffered from limited opportunity in the seniors. Certainly they've had nowhere near the chances Bevan and McVeigh have had.

Triple B

22nd July 2007, 08:09 PM

A lot of those 80 or so Staker games have been pretty ordinary too - including the 2005 GF where he was one of the Swans' best.

That's pretty close to the money.

Judd's Norm Smith was a travesty for Monty/LRT/Fosdike and 1 or 2 others with legitimate claims, but Staker had as big a role in the Swans win as anybody.

Bloody Hell

22nd July 2007, 08:46 PM

I thought that Heath positioned himself quite well when playing in defence, his main problem simply seemed to be the change up in pace and skill from Canberra to the AFL. He appeared to have been asked to play in defence with a primary purpose of actually defending, we don't bring in too many guys and stick them close to goal straight away with that as their main job. I wouldn't mind seeing him get another game or two.

I thought his main problem was his arms were 6 inches shorter than they needed to be. Being thrown out of a marking contest in the square didn't make him look special.

It's a big responsiblilty to be dropped into the last line like that. The only thing I would think is Roos thinks he can make it, so he let him get his pants pulled down to show him where he is in terms of development, and what he has to do. Staker is no star.

stellation

22nd July 2007, 08:58 PM

I thought his main problem was his arms were 6 inches shorter than they needed to be.
That's fair, but in general I was left with the impression that where his fist was found to be just short of effecting a spoil that his instincts had him moving in the right direction... if that makes sense...

liz

22nd July 2007, 09:18 PM

That's fair, but in general I was left with the impression that where his fist was found to be just short of effecting a spoil that his instincts had him moving in the right direction... if that makes sense...

It does.

Dunks was pretty much a journeyman defender until 1996 when he suddenly elevated himself into one of the best half-dozen FBs in the league (argubaly the best in 1996, despite Silvagni getting the AA position that year). He was no quicker than Grundy and a similar height. But one thing he became brilliant at was reading the ball in flight and his hands were like vices.

Obviously can't compare Grundy's ACTAFL form but he does seem to have those same abilities. And he's a much better kick than Dunks too!

Who knows whether he'll make it but it would be good to see him get a few more chances down there to find out.

Bloody Hell

22nd July 2007, 09:23 PM

It does.
Who knows whether he'll make it but it would be good to see him get a few more chances down there to find out.
As a backman or a forward?

hammo

22nd July 2007, 09:34 PM

I thought his main problem was his arms were 6 inches shorter than they needed to be.
It works for Daniel Kerr so maybe Heath will be OK in the long run

Ludwig

22nd July 2007, 09:44 PM

Staker is a very tough assignment for any defender. Many swan defenders have been outmarked by him over the years. Now in career best form, he goes up against a young player that hasn't played any defence in the seniors.

The swans really didn't have a good matchup for Staker, unless you want to put Goodes on him. With Lynch, Hanson and Staker up forward, the swans were badly outsized, and have been all season. Badly need LRT to return, just for the size marchup. As for Grundy, I don't think too much can be taken from the game.

JF_Bay22_SCG

22nd July 2007, 10:00 PM

I was suprised they went with Grundy in defence and I was even more suprised when they left Jolly on Cox in defence.

The suprise to me was LRT is left in the reserves and they went with Heath for a defensive role.

Vogels did a couple of nice things but goes missing for periods.

Cheers

Waz

Vogels had one good game as a forward in I think 2005 & has been resting on his laurels since then. He has a large frame and often struggles to last the distance in game at AFL level, especially as a key position defender.

I know Roos was worried about Leo's hamstring, but playing Grundy in defence was a very very strange call. We lost control of the game in this 3rd quarter as Staker Cox etc were able to get too much of the footy without anyone with much defensive nouse being able to stop them. Richards was yet again a major disappointment in my eyes. He just doesn't do enough out there. Craig Bolton I swear can't do things all on his own.

Hopefully for the Richmond game we will see LRT make a return, with Leo reverting to BP & Tagdh to a HBF.

JF

TMSS

22nd July 2007, 10:40 PM

NMWBloods

22nd July 2007, 10:44 PM

I agree - we should concentrate on bagging those who deserve it - J Bolton, McVeigh, Ablett, Hall, Goodes...

LRTs LoveChild

23rd July 2007, 12:24 AM

Maybe this has been covered somewhere else but Hall being a KP forward and Tiger being a running halfback flanker, why bring in 2 KP forwards as emergencies?? 1 makes sense but 2, I thought that left us short of run out of the back.

I know that they have to name emergencies then fly them as well but if they are in doubt why not name someone who is a better in to cover the out.

Lucky Knickers

23rd July 2007, 10:23 AM

I didn't think Grundy was too bad and bet he'll learn a lot from that. I don't think he's a forward so maybe grooming him into a FB a la Dunkley, as Liz suggested, has merit.
Vogels was also not too bad when he was on the ground.
What was noticeable was:
a) the space the swans allowed their opponents.
b) the number of missed tackles - Judd and Cuz were easily able to shrug out of tackles.
c) the lack of support in defence - the ball was pinging in there and no one was getting back to help out either Bolts or Grundy to block up the space in front of a leading Lynch and Hansen
d) Jolly/Spida can run with Cox

barry

23rd July 2007, 10:47 AM

Vogels is a depth player, and thats all he will ever be. He is in the squad to cover for injuries in the best 22. He's in his mid-20's so probably has peaked as far as football ability goes.
Sure, after Hall and Oloughlin retire he may be our key forward during some rebuilding years, but I dont think he has the ability to be a premiership player.

Grundy, on the other hand, seems to be getting a few chances. I think they are trying to get him to be like Richards where he can play either end of the ground. Leo Barry and LRT arent really that flexible, so we need defenders who can go forward ala Hunter for the e-girls.

Grundy has been disappointing in his senior appearances though. I hope he kicks on. How old is he ?

reigning premier

23rd July 2007, 11:04 AM

I agree - we should concentrate on bagging those who deserve it - J Bolton, McVeigh, Ablett, Hall, Goodes...

Probably a good time to get off the McViegh bashing band wagon after the last few games. Especially Saturday night.... As for the others mentioned.. :rolleyes: yeah.. whatever....

reigning premier

23rd July 2007, 11:08 AM

Both of them were pretty average.... Along with Bevan, they were our three worst.

Luckily though, we have Hall, Kenelly and LRT to step into the breach.

Had of we had them on Saturday night, we probably would of won.

NMWBloods

23rd July 2007, 11:14 AM

Probably a good time to get off the McViegh bashing band wagon after the last few games. Especially Saturday night.... As for the others mentioned.. :rolleyes: yeah.. whatever....
McVeigh's still a long way from being a regular useful contributor. The others have been generally poor.

JF_Bay22_SCG

23rd July 2007, 10:07 PM

FFS give these guys a break, its not their fault we struggling.

Anyone ever heard of encouragement?

Get over it and support your team don't bag them constantly!

Not everyone here is guilty but some comments recently are laughable.

Man, are you a rugby league convert or something? Because I swear, that is the attitude you get from a lot of them. "The players did their best. You go out and do better".:rolleyes:

I like my players to put in every week. I think all players did that on Saturday. Despite the loss I was happy with our effort.

But that doesn't mean I need to put up with players stuffing up kick-ins because they chose to kick it to themselves. Or sent handballs to a player under severe pressure, only to see them get pinged for holding the ball. Or sending passes into our half forward line that go 30 metres off target.

I'm a club member. I have a right to have an opinion. I can pass comment as I see fit. That surely doesn't mean I won't be there supporting them like buggery the next week, you know. :rolleyes:

JF

TMSS

24th July 2007, 01:24 AM

But that doesn't mean I need to put up with players stuffing up kick-ins because they chose to kick it to themselves. Or sent handballs to a player under severe pressure, only to see them get pinged for holding the ball. Or sending passes into our half forward line that go 30 metres off target.

Isn't this thread about Grundy and Vogels? Dont recall either of them doing any of those things.