Waiting to see what number Paddy is allocated. I am very positive about the contribution Paddy will make in the Swans 22 as CHB with his skill, body and obviously his desire to succeed against all odds, physical and mental.
Waiting to see what number Paddy is allocated. I am very positive about the contribution Paddy will make in the Swans 22 as CHB with his skill, body and obviously his desire to succeed against all odds, physical and mental.
I was watching a replay of our ill-fated finals loss last season against GWS. Melican was outpointed by his opponents on several occasions. At one point, Hogan marked and kicked a critical goal while Melican lay sprawled on the turf. He really has not developed into a good key defender. Serviceable at best. That spot is really up for grabs and hopefully Paddy can grab it.
It's interesting, I haven't re-watched the elimination final v GWS but I have heard a lot of criticism of Melican's performance in the match (quite possibly warranted) but I believe I also read that Melican had a career high 17 disposals and 5 intercept marks in that match. Don't know what to make of that except clearly Hogan got the better of Melican on the day - but that can happen.
All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated, and well supported in logic and argument than others. -Douglas Adams, author (11 Mar 1952-2001)
You could read that as GWS were going through Hogan as he had the better matchup.Originally Posted by bloodspirit
Re-watch the last 5 minutes and see what Melican doesn't do.
Melican did not lose us that final. We had far more scoring shots. We got murdered in the second quarter out of the stoppages. Our mids were slack. In the third and last quarters we had far more of the play but just bombed rather than set up play through finding leading players. I was so frustrated that in the last quarter we had the ball in our forward line for a full 15 minutes but managed to only score points.
We were not looking for a target. We were wasting the ball forward of centre. It did not help that they put on the big flood on a small ground. Why did we agree to play here in the first place? The ground does not suit our style of play. It suited theirs. They are a side that does not score and floods causing terribly congested and ugly footy.
We list because we could not score goals. They kicked goals. They had the ground and game on their terms.
Sent from my JAT-L29 using Tapatalk
Returning to Paddy, I managed a snippet of conversation with Tom McCartin. He said he could see a backline featuring himself, Paddy, Rampe and Melican at the same time. Given that I would say Lloyd and Harry C are non-negotiables, can you then fit in Blakey as the 7th? That's a tall backline - although apart from the three keys they are all capable of playing against smaller players. It doesn't omit anyone that is a certain selection - does it? Could that be a R1 backline?
All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated, and well supported in logic and argument than others. -Douglas Adams, author (11 Mar 1952-2001)
Paddy seems to have a similar build to Steven May of Melbourne.
Yes very similar build
Sent from my JAT-L29 using Tapatalk
good answer by Tom
I would stick to that line also
I am guessing it would be very tricky to maintain all 4 talls unless Rampe plays a different role?
Week to week the mobile backlines like ours meant we counter attacked very effectively and ran tall forwards off their feet.
Come finals though we tend to see forward lines that play tall as fairly dominant force.
"be tough, only when it gets tough"
That’s a very tall backline but Rampe could play as a smaller lockdown or running back in place of Harry or Lloyd. I’d love to see Rampe playing as 3rd tall behind 2 other talks come round one.
It would not surprise me if Rampe started to play more like a medium defender rather than having to match up against the biggest forwards every week.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks