View previous topic :: View next topic |
Who would you prefer in the team? |
Cameron |
|
56% |
[ 32 ] |
Cox |
|
43% |
[ 25 ] |
|
Total Votes : 57 |
|
Author |
Message |
Jezza
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 05 Sep 2010 Location: Ponsford End
|
Post subject: | |
|
#26 wrote: | Cox has played 77 games and Cameron 59. I feel like they've persisted for longer with Cox in the seniors to see if he could find his feet. I think they should give Cameron the same opportunity. Reminds me a bit of Jarrod Witts. I always felt that he could've made it at Collingwood if they had've persisted with him in the seniors. But he never really found his feet because he was constantly in and out of the team. Then he was given the opportunity at the Suns and turned into a decent player. |
Cameron has played 31 games. Agree with you about giving Cameron more opportunities.
Cox has had six years and I've had enough of watching him. _________________ | 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | |
|
|
|
|
Jezza
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 05 Sep 2010 Location: Ponsford End
|
Post subject: | |
|
E wrote: | I still suspect Kreuger is the better option than both, but i prefer Cameron in the side to Cox by a long way! |
Agree, though the sample size with Kreuger is very small but he looked more energetic and dangerous up forward than the other two when I saw him up close against the Crows.
Kreuger > Cameron > Cox if all three are available for selection. _________________ | 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | |
|
|
|
|
BBHS
bbhs
Joined: 30 Jun 2004 Location: Bellarine
|
Post subject: | |
|
^
100% Agree Krueger is the most suited to our game style. |
|
|
|
|
Pebbles Rocks
Joined: 28 Sep 2008 Location: Collingwood
|
Post subject: | |
|
I think Cox gets marked way harder than he should be. Too often we judge players based on their recent form when they have been playing injured. Cox has had major problems with his eyes in the last 2 years. Last time I checked your eyes are pretty important when you are trying to judge the flight of a ball.
With all that said, I prefer Kreuger 1st Cameron 2nd and Cox 3rd simply because in the rough and tumble of a grand final (if we get there in the next few years) when you need blokes who have to be versatile and able to contest when the ball hits the ground.
Also Cox is getting older and will probably be at least 33 by the time we make the big dance again... _________________ "You must be a parking ticket, cuz you got fine written all over you" Glen Quagmire |
|
|
|
|
bucking awesome
Joined: 29 Aug 2018
|
Post subject: | |
|
Unfortunately Krueger showed in his one game he is a good forward prospect but his ruck work was terrible. He can’t give Grundy a chop out which means we also have to have room for Cameron or cox
If he improved his Ruck work then maybe but I think we will have to try Cameron Grundy and Krueger in the one side _________________ Painful frustrating disappointing exhilarating and unbelievably awesome. - That's a Collingwood life through and through |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
Post subject: | |
|
Krueger showed promise as a KP but not a a ruck.
He's quick and mobile enough that we could play him, checkers and a 2nd ruck without being too top heavy.
You can play 3 talls together provided they aren't a liability when the ball hits the ground. A balanced forward line for us could be
HF McCreery, Krueger, Mihocek
FF Cox/Cameron, Billy/Jordy*, Ginnivan
*Billy and Jordy alternate between FF and midfield.
Cox/Cameron aren't the focal points, they're there do do the forward line ruck work leaving Grundy to hang back and provide a contest to the long bomb getout kick and bring the ball to ground _________________ Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
Piesnchess
piesnchess
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
|
Post subject: | |
|
Im not writing Cox off by any means, if Grundy goes down, who else have we got to ruck, Lynch has gone now. ?? Krueger looks good, though he has to prove it when he comes back, Cameron is just ok, at best, the jury is still out on him, see how he goes this week an next. _________________ Poverty exists not because we cannot feed the poor, but because we cannot satisfy the rich.
Chess and Vodka are born brothers. - Russian proverb. |
|
|
|
|
Pies2016
Joined: 12 Sep 2014
|
Post subject: | |
|
Do we place to much emphasis on back up ruck when Grundy is off the ground for about 16 mins every game ( from the AFL app)
That’s four mins a qtr and with a real possibility of only a couple ruck contests per qtr while Grundy is off. Why can’t Roughead ( 200cm ) ruck deep in defence, while Krueger ( 196cm ) would ruck between the arcs ( but not centre bounces ) That then leaves the best key forward choice of either Cox or Cameron to take centre bounces and ball ups and throw ins inside our forward fifty for a whole 240 seconds every quarter |
|
|
|
|
Piesnchess
piesnchess
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
|
Post subject: | |
|
Pies2016 wrote: | Do we place to much emphasis on back up ruck when Grundy is off the ground for about 16 mins every game ( from the AFL app)
That’s four mins a qtr and with a real possibility of only a couple ruck contests per qtr while Grundy is off. Why can’t Roughead ( 200cm ) ruck deep in defence, while Krueger ( 196cm ) would ruck between the arcs ( but not centre bounces ) That then leaves the best key forward choice of either Cox or Cameron to take centre bounces and ball ups and throw ins inside our forward fifty for a whole 240 seconds every quarter |
Maybe, but what if Grundy, heaven forbid, does his shoulder or something and is out for five or six weeks, who rucks then, we have nobody, really. Lynch was cleared to the Hawks, wasnt he ? _________________ Poverty exists not because we cannot feed the poor, but because we cannot satisfy the rich.
Chess and Vodka are born brothers. - Russian proverb. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
^ He's talking about weekly team selection, not suggesting we should have no other ruckmen on the list. Obviously, if something happens to Grundy, Cameron or Cox would ruck (maybe both). |
|
|
|
|
Pies2016
Joined: 12 Sep 2014
|
Post subject: | |
|
^ ^ ^
Correct. Thanks. To me, the above solution sounds workable but the most important consideration in that plan, is Rougheads very limited ability to compete in the ruck, deep in defence. Coaches place a premium on winning ruck contests in the defensive arc because if the ruck contest is lost ( as opposed to halved ) then the opposition generally get a shot on goal.
What hasn’t happened yet, is for all of Cox, Cameron, Krueger ( and to a lesser extent, Roughead ) all being available as a collective.
It’s not until that happens, will we get a better idea of our game day back up ruck plans. |
|
|
|
|
Jezza
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 05 Sep 2010 Location: Ponsford End
|
Post subject: | |
|
Cox producing a great performance in the VFL today. _________________ | 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | |
|
|
|
|
Mr Miyagi
Joined: 14 Sep 2018
|
Post subject: | |
|
Cameron won’t be playing next week |
|
|
|
|
masoncox
masoncox
Joined: 31 Aug 2015
|
Post subject: Cameron is a dud | |
|
For those nixters who think Cameron is better than Cox.
8 quarters this year with only one quarter where he was good.
7 quarters of absolutely nothing.
He is a dud |
|
|
|
|
SteveH67
Joined: 17 Jul 2004 Location: Canberra, Australia
|
Post subject: | |
|
Swans were happy to give him up.
Spud. _________________ Social club member 7342 since 2000. |
|
|
|
|
|