 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Pies4shaw 
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| Warbler wrote: | If it comes down to a choice between White & Gault then it has to be Gault , he at least has some upside & may improve .
White , well we all know what you're gonna get there .
Maybe an " easy " game may be good for Gaults confidence . The powers that be at CFC have kept him hanging around for 3-4 years , we may as well give him a decent run at it ( as long as it's not costing us games )
GO PIES |
This is his fifth year at the Club. He is 23 and a half. He is about 6 weeks younger than Witts but Witts never gets cut this sort of slack by supporters. We can scarcely even dream of Gault having a 21 hit out, 8 disposal, 6 tackle game - but Witts had one against the Swans and - despite a very fine showing in the pre-season (where he was generally the first choice ruckman and had 74 hit outs, compared to Grundy's 22) - the calls for him to be dumped were deafening.
I also felt Witts needed to be dropped - he was extremely disappointing against the Swans - but I don't understand why some supporters would make that call but, the following week, want to give a guy who has shown absolutely nothing, two weeks in a row, another opportunity in a struggling team. Let's be blunt - but for a lot of help from the umpires in the last 3 minutes of that match, that was a 10-goal forward line, even with Fasolo playing a genuine blinder.
My primary concern, ultimately, isn't that Gault has barely touched the ball - it's that he has shown nothing at senior level that reflects his apparent ability in the VFL and in practice matches to run to the right spot and make a good contest.
Because, let's face it, despite Balme saying his elevation was "a no-brainer", Gault's preseason form wasn't that great - he kicked 8 goals in his three games (including a few handballed over the top to him in the goal-square) but only had 11 other kicks in total in those games (average 6.3 kicks, 2 handballs and two hit-outs). Thus, except for his failure to trouble the scorers, his output in the first two rounds hasn't been much different from his output in the NAB Challenge.
Given that Moore (who will probably be a great player, in due course) is also very definitely wearing L-plates (total of 11 kicks, 6 handballs, 6 marks and 2 goals 1 so far in 2016) and Cloke is struggling to find touch, why would we play a third-tall in the forward line who has shown almost nothing? That would, of course, be fine if this were just a "development" year and we were looking to draft picks at the end of the season but that probably isn't the plan. |
|
|
|
 |
RudeBoy
Joined: 28 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Gault has had 2 weeks to show something, and he has come up short twice. The competition is to tight to carry passengers week in week out, hoping they come good. That's why both he and MaCaffer need to be sent back to the VFL to find some form.
Given Witts' hand injury, it seems the replacement for Gault will come from White or Goldsack, who were both among our best in the VFL yesterday. Goldsack might be an interesting move, since he can play at both ends if needed, but this would require Moore to provide brief spells in the ruck. The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of Goldsack. He is a good mark and would provide movement and plenty of tackling pressure in our forward half. Hopefully, by the 2nd half of the season we might see Mason Cox emerge as a genuine option in the ruck and up forward. We'd be a 3 goal better side if we had a winning ruckman. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| ^^^ Yes, I agree (as long as we are realistic about Cox's rate of development). I posted that Goldsack is the obvious choice in the Gault thread earlier today. The ease with which the ball bounced out of the forward-line in the first two weeks was frustrating. Goldsack, fully fit, would probably, at the least, reduce that and give the stoppage players another chance to move forward and create a scoring opportunity. Also, as you say, he's flexible, even if he's not a star. |
|
|
|
|
qldmagpie67
Joined: 18 Dec 2008
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I think a lot will depend on Howe's report, Varcoe's injury progression and whether Bucks and the match committee want to make a statement early in the season.
Marley was horrible in defence the other night his kicking was very sub par when generally he is a moderate kick. But he still has agression at the contest and that X factor about him. I would move him to the bench and use him in the middle as a battering ram clear the contest type.
We need skill down back badly. Reid adds to it immensely and will be better again for the run. Would love Pendles and Varcoe starting down back to give us some skill flair and most importantly decent kicks. Don't know if we can afford both there however. Our midfield which was much vaunted in the preseason has yet to fire a shot. Don't know if this is to do with bad rucking, bad structures or simply bad play.
Our success the past few years has been built on contested ball and we having been badly beaten in both games. Richmonds poor goal kicking and last 5 minutes doesn't hide the fact we aren't playing anywhere near good enough to be a finals contender let alone at a minimum be competitive with the best sides.
It won't happen but I would like to see the following changes
Out Langdon, Caff, Gault, Aish
In Varcoe, Howe , Cox, Maynard |
|
|
|
|
John Wren 
"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies4shaw wrote: | | ^^^ Yes, I agree (as long as we are realistic about Cox's rate of development). I posted that Goldsack is the obvious choice in the Gault thread earlier today. The ease with which the ball bounced out of the forward-line in the first two weeks was frustrating. Goldsack, fully fit, would probably, at the least, reduce that and give the stoppage players another chance to move forward and create a scoring opportunity. Also, as you say, he's flexible, even if he's not a star. |
goldy hasn't been on my radar but he would be a very flexible option because you can send him back too.
_________________
Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle. |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| qldmagpie67 wrote: | I think a lot will depend on Howe's report, Varcoe's injury progression and whether Bucks and the match committee want to make a statement early in the season.
Marley was horrible in defence the other night his kicking was very sub par when generally he is a moderate kick. But he still has agression at the contest and that X factor about him. I would move him to the bench and use him in the middle as a battering ram clear the contest type.
We need skill down back badly. Reid adds to it immensely and will be better again for the run. Would love Pendles and Varcoe starting down back to give us some skill flair and most importantly decent kicks. Don't know if we can afford both there however. Our midfield which was much vaunted in the preseason has yet to fire a shot. Don't know if this is to do with bad rucking, bad structures or simply bad play.
Our success the past few years has been built on contested ball and we having been badly beaten in both games. Richmonds poor goal kicking and last 5 minutes doesn't hide the fact we aren't playing anywhere near good enough to be a finals contender let alone at a minimum be competitive with the best sides.
It won't happen but I would like to see the following changes
Out Langdon, Caff, Gault, Aish
In Varcoe, Howe , Cox, Maynard |
Contested ball against Richmond was basically even, we lost: 134-131. We were smashed by Sydney in contested ball, but they are probably the best in the comp.
Clearances were poor against the Tigers: 24-37. I'd put this down to Grundy's rucking performance.
Richmond did miss a number of shots, but even taking out the last few minutes, that was a fairly even game. We controlled as much of the game as they did (+2 on i50s), we just had a more difficult time putting it on the scoreboard until late.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
jackcass 
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| AN_Inkling wrote: | | qldmagpie67 wrote: | I think a lot will depend on Howe's report, Varcoe's injury progression and whether Bucks and the match committee want to make a statement early in the season.
Marley was horrible in defence the other night his kicking was very sub par when generally he is a moderate kick. But he still has agression at the contest and that X factor about him. I would move him to the bench and use him in the middle as a battering ram clear the contest type.
We need skill down back badly. Reid adds to it immensely and will be better again for the run. Would love Pendles and Varcoe starting down back to give us some skill flair and most importantly decent kicks. Don't know if we can afford both there however. Our midfield which was much vaunted in the preseason has yet to fire a shot. Don't know if this is to do with bad rucking, bad structures or simply bad play.
Our success the past few years has been built on contested ball and we having been badly beaten in both games. Richmonds poor goal kicking and last 5 minutes doesn't hide the fact we aren't playing anywhere near good enough to be a finals contender let alone at a minimum be competitive with the best sides.
It won't happen but I would like to see the following changes
Out Langdon, Caff, Gault, Aish
In Varcoe, Howe , Cox, Maynard |
Contested ball against Richmond was basically even, we lost: 134-131. We were smashed by Sydney in contested ball, but they are probably the best in the comp.
Clearances were poor against the Tigers: 24-37. I'd put this down to Grundy's rucking performance.
Richmond did miss a number of shots, but even taking out the last few minutes, that was a fairly even game. We controlled as much of the game as they did (+2 on i50s), we just had a more difficult time putting it on the scoreboard until late. |
Agree Inky. Like to know which of the injured players are available before contemplating who might come in but realistically wouldn't expect any more than 2 changes with Gault and Macaffer under the pump. |
|
|
|
|
neil 
Joined: 08 Sep 2005
Location: Queensland
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^Agree about needing to know about player availability
No point dropping someone if there is no suitable replacement
Macaffer is far to slow
Gault in the ruck showed something in the last qtr. the rest of the time was non existant
_________________
Carlscum 120 years being cheating scum |
|
|
|
|
doriswilgus
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Location: the great southern land
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| I think Langdon could be in trouble too,judging from what Buckley said the other night.He said Langdon is not defending at the moment,or words to that effect.It's always a bad sign when a coach says something like that about one of his players. |
|
|
|
|
qldmagpie67
Joined: 18 Dec 2008
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| AN_Inkling wrote: | | qldmagpie67 wrote: | I think a lot will depend on Howe's report, Varcoe's injury progression and whether Bucks and the match committee want to make a statement early in the season.
Marley was horrible in defence the other night his kicking was very sub par when generally he is a moderate kick. But he still has agression at the contest and that X factor about him. I would move him to the bench and use him in the middle as a battering ram clear the contest type.
We need skill down back badly. Reid adds to it immensely and will be better again for the run. Would love Pendles and Varcoe starting down back to give us some skill flair and most importantly decent kicks. Don't know if we can afford both there however. Our midfield which was much vaunted in the preseason has yet to fire a shot. Don't know if this is to do with bad rucking, bad structures or simply bad play.
Our success the past few years has been built on contested ball and we having been badly beaten in both games. Richmonds poor goal kicking and last 5 minutes doesn't hide the fact we aren't playing anywhere near good enough to be a finals contender let alone at a minimum be competitive with the best sides.
It won't happen but I would like to see the following changes
Out Langdon, Caff, Gault, Aish
In Varcoe, Howe , Cox, Maynard |
Contested ball against Richmond was basically even, we lost: 134-131. We were smashed by Sydney in contested ball, but they are probably the best in the comp.
Clearances were poor against the Tigers: 24-37. I'd put this down to Grundy's rucking performance.
Richmond did miss a number of shots, but even taking out the last few minutes, that was a fairly even game. We controlled as much of the game as they did (+2 on i50s), we just had a more difficult time putting it on the scoreboard until late. |
Fair points Inky I thought our contested ball was a lot worse than that against the Tigers. Clearances have been bad both games even when we have won it we seem to turn it over quickly.
The Tigers seemed to have more control on the game for longer periods than us IMO but we either found a spoil or intercept or they butchered to us quite a few times.
I agree that we didn't impact the score board as much as we could or should have early but Rance seemed way more effective before half time than after
I still believe we need changes as the win masks the holes that have been glaringly bad in the first 2 rds |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| simon tonna wrote: | | bring out the tackling bags this week. some of those don't argues from dusty were embarrassing. |
Tackling bags don't use the fend. They're trained to tackle, not to get hit with maori sidestep.
The solution to that is simple, just requires the mindset. When someone goes the fend when you try to tackle, grab their wrist and hang on. Swing them by it, they can't legally dispose of the ball in their other hand unless they can fluke it onto the boot and ideally while you're hanging on, someone else comes in and wraps them up.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
Neil Appleby 
Joined: 11 Feb 1998
Location: Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| qldmagpie67 wrote: | | Marley was horrible in defence the other night his kicking was very sub par when generally he is a moderate kick. But he still has agression at the contest and that X factor about him. I would move him to the bench and use him in the middle as a battering ram clear the contest type. |
Williams wasn't our worst user by a long shot. He had 14 kicks at 72.2%. All up he had 18 possessions, 2 marks and 6 rebound 50s, the most in the backline.
When we consider we had 11 players who had ten kicks or under, we have a lot of improving to do. Marley stuffed up 2 kick ins (one resulting in a goal, the other a turnover and a behind), but he wasn't our worst user. Consider the following:
Blair 10 kicks at 43.8%
Gault 3 at 50%
Cloke 9 at 55.6%
Greenwood 12 at 57.1%
Crisp 4 at 58%
Oxley 14 at 61.9%
Macaffer 5 at 62.5%
Treloar 17 at 62.5%
DeGoey 10 at 64.3%
_________________
After the epic draw comes the decisive knockout!
Collingwood rules the world again and Mick Malthouse fulfils his destiny with the twenty ten premiership and can you hear the people sing! |
|
|
|
|
Culprit
Joined: 06 Feb 2003
Location: Port Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| After watching the Saints game, they are lacking quality height in defence. Cloke should kick 6 after half time. |
|
|
|
|
What'sinaname 
Joined: 29 May 2010
Location: Living rent free
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Culprit wrote: | | After watching the Saints game, they are lacking quality height in defence. Cloke should kick 6 after half time. |
behinds or out on the full? |
|
|
|
|
Dangles
Balmey Army
Joined: 14 May 2015
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Culprit wrote: | | After watching the Saints game, they are lacking quality height in defence. Cloke should kick 6 after half time. |
Or at least have six shots at goal. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
