Preview 2024 Round 2 Freo v Roos

[freo1997]

Brisbane looked sore after the first quarter, hopefully we are ready to back up on the road for 4 quarters.

Carlton took it out of them.

Looks like it’s a Lighter week on the track too.

 

[Eski3]

It would be quite deflating if they just decided to run with Pearce and Ryan as our key backs, Hughes to the third tall and bring in a medium forward like Sturt for Cox. I'd like to see at least one debutant this week - ideally two with Voss and either of Draper/Davies

 

[Minz]

I just have horrible memories of last year…. at work and a wardie was watching the game live on his phone while we transferred a patient to another ward.

I saw the score and swore; the patient was somewhat put out (i couldn’t help myself)

So, hoping the boys bring their A game. Freo’s often pulled one out against the good sides and fallen in a heap against the bad, so seeing how this one goes could be a bit of a litmus test, especially after the injuries last week

 

[CaseySibosadoHOF]

That's interesting. I thought it was more a horses for courses thing. Might have a look at this for a bit of fun.

Tall Forwards/Ruck combinations this weekend:
2 Rucks/2 Tall Forwards: Essendon, Hawthorn,
1 Ruck/3 Tall Forwards: Fremantle, Port Ad, Western Bulldogs (if you count Lobb as a forward)
1 Ruck/2 Tall Forwards: Carlton, Richmond, GWS, Nth Melb, Geelong, Gold Coast, West Coast, Brisbane, Melbourne
1 Ruck/ 1 Tall Forward: Collingwood, Sydney, St Kilda, Adelaide

You're right about when it comes down to it some teams change structure (eg: Pitonnet to my knowledge is best 22 making them 2 rucks 2 fwds, but he's had injury concerns so Matthew Kennedy can come in and play taller, though they really don't need the 3rd tall since Curnow's elite and McKay's biggest opponent is set shot kicking (could've improved this year though)). Also I'm judging off lineups unless there's obvious errors (Tom McDonald listed as a key fwd but he played key back), which can sometimes be off.

• Adelaide is 1/3 (Reilly, Fogarty, Gollant, Burgess). Their best 22 has Thilthorpe and Walker in for Gollant and Burgess.
• Brisbane is 1/2 (Big O, Daniher, Hipwood). That's their default, but sometimes Darcy Fort plays to make it 2/2.
• Carlton is 1/2 (TDK, Curnow, McKay), with I think Kennedy playing taller. Best 22 I think is 2/2 with Pittonet. Last year if that combo was unavailable Jack Silvagni played key fwd/2nd ruck.
• Collingwood is 2/2 (Cameron, Cox, Johnson, Mihocek). They're probably the #1 example I'd use of how most teams stubbornly stick to that structure irrespective of availability: when McStay was injured for the GF, Frampton played fwd to nullify Andrews.
• Essendon I think are 1/2 actually (Goldstein, Wright, Langford - not counting Stringer). I'd assume Draper would be best 22 once properly fit, but I might be wrong on that one.
  • Edit - 1/3, forgot to count Jones. Still think when fully fit, Draper is best 22.
• As mentioned, we're 1/3.
• Geelong are kinda 2/2 (Stanley, Blicavs, Cameron, Hawkins) but they're the exception for 2 ruck combos where I don't think either rotate fwd that much, and Blicavs plays 2nd ruck/wing almost. Btwn Henry and Rohan, they have enough medium fwds on the taller side anyways.
• Gold Coast are 1/3 (Witts, Lukosius, Casboult, King).
• GWS is 1/3 (Briggs, Hogan, Cadman, Riccardi).
• Hawthorn I think are actually 1/3 (Reeves, Chol, Lewis, Gunston). Chol only attended 9 ruck contests - hardly 2nd ruck material (Treacy attended 20).
• Melbourne were 1/2 as you mentioned (Gawn, Brown, JvR). I think that's their default structure, especially when Fritsch and Petracca play.
• North are unsurprisingly 1/2 coz they're allergic to drafting KPPs.
• Port as mentioned 1/3.
• Richmond as mentioned 1/2. They went 2/2 OR (Naismith, Ryan, Balta, Koschitzke), but I assume we'll see more 1/2 from them than anything else.
• St Kilda were either 1/2 (Marshall, Membrey, King) or 1/3 (Owens' role is a bit of a unique one - he plays some undersized key fwd but also some midfield). Fwiw club lists him as a key fwd.
• Sydney are 1/3 (Grundy, McClean, Logan, Amartey).
• West Coast technically were 1/3 (Williams, Darling, Waterman, Allen), but I don't think anyone told Darling he was on the team sheet.
• And yeah Bulldogs are either 1/3 or 2/2 depending on what you view Lobb as.

Based on the fact that 7/18 teams play 1/2 and the rest play 1/3 or 2/2, and for a sizeable number of those 6 1/2 is not their default structure + for St Kilda specifically I'm not including someone as a key fwd who the club list specifically counts as a key fwd, safe to say 2/2 or 1/3 is the default. The exceptions are often list-dependent - either they have 2 elite keys so you don't need the 3rd, or they have nothing talls-wise so they play small (hello North), or they have elite tall mediums. Even some of the exceptional teams try to chase a 2/2 or 1/3 structure, specifically Melbourne who tried to turn 1 of Gawn/Grundy into Jackson before realising Luke Jacksons don't grow on trees.

The 1 caveat is that some of these teams sub out the 3rd tall as the game goes on because the conditions of the game demand a different structure - Gollant out for Soligo, Johnson out for Macrae, etc.

 

[Alfonz]

To the post above ... Essendon also have Harrison Jones as a genuine (albeit skinny) KPF.

And slice it how you want in terms of what classifies as a "tall", the teams who are playing less than 4 of the genuine 195cm+ guys are generally getting a good dose of aerial capability from 190cm types. For example Langford/Stringer or Dempsey/Rohan/Henry. Our opponents this week have Zurharr/Duursma/Ford. We can't really use this setup, we only have Sturt and he is out of form.

For this week's game, we should replace Cox with Voss or Taberner this week to keep our structure that works. If we are not going to do that, then we need something like a Fyfe/Johnson combo to play as a permanent Langford-type role. But that would mean Johnson primarily as a forward (seeing as Fyfe is back to being a mid), and I don't know how much he knows about playing forward.

 

[CaseySibosadoHOF]

To the post above ... Essendon also have Harrison Jones as a genuine (albeit skinny) KPF.

And slice it how you want in terms of what classifies as a "tall", the teams who are playing less than 4 of the genuine 195cm+ guys are generally getting a good dose of aerial capability from 190cm types. For example Langford/Stringer or Dempsey/Rohan/Henry. Our opponents this week have Zurharr/Duursma/Ford. We can't really use this setup, we only have Sturt and he is out of form.

For this week's game, we should replace Cox with Voss or Taberner this week to keep our structure that works. If we are not going to do that, then we need something like a Fyfe/Johnson combo to play as a permanent Langford-type role. But that would mean Johnson primarily as a forward (seeing as Fyfe is back to being a mid), and I don't know how much he knows about playing forward.

Oh yeah I agree that basically every team, even those who don't play 2 rucks + 2 talls or 1 ruck + 3 talls, aims to have that aerial prowess fwd wise. I was more basing off what teams + the AFL website define as their role: Langford and Stringer are basically the same height but the former counts as a key fwd and the latter doesn't. We saw this last season: Corbett, Banfield and Sturt all played fwd and are all the same height essentially, but their roles aren't the same.

Good pick-up on Jones, missed that one. Will edit.

 

[Footskill]

The only way we lose this is complacency. Roos are not on our level

 

[DocT]

The only way we lose this is complacency. Roos are not on our level

And surely our awful loss last year is the best insurance against complacency.

 

[poshman]

Yep, happened last year at HOME and a lot on this board seem to think we are a certainty.
Yeah we beat the Lions but they seem to be a bit disinterested atm
Roos have so much young talent that one day will click, when it does look out.
Mark my words, this weekend is a worry!!

I am only worried about Jye kicking 8 and it not being at home for the fans to celebrate properly.

Mark my words, game over early in the third. You will love it!

 

[kp junior]

Need to blood one of our key backs. Years on the list, need to know if they've got something

No better opportunity - they'll be heavily supported by our team defence


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Also given history, there is a very non zero probability that Pearce gets injured soon and misses a month or so, so we need experience into our young key backs asap.

 

[go_the_dockers]

Im convinced they’ll play JOM in the role Cox had

JL said they like 3 talls. I think Tabs or Cox will come in.

 

[s_wd6]

JL said they like 3 talls. I think Tabs or Cox will come in.

if they do decide to bring Reidy in I hope they just park him forward for the most part. Jacko’s follow up efforts in the ruck are huge and I don’t think it’s worth sacrificing that for him to go forward (especially when he still managed to kick 2 last week)

 

[go_the_dockers]

if they do decide to bring Reidy in I hope they just park him forward for the most part. Jacko’s follow up efforts in the ruck are huge and I don’t think it’s worth sacrificing that for him to go forward (especially when he still managed to kick 2 last week)

My interpretation of what JL said, is they will prioritise the midfield, so I am assuming Jackson and Young stay in the midfield and we find players in other positions.

 

[Big Animal]

JL said they like 3 talls. I think Tabs or Cox will come in.

Tabs or Voss? + walker

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Seems like the only interesting one is what they do for extra defender, especially since it's North who play pretty small up there.

Walker, Tabs/Voss a lock, then they either leave Banfield down there and bring in JOM or Draper plays

 

[FreoMatt]

Ash Johnson and Chris Burgess

21

Chris Burgess

Age

29

Ht

194cm

Wt

97kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

8.2

2star

K

3.9

2star

HB

4.3

3star

M

2.7

3star

T

1.6

4star

G

0.3

3star

No current season stats available

D

6.6

2star

K

3.8

2star

HB

2.8

3star

M

2.6

3star

T

2.4

4star

G

0.4

3star

i would also say are playing as tall forwards for collingwood and the crows

What about Miocheck


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[freo1997]

Surely debut Voss in front of Fam and friends.

Most posters saying now is a great time to play Davies and Draper..likewise Voss imo.

We have seen Tabs. Great 2 or 3 seasons, good servant but it’s time he goes about his trade for Peel and lead that fwd line to glory. Aerobically incapable and gets in the way f50. Time to move on.

 

[WilloTree]

You're right about when it comes down to it some teams change structure (eg: Pitonnet to my knowledge is best 22 making them 2 rucks 2 fwds, but he's had injury concerns so Matthew Kennedy can come in and play taller, though they really don't need the 3rd tall since Curnow's elite and McKay's biggest opponent is set shot kicking (could've improved this year though)). Also I'm judging off lineups unless there's obvious errors (Tom McDonald listed as a key fwd but he played key back), which can sometimes be off.

• Adelaide is 1/3 (Reilly, Fogarty, Gollant, Burgess). Their best 22 has Thilthorpe and Walker in for Gollant and Burgess.
• Brisbane is 1/2 (Big O, Daniher, Hipwood). That's their default, but sometimes Darcy Fort plays to make it 2/2.
• Carlton is 1/2 (TDK, Curnow, McKay), with I think Kennedy playing taller. Best 22 I think is 2/2 with Pittonet. Last year if that combo was unavailable Jack Silvagni played key fwd/2nd ruck.
• Collingwood is 2/2 (Cameron, Cox, Johnson, Mihocek). They're probably the #1 example I'd use of how most teams stubbornly stick to that structure irrespective of availability: when McStay was injured for the GF, Frampton played fwd to nullify Andrews.
• Essendon I think are 1/2 actually (Goldstein, Wright, Langford - not counting Stringer). I'd assume Draper would be best 22 once properly fit, but I might be wrong on that one.
  • Edit - 1/3, forgot to count Jones. Still think when fully fit, Draper is best 22.
• As mentioned, we're 1/3.
• Geelong are kinda 2/2 (Stanley, Blicavs, Cameron, Hawkins) but they're the exception for 2 ruck combos where I don't think either rotate fwd that much, and Blicavs plays 2nd ruck/wing almost. Btwn Henry and Rohan, they have enough medium fwds on the taller side anyways.
• Gold Coast are 1/3 (Witts, Lukosius, Casboult, King).
• GWS is 1/3 (Briggs, Hogan, Cadman, Riccardi).
• Hawthorn I think are actually 1/3 (Reeves, Chol, Lewis, Gunston). Chol only attended 9 ruck contests - hardly 2nd ruck material (Treacy attended 20).
• Melbourne were 1/2 as you mentioned (Gawn, Brown, JvR). I think that's their default structure, especially when Fritsch and Petracca play.
• North are unsurprisingly 1/2 coz they're allergic to drafting KPPs.
• Port as mentioned 1/3.
• Richmond as mentioned 1/2. They went 2/2 OR (Naismith, Ryan, Balta, Koschitzke), but I assume we'll see more 1/2 from them than anything else.
• St Kilda were either 1/2 (Marshall, Membrey, King) or 1/3 (Owens' role is a bit of a unique one - he plays some undersized key fwd but also some midfield). Fwiw club lists him as a key fwd.
• Sydney are 1/3 (Grundy, McClean, Logan, Amartey).
• West Coast technically were 1/3 (Williams, Darling, Waterman, Allen), but I don't think anyone told Darling he was on the team sheet.
• And yeah Bulldogs are either 1/3 or 2/2 depending on what you view Lobb as.

Based on the fact that 7/18 teams play 1/2 and the rest play 1/3 or 2/2, and for a sizeable number of those 6 1/2 is not their default structure + for St Kilda specifically I'm not including someone as a key fwd who the club list specifically counts as a key fwd, safe to say 2/2 or 1/3 is the default. The exceptions are often list-dependent - either they have 2 elite keys so you don't need the 3rd, or they have nothing talls-wise so they play small (hello North), or they have elite tall mediums. Even some of the exceptional teams try to chase a 2/2 or 1/3 structure, specifically Melbourne who tried to turn 1 of Gawn/Grundy into Jackson before realising Luke Jacksons don't grow on trees.

The 1 caveat is that some of these teams sub out the 3rd tall as the game goes on because the conditions of the game demand a different structure - Gollant out for Soligo, Johnson out for Macrae, etc.

Thanks for this. Much better than my quick glance list.

Great work

 

[freo1997]

Reckon after rushing Cox it’s possible we play it conservatively with Walker. Clark is being managed through the week, possibly bring Walker as an emergency.

Rather go with Draper, Voss and JOM. Banners takes Worners spot. Erasmus starts and Johno gets the vest.

 

[FreoMatt]

if they do decide to bring Reidy in I hope they just park him forward for the most part. Jacko’s follow up efforts in the ruck are huge and I don’t think it’s worth sacrificing that for him to go forward (especially when he still managed to kick 2 last week)

Why would you bring in Reidy to play forward when you have Tabs or Voss who could do better. Your point on Jackson is spot on snd is why Reidy won’t play, our Jackson/Treacy ruck/forward combination couldn’t have worked better last week so they won’t mess with that


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Eski3]

Seems like the only interesting one is what they do for extra defender, especially since it's North who play pretty small up there.

Walker, Tabs/Voss a lock, then they either leave Banfield down there and bring in JOM or Draper plays

I actually don't hate the idea of Banfield down back against the smaller North forwards. At the very least a stint down back will give him some experience he can use as a defensive forward, which I think is his best position. We haven't had a proper defensive forward since Mayne

 

[FreoMatt]

Seems like the only interesting one is what they do for extra defender, especially since it's North who play pretty small up there.

Walker, Tabs/Voss a lock, then they either leave Banfield down there and bring in JOM or Draper plays

I think one of Draper/Davies is also a lock. As others (and yourself) have said we need to develop a key back until Cox comes back and getting them (i think Draper) in against Norf is the perfect opportunity to blood them.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[WilloTree]

Your classification needs to evolve.
1. Plays forward
2. Takes marks
3. Kicks goals
4. Over 195cm
= Tall forward

Fair enough. It still needs a bit of common sense though.

By that criteria guys like Zac Clark and Adam Goodes are 'tall forwards' and Matt Pavlich/Charlie Curnow/Tony Modra aren't.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

I actually don't hate the idea of Banfield down back against the smaller North forwards. At the very least a stint down back will give him some experience he can use as a defensive forward, which I think is his best position. We haven't had a proper defensive forward since Mayne

The whole game with Banfield and Hughes taking it out of the backline fills me with dread to be honest but we'll see

 

[Van_Dyke]

The whole game with Banfield and Hughes taking it out of the backline fills me with dread to be honest but we'll see

to be fair some of draper's kicking in the preseason doesn't make much more confident