Traded #22: Jake Carlisle - Pt.1 - Traded with some other stuff for pick 5, 24 and a Bird (cont in Part 2)

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
if he could convert set shots..


sorry. love the bloke. but he's not a forward.
 
His effort and workrate was much better than earlier in the season. But he missed two of the easiest shots you will ever get as a forward. To be honest i think Daniher has gone past him as a set shot kick and that's not saying much about Carlisle.
 
He got some marks in the 3rd quarter because Taylor went off..

He will not have an impact against the well organised Port defence.

Not a forward.. never will be. Send him down back where he looked good.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

He is missing easy set shots because he is down on goal kicking confidence. He hardly missed in the warm up. It won't take much for it to click.
 
Daniher back, Hurley forward and Carlisle on the wing Richo style. We woulda won by ten last night :D. Im emailing Bomber now.
 
He got some marks in the 3rd quarter because Taylor went off..

He will not have an impact against the well organised Port defence.

Not a forward.. never will be. Send him down back where he looked good.



Didn't seem to have a problem bossing Harry Taylor in the first half.


Seriously, he did finally have the space and mindset to hit the footy (only to be undone about 6 times by disposal).

He didn't take 4 marks inside 50 (and 4 contested marks in total)?

He didn't kick 2.2 (with a few admittedly poor shots on goal)?

If he can settle his set shot routine like Daniher he kicks 3.1 or 4.0 and all of the sudden he is a "very natural forward".


Funny that his best performance came with a side that was working reasonably well together (as opposed to the midfield and attack being totally disjointed).
 
Last edited:
Promising performance. The goal-kicking is just a mindset thing; he is not a poor kick.

His body language is terrible when he knows he's about to take a set shot, but that should be easy to fix.
 
Really surprised so many believe that his performance against Geelong confirms that he's not a forward. Looked very good to me.

there was one moment where he was streaming back to goal and should have you turned and come back at the ball for what should be an easy mark 20 out directly in front, but i agree, looked very good.

If he continues to play forward he'll have equivalent days to that in terms of possessions, amount of contests he get to and kick 5-6 goals easy.

Kicked 2.2, almost clunked another couple more and was denied at least 2 free kicks in definite scoring position
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Really surprised so many believe that his performance against Geelong confirms that he's not a forward. Looked very good to me.
rines wouldn't think he's a forward if he kicked 10 on Matthew Scarlett in his prime
 
Really surprised so many believe that his performance against Geelong confirms that he's not a forward. Looked very good to me.

It's almost like they've reached a conclusion and are now looking for evidence to support it, rather than reaching a conclusion based on the evidence.
 
Thought he was quite good. The issue is though that our forward line seems disjointed still. We have individuals in our forward line, not a team of forwards. While I like Carlisle forward, I think Hurley kind of binds the whole forward line together as a unit when he plays there. Having said that, we haven't actually seen Hurley forward with this bunch of guys, so I guess it's hard to judge.
 
is Daniher a AA contender at CHB? silly logic

the issue being discussed is whether carlisle is a forward. the reasons being given for his supposed omplete inability to play forward do not really stand up given the nature of the tiny sample available.

rlisle forward is more important than him playing in defence even if he is bettter in defence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top