Preview AFL Round 4 - Geelong v North Melbourne, Simonds Stadium, 3:20PM Sunday 26 April

[dazbroncos]

I agree and from a limited showing I like what Stanley brings, unlikely he will develop into a superstar.
but a number of things he's done haven't been seen from a Geelong ruckman for a while. His follow up work including smothers, tackles, defending, marking the ball, providing a target across the ground and kicking goals. And actually his tap work around the ground is pretty good he jumps to contest at the centre bounces, it wouldn't be my choice to keep Hmac or Simpson.

But we can't go into next year with Reed and Stanley (the same questions need to be asked of Vardy being there) I can't see who could be available at a decent price.
Sorry this is probably the wrong thread to be hypothesising on ruck options for next year apologies for that.

I think we'll get a much better effort from Stanley tomorrow against a quality ruckman than we've had, he's our best option in my opinion. And Clark and Walker provide aggressive support who are dangerous going forward.

It was nice to see a 200 cm guy in the hoops jumping ( as in actually leaving the ground) at the centre bounces. Might not win them all, but it was amazing to see the ball getting tapped to the MF advantage - and I mean OUR MF advantage. I actually saw Stanley get taps to space which became filled by our guys in motion as they cleared the centre. I had Otto flashbacks of Kelly getting first use from him without getting touched. But I digress -

Clark has also provided the same kind of service - see Cocky's goal in the NAB cup - Clark to Selwood and then to Cocky.

Point is, if Stanley and CLark can stay fit, get fitter, and with Blitz and Walker in support in their respective 50's of the ground ( meaning Walker forward and Blitz back for example) then we might be able to win some clean ball at the bounces.
And as you say, they have the ancillary skills and effort post the bounce itself to add value to the 2/3/4 efforts.

Not to mention what they bring in goal kicking, linking up thru the ground and providing scoring options.

GO Catters

 

[Hood007]

Reading through most of this thread and the past game preview threads, the weekly whinging about team selection, Chris Scott and the usual whipping boys is becoming boring.
There are other things to talk about.
Team tactics. The opposition.
Definitely criticise if it's warranted but there's no need for the constant negativity.
Just my 2 cents.

 

[you pick one]

How isn't Rivers a KPD??? Just because Blicavs is "learning the game" doesn't mean he isn't playing as a KPD(he played on Tabiner against Freemante and Day against GC in the first half and did a great job of it) and Kolodjashnij is on the list and as you can see people are asking for him to play this week ahead of Rivers... as a KPD.

Or are we just playing one KPD in Taylor this week? And that's five players. Sure like the club, I would have been happy to get Frawley but the Club didn't have the final say in that did they.

Simple because some one has to play there due to circumstances doesn't automatically make them a KPD,look at Walker he was thrown into ruck in 3013/14 do we class him as a ruckman?no of cause not and the same with Rivers you may as well thrown Mackie in there as well with your key position defenders he once took on Buddy.

 

[you pick one]

Reading through most of this thread and the past game preview threads, the weekly whinging about team selection, Chris Scott and the usual whipping boys is becoming boring.
There are other things to talk about.
Team tactics. The opposition.
Definitely criticise if it's warranted but there's no need for the constant negativity.
Just my 2 cents.

Well off you go the floors yours.

 

[Hood007]

Well off you go the floors yours.

I'll let you lead the way sheriff.

 

[Lana]

Simple because some one has to play there due to circumstances doesn't automatically make them a KPD,look at Walker he was thrown into ruck in 3013/14 do we class him as a ruckman?no of cause not and the same with Rivers you may as well thrown Mackie in there as well with your key position defenders he once took on Buddy.

Expect Rivers plays against KPF or the resting Ruckman every week and Kolodjashnij also plays against KPFs at VFL level and will do so at AFL level while Walker isn't a Ruckman. You're using a false dichotomy.

 

[you pick one]

Expect Rivers plays against KPF or the resting Ruckman every week and Kolodjashnij also plays against KPFs at VFL level and will do so at AFL level while Walker isn't a Ruckman. You're using a false dichotomy.

Last question we're getting nowhere, does Rivers play fullback or centre half back? if the answers yes he's a KPD if the answers no he's not.

 

[you pick one]

I'll let you lead the way sheriff.

O/K so we have picked three tall forwards Hawkins,Clark and Walker,question 1 do they all start or is there a case for Walker to be sub.
2 what part will Blits play with Loners out you would think he will be a stay at home backman this week.
3 I'd run for want of another word GHS into the ground this week lets see what he has.

 

[Lana]

Last question we're getting nowhere, does Rivers play fullback or centre half back? if the answers yes he's a KPD if the answers no he's not.

So you can only have 2 KPD on the field at once? What about forwards? If Clark, Hawkins and Walker are playing, does that make Walker a non-KPF because he's named in the pocket on the team sheet? And Rivers is named at CHB.

Whatever I CBF continuing this.

 

[you pick one]

So you can only have 2 KPD on the field at once? What about forwards? If Clark, Hawkins and Walker are playing, does that make Walker a non-KPF because he's named in the pocket on the team sheet? And Rivers is named at CHB.

Whatever I CBF continuing this.

No you can have as many KPD as you like as long as you have them and we don't,it's why we chased Frawley.Oh look we're back here again.

 

[Hood007]

O/K so we have picked three tall forwards Hawkins,Clark and Walker,question 1 do they all start or is there a case for Walker to be sub.
2 what part will Blits, play with Harry out you would think he will be a stay at home backman this week.
3 I'd run for want of another word GHS into the ground this week lets see what he has.

1. I reckon they all start. People on here have been asking for a 3 tall setup and I haven't been a huge advocate but I'm happy to see it get a run. Clark will probably get some time in the ruck again where he seems to be going well.
Plus, it's not proven but it seems that having a tall as a sub is a bit of a waste especially as teams seem to want more run towards the end of the game
2. You'd think he'd play mostly back with Petrie, Waite and B Brown playing fwd. Will give Stanley a chop out in the ruck when/if Brown or Petrie go in there. Last week
3. Don't think we need to run him into the ground. Don't think he should be sub nor do I think he's been good at it when given that role. I thought he was ok against Freo. Hoping he can build into some better form, we need him around the contest.

 

[dazbroncos]

O/K so we have picked three tall forwards Hawkins,Clark and Walker,question 1 do they all start or is there a case for Walker to be sub.
2 what part will Blits play with Harry out you would think he will be a stay at home backman this week.
3 I'd run for want of another word GHS into the ground this week lets see what he has.

Exsqueeze me?

I presume you meant Domsy or have you some late breaking news I have yet to come across…?

Go Catters

 

[you pick one]

Exsqueeze me?

I presume you meant Domsy or have you some late breaking news I have yet to come across…?

Go Catters

Thanks Daz ill fix that.

 

[CatRiot]

Not sure if anyone has heard, I may be late with this mail:

Geelong has also made a late change to its squad, replacing emergency Mathew Stokes (omitted) with midfielder Dean Gore, who is yet to debut after joining the Cats in last year's NAB AFL Draft.

 

[manboob]

A bit late but never hurts You'd hope he'd play - why else would they bother to change it. Unless the AFL told them to after Matty said he wouldn't play the other night when he was on the telly.

 

[dazbroncos]

O/K so we have picked three tall forwards Hawkins,Clark and Walker,question 1 do they all start or is there a case for Walker to be sub.
2 what part will Blits play with Harry out you would think he will be a stay at home backman this week.
3 I'd run for want of another word GHS into the ground this week lets see what he has.

Hope they don't make Walker the sub. Not sure his influence is the burst type of short term influence that the sub requires. He needs to be out there up forward making the North Back 6 respect the 3 of them. Im also not expecting massive games from all 3 - but zone off and double team any one of the at your own risk. All 3 are weapons one on one IMO.

Blitz I feel you will see more back than forward but as last week - can he be rotating b/w CHB and the MF?

Hyphen for mine is inside not out. Selwood carries it. All of Guthrie, Caddy, Hyphen, need to look in the mirror and lift. Not saying they have been bad but they need to lift and support the skipper more.

Go Catters

 

[Frappe]

O/K so we have picked three tall forwards Hawkins,Clark and Walker,question 1 do they all start or is there a case for Walker to be sub.
2 what part will Blits play with Loners out you would think he will be a stay at home backman this week.
3 I'd run for want of another word GHS into the ground this week lets see what he has.

I wondered about Walker being sub, however, generally goes to a running player.

From left field, could Walker play back at some stage to allow Blicavs a run on the ball? Would then mean we have two talls up forward.

 

[Lana]

A bit late but never hurts You'd hope he'd play - why else would they bother to change it. Unless the AFL told them to after Matty said he wouldn't play the other night when he was on the telly.

It's probably a way of getting him to go through the motions of a game day, like turning up at the right time, getting a pre-game ritual going, attending the match day meetings and doing the warm up.

 

[you pick one]

1. I reckon they all start. People on here have been asking for a 3 tall setup and I haven't been a huge advocate but I'm happy to see it get a run. Clark will probably get some time in the ruck again where he seems to be going well.
Plus, it's not proven but it seems that having a tall as a sub is a bit of a waste especially as teams seem to want more run towards the end of the game
2. You'd think he'd play mostly back with Petrie, Waite and B Brown playing fwd. Will give Stanley a chop out in the ruck when/if Brown or Petrie go in there. Last week
3. Don't think we need to run him into the ground. Don't think he should be sub nor do I think he's been good at it when given that role. I thought he was ok against Freo. Hoping he can build into some better form, we need him around the contest.

I'm beginning to think Scott is coming more amore around to the idea of Clark in the ruck,I'd expect we might see his minutes in there increase.And you would think Blitz having his hands full down back this week we might not be truly running a 3 man tall set up but more just a standards forward half.

 

[Teriyakicat]

Gee,what a surprise!

The players probably have a little flutter in the club rooms every week to win the meat tray - the MC plays ducks and drakes until the last minute

 

[Teriyakicat]

Jesus.......just what we need

No- just what WE need!

 

[Teriyakicat]

Cry 'Havoc!', and let slip the dogs of Gore.

FTFY

 

[manboob]

FTFY

Oh Terry!

 

[FredLeDeux]

I'm beginning to think Scott is coming more amore around to the idea of Clark in the ruck,I'd expect we might see his minutes in there increase.And you would think Blitz having his hands full down back this week we might not be truly running a 3 man tall set up but more just a standards forward half.

You wish.

 

[Vdubs]

Is he anywhere near big enough,I'd have thought 3rd tall.I can't see Lonergans replacement on the list unless they try Blits.

That's what I thought, and I gather CS has that Blicavs idea too.