Opinion Best 22 for 2022

[Matty411]

I think the best 22 is narrowing, as I've only got 3 differences to yours:

• McGov vs Young
• Cuningham vs Kennedy
• Dow vs E Curnow

It will be interesting when Matty411 runs the consolidated best 22; there shouldn't be too much disparities.
It would likely come down to a few players and whether we include the injured players or not (e.g. Docherty, Cuningham)

I'll have another think about the make up of the voting this year. I still like the format of 7 defenders, 7 forwards and 7 mids including the 1 ruck - before opening the final spot to a vote based on the makeup of the side.

Probably the fairest and most realistic way. Only question will be (given flexibility in positions): which position goes first this time?

If we go mids first, then it may make it likely we throw the leftovers into back/forward roles at the expense of better defenders/forwards. But if we go the route we usually go, then those flexible guys (I'm thinking the Martins and Williams') may miss out.

Thoughts, team?

 

[Bletch]

I think the best 22 is narrowing, as I've only got 3 differences to yours:

• McGov vs Young
• Cuningham vs Kennedy
• Dow vs E Curnow

It will be interesting when Matty411 runs the consolidated best 22; there shouldn't be too much disparities.
It would likely come down to a few players and whether we include the injured players or not (e.g. Docherty, Cuningham)

No real arguments there. Figured we really need a better second ruck option, and went with Young for that reason. And went with Kennedy and Ed C, as they were prob our 3rd and 4th best mids this year - up to the others to push them out. But ok with your options - Cunners gives it a bit more pace at least.

 

[Revenant1965]

I'll have another think about the make up of the voting this year. I still like the format of 7 defenders, 7 forwards and 7 mids including the 1 ruck - before opening the final spot to a vote based on the makeup of the side.

Probably the fairest and most realistic way. Only question will be (given flexibility in positions): which position goes first this time?

If we go mids first, then it may make it likely we throw the leftovers into back/forward roles at the expense of better defenders/forwards. But if we go the route we usually go, then those flexible guys (I'm thinking the Martins and Williams') may miss out.

Thoughts, team?

Why can't we do 6 starting defenders, 6 starting forwards, 6 starting mids (including 1 ruck), and then 5 on bench including medical sub?

 

[Blue__Balls]

Why can't we do 6 starting defenders, 6 starting forwards, 6 starting mids (including 1 ruck), and then 5 on bench including medical sub?

The 7/7/7 split generally provides a more balanced bench, rather than having people just pencilling in 4 mids.

 

[jezzatigerbrent]

I'll have a ping at picking two sides.
Assumption: All players ready to go round 1.
Note - also assumes we get a 2nd Cat-B Rookie to conveniently provide us with a 44th player.
Could do with a bit more pace on the bench, but it'll do to start.

View attachment 1259947

I like your AFL side as well and I agree you should have more pace so I would find a way to include Owies, Philp , or durden....[ whoever is playing better in the lead up matches of that Trio] probably in place of Young , as the forward line as it stands will not exert enough frontal tackling pressure for the Voss game plan

 

[jezzatigerbrent]

I'll have another think about the make up of the voting this year. I still like the format of 7 defenders, 7 forwards and 7 mids including the 1 ruck - before opening the final spot to a vote based on the makeup of the side.

Probably the fairest and most realistic way. Only question will be (given flexibility in positions): which position goes first this time?

If we go mids first, then it may make it likely we throw the leftovers into back/forward roles at the expense of better defenders/forwards. But if we go the route we usually go, then those flexible guys (I'm thinking the Martins and Williams') may miss out.

Thoughts, team?

yes I would go mids first for the very reason you outlined... And because we have an abundance of flexible Mids [ more so than ever with trading this past 2 wks ] the forward and the back lines will be better with their availability to slot in

 

[JuddgementDay]

I'll have another think about the make up of the voting this year. I still like the format of 7 defenders, 7 forwards and 7 mids including the 1 ruck - before opening the final spot to a vote based on the makeup of the side.

Probably the fairest and most realistic way. Only question will be (given flexibility in positions): which position goes first this time?

If we go mids first, then it may make it likely we throw the leftovers into back/forward roles at the expense of better defenders/forwards. But if we go the route we usually go, then those flexible guys (I'm thinking the Martins and Williams') may miss out.

Thoughts, team?

Yeah, go mids first given that we've been discussing it in here https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/midfield-2022-4-locks.1289137/
So it would be good to get that consensus first
It also has the biggest number of players too

 

[CJMB]

I'll have another think about the make up of the voting this year. I still like the format of 7 defenders, 7 forwards and 7 mids including the 1 ruck - before opening the final spot to a vote based on the makeup of the side.

Probably the fairest and most realistic way. Only question will be (given flexibility in positions): which position goes first this time?

If we go mids first, then it may make it likely we throw the leftovers into back/forward roles at the expense of better defenders/forwards. But if we go the route we usually go, then those flexible guys (I'm thinking the Martins and Williams') may miss out.

Thoughts, team?

I think we're going to have issues regardless of which line we start with, especially as we've got a better squad to select from.

This is probably how I'd approach it:
Starting midfield: 5 players (3 mids + 2 wings)
Starting ruck: 1
Starting defenders: 6 players (3 tall def & 3 gen def)
Starting forwards: 6 players (3 tall fwd & 3 gen fwd)
Bench: 4 players (1 def, 1 mid, 1 fwd, 1 utility/extra/wildcard/etc)

Up to you if you want/need to narrow the bench selection to only include players who have received on-field votes.

Another way, a bit more laborious and time consuming, might be to break it down further than previously. We'd have to more or less agree on a 3 tall structure at both ends of the ground.

3 mid
2 wing
1 ruck
3 tall def
3 gen def
3 tall fwd
3 gen fwd
bench: 1 def, 1 mid, 1 fwd, 1 other/utility

To do it that way would be at least 8 votes though, which is pretty intense...

 

[Matty411]

I think we're going to have issues regardless of which line we start with, especially as we've got a better squad to select from.

This is probably how I'd approach it:
Starting midfield: 5 players (3 mids + 2 wings)
Starting ruck: 1
Starting defenders: 6 players (3 tall def & 3 gen def)
Starting forwards: 6 players (3 tall fwd & 3 gen fwd)
Bench: 4 players (1 def, 1 mid, 1 fwd, 1 utility/extra/wildcard/etc)

Up to you if you want/need to narrow the bench selection to only include players who have received on-field votes.

Another way, a bit more laborious and time consuming, might be to break it down further than previously. We'd have to more or less agree on a 3 tall structure at both ends of the ground.

3 mid
2 wing
1 ruck
3 tall def
3 gen def
3 tall fwd
3 gen fwd
bench: 1 def, 1 mid, 1 fwd, 1 other/utility

To do it that way would be at least 8 votes though, which is pretty intense...

Yeah sticking to 4 or 5 votes max is my preference. Having guys like Walsh and Cerra able to 'wing it' for a time will help the balance from being totally off, but don't think many will opt for Newnes or LOB in the 22... which is always where a consensus falls apart. Our 22 as a supporter base doesn't have to go through the same process/balance in as detailed a way as the MC.

 

[gbatman]

Hi GBM, you and others have mentioned using McG in defense, is this simply because his brother does well there or is there some defensive substance to McG that we have not seen todate.

The pedigree surely adds to the theory that potentially McGovern could be very good in defence.

McGovern is a very very talented footballer however he's had a very poor run with injuries.

If you break down McGovern's attributes he comes up really good, certainly better than Plowman who has been adequate but he's not elite and IMO, that third tall position is one we should be looking to improve on.

McGovern is quick and has good agility for a guy his size. He can also play fairly tall which is a must for a third tall defender. He's strong and skilled and if his footy brain is similar enough to his brothers then there is a very good defender untapped there.

IMO if allowed time to settle in and hone his game in the back pocket we could have a really good defender on our hands who should be able to shut down tall and smaller players as well as provide some offence.

McGovern needs to be tried and tested in this role, IMO he is mostly an upgrade on what we have and would improve our defence. Then again Marchbank does the same for us as well.

 

[Tim H]

The pedigree surely adds to the theory that potentially McGovern could be very good in defence.

McGovern is a very very talented footballer however he's had a very poor run with injuries.

If you break down McGovern's attributes he comes up really good, certainly better than Plowman who has been adequate but he's not elite and IMO, that third tall position is one we should be looking to improve on.

McGovern is quick and has good agility for a guy his size. He can also play fairly tall which is a must for a third tall defender. He's strong and skilled and if his footy brain is similar enough to his brothers then there is a very good defender untapped there.

IMO if allowed time to settle in and hone his game in the back pocket we could have a really good defender on our hands who should be able to shut down tall and smaller players as well as provide some offence.

McGovern needs to be tried and tested in this role, IMO he is mostly an upgrade on what we have and would improve our defence. Then again Marchbank does the same for us as well.

Lack of concentration, overweight, lazy and drifts out of the game for whole quarters.

Not what anyone is looking for in a defender.

All the things he does wrong as a forward would be even worse in the backline.

Next two years in reserves unless no one else is available or he really starts trying.

Three years at Carlton and he has played very little good football.

 

[Sharks On A Plane]

The pedigree surely adds to the theory that potentially McGovern could be very good in defence.

McGovern is a very very talented footballer however he's had a very poor run with injuries.

If you break down McGovern's attributes he comes up really good, certainly better than Plowman who has been adequate but he's not elite and IMO, that third tall position is one we should be looking to improve on.

McGovern is quick and has good agility for a guy his size. He can also play fairly tall which is a must for a third tall defender. He's strong and skilled and if his footy brain is similar enough to his brothers then there is a very good defender untapped there.

IMO if allowed time to settle in and hone his game in the back pocket we could have a really good defender on our hands who should be able to shut down tall and smaller players as well as provide some offence.

McGovern needs to be tried and tested in this role, IMO he is mostly an upgrade on what we have and would improve our defence. Then again Marchbank does the same for us as well.

Agree with all this. Just feel like McGovern would benefit from the challenge of being assigned a more specific task. Much easier to play back than forward, he gets lost up the ground.

This is such an obvious move, really hope the new regime go with it. Will pay-off big imo.

 

[kickballfoot]

Plowman Weitering Stocker
Saad Jones Young
Walsh Cerra E.Curnow
Martin Curnow Fisher
JSOS McKay Honey
TDK Cripps Hewett

Williams Dow Newman McGovern

JSOS and Young to chop out in the Ruck - I’d rotate TDK with Pittonet every 3rd/4th week.
Hate to see TDK and Pittonet in the same team - neither is good enough around the ground or forward to take up 2 spots.

 

[Uncle Fester]

just saying. Lachie Plowman third straight year top 10 in the b&f.

Can people stop excluding him from their starting 22 for next year.

It ain’t going to happen

 

[BrisbaneCFC]

just saying. Lachie Plowman third straight year top 10 in the b&f.

Can people stop excluding him from their starting 22 for next year.

It ain’t going to happen

We absolutely need to change up our defense to improve.

 

[Beyond Blue]

Weits isn't slow. Myth that was pushed around. I don't remember what radio show it was on. One of the blues players was talking about jow surprisingly fast Weits is during the season.

If he gets beaten, which is rare, it tends to be by leading forwards though.

 

[Beyond Blue]

Marchbank did his ACL early April. A slow return to football would be 12 months, it’s not unreasonable that he could be ready to go Feb/March.

Cuningham did his ACL mid May. Similarly that’s should be a march-may return.

Docherty is harder to gauge, it’s really going to depend on how his treatment goes, how long that takes and how much his body is knocked around because of it.

That being said, the original timeline proposed was that he’d at least get some preseason training in.

“Docherty will now undergo 12 weeks of chemotherapy before a planned return to preseason training ahead of the 2022 campaign.”

‘Another curveball’: AFL star Sam Docherty reveals cancer battle

Months after the Carlton co-captain underwent surgery on a malignant testicular tumour, he took to Instagram to detail a ‘really tough few days’.

7news.com.au

Marchbank and Cunners might be ready by March-April but with limited preseason and a lot of match conditioning required in the reserves I think the absolute best we can hope for is that they play senior football after the bye.

It’s not unreasonable to think Docherty could be out indefinitely.

Add that with Mirkov being highly unlikely to be ready to play AFL level next season nor whoever we take pick 64, then we are already 5 short on the list.

I’m really hoping we only use pick 25 and try snare someone like Brander who we at least know is AFL ready.

 

[The Blue Baggers]

Newman Jones Young
Williams Weitering Saad
TDK Cripps Walsh
Hewitt Cerra Fisher
Martin C.Curnow Honey
JSOS McKay Durdin
Stocker Kemp Philip Ed Curnow

 

[GoBlues!]

Young Jones Stocker
Williams Weitering Saad
Kemp Cripps Cerra
TDK Hewitt Walsh
Martin C.Curnow JSOS
Fisher McKay Honey

Pitto Kennedy Dow Newman
(Sub - Ed Curnow)

 

[CJMB]

Marchbank and Cunners might be ready by March-April but with limited preseason and a lot of match conditioning required in the reserves I think the absolute best we can hope for is that they play senior football after the bye.

It’s not unreasonable to think Docherty could be out indefinitely.

Add that with Mirkov being highly unlikely to be ready to play AFL level next season nor whoever we take pick 64, then we are already 5 short on the list.

I’m really hoping we only use pick 25 and try snare someone like Brander who we at least know is AFL ready.

Could be the case, but let’s wait and see. If all 3 return and have no setbacks, they could probably get fitness and form up to scratch in less than 8-12 weeks.

A draftee not being ready at round 1 is probably more the norm for us now, aside from any freaks like Walsh or if we pick a mature player/man-child who’s good enough to make the team.

 

[gbatman]

Lack of concentration, overweight, lazy and drifts out of the game for whole quarters.

Not what anyone is looking for in a defender.

All the things he does wrong as a forward would be even worse in the backline.

Next two years in reserves unless no one else is available or he really starts trying.

Three years at Carlton and he has played very little good football.

He's been consistently injured, that brief period he wasn't he was pretty handy.

 

[VainGlorious]

BEST 22:
B: Stocker, Weitering, Young
HB: Williams, Jones, Saad
C: Newman, Walsh, O’Brien
HF: McGovern, C Curnow, Martin
F: Honey, McKay, JSOS
R: De Koning, Cripps, Cerra
INT: Hewett, Kennedy, Dow, Kemp

EMERGENCIES:
Ed Curnow, Plowman, Owies, Pittonet

INJURED (But otherwise Best 22)
Docherty (BP/HBF/W), Marchbank (BP), Cuningham (On ball)

UNLUCKY:
Fogarty, Durdin, Williamson, Setterfield, Newnes, McDonald

UNPROVEN:
Carroll, Parks, Philp, Mirkov

NOT TO STANDARD:
Cottrell - happy to be proven wrong though.

POTENTIAL ROLE CHANGES:
Stocker - Move to on-ball (Listed as a back pocket for purpose of starting 18)
Newman - Move to the wing
Kemp - Move to on-ball
​

This. All of this please.

Barring injury this is what I’d like to see. It looks balanced with great depth and versatility across the board and there is some healthy competition in the emergencies.

Durdin V Honey for that last small/medium forward spot, I like it, i really like it.

If guys like Hansen, Voss and Hamill can’t get Mitch McGovern up and about then he is finished, but I’m salivating at the prospect of him being able to play 3rd tall alongside Charlie and H.

Like, drooling:



Jack Martin and JSOS give us front half pressure and both can pinch hit in other areas of the ground, but that forward mix is going to do some far better than just kick some winning scores.

It’s going to provide the oppo coaching teams with headaches. Migraines even. Dining out on some silver service from the new mid recruits coupled with a more structured game plan and I think we’ll be well on the way to climbing up the ladder.

I don’t think it is fair and reasonable for us to expect much from Doc next season, I really don’t. I’ve seen first hand what chemo does to people and it ain’t pretty, but he’s tough, resilient and I have the utmost faith and confidence that he will turn a corner and get healthy again. Then we can talk about his return to the field.

The midfield group is finally starting to look like something that can challenge the better on-ball divisions. We’ve got two A-Graders in Walsh the cyborg and Crippa, although the latter has been under extreme emotional and physical duress for two seasons running now. Add a fit Cripps back into the mix with Hewett, Cerra and another pre-season in the gym for the freakish TDK, and I’m legitimately excited, like big Kev excited. Adding Stocker in around the stoppages in fits and bursts, a Dow who looked like he had found his mojo and gained some confidence in his abilities with Kennedy and Setterfield and it’s looking like we can finally say there’s a bit of depth there.

Dow needs to keep it simple. See ball, get ball, run and break lines. No have ball? Tackle, chase, pressure. Tackle, chase, pressure.

Cripps needs to stop trying to take on 18 blokes at a time and fire out some handballs to Cerra, Walsh etc.


I really hope LoB makes it as a winger. He has ELITE endurance, nearly Walsh-like endurance and a beautiful left peg. He doesn’t have to be a grunt player, but he needs some consistency on a wing to show he belongs. Hopefully a new game plan and a new coaching vibe will give him the best chance of showing us if he wants it enough, if he is made of the right stuff.

Bounce the ball ffs.

 

[VainGlorious]

Does not look AFL grade in his presentation or preparation....

Are you talking about LoB here?

 

[spry]

Forget Fogarty at your peril I reckon. He’s one I tip for a big year. His first 4 weeks were epic.
he plays a powerful team lifting style which I think boss will love/ utilise.

 

[VainGlorious]

He's been consistently injured, that brief period he wasn't he was pretty handy.

Injured and bereft of confidence. It’s easy for professional athletes to drop 5-10% in their preparation and look what it did to him.

Getting fitter and preparing his mind and body should be paramount this preseason, and I hope he’s got the right support around him.

Sublimely talented, but that will only get you so far.