Can we now drop Sinclair?? (+ general forward line discussion)

[Mr Responsible]

Please Bucks. Sinclair needs to be dropped. Shouldn't have kept getting a game last year let alone this year. At least Didak has got a few tricks up his sleeve and Krakour should also come in.

 

[POKsPies252]

We need some potency in our FWD line, can't rely on Trav kicking a bag every week. Bring back the Krak!!

 

[Stifler's mom]

When I suggested this a few weeks ago I was told it was an overreaction.

Please please get rid of this kid from the side.

 

[Yonchi]

The whole forward line needs a shake-up. Pendles ran through the centre of the ground bouncing the ball and ended up kicking to a contest. That is a situation that should make a forwards' eyes light up. Surely they practise working through an ideal situation like this. Ridiculous at the lack of structure and synergy.

Sinclair has not given a reason why he will remain on the list

Fasolo has had his position in the team since the injuries of 2011. Personally I don't think that's enough

Currently both are out of our best 22

 

[Go_Brad_Dick]

Yes to Krak and Dids.
Yes to sinc out.
Fas needs a warm up in the 2s.

 

[PieNSauce]

Despite what some here are saying, he had some of the highest stats last week for pressure acts and almost as many goal involvements as anyone in the side. That said, he gave us very little yesterday and whilst I've been happy enough for him to stay in the side, I have to agree it's probably time he had a spell in the magoos. We definitely need another goal kicking option down there and that's just not happening with him at the moment. If he can't do that and he's not putting on pressure then I think you have to look elsewhere.

 

[sloth6]

If we play Didak and/or Krakouer without Sinkers our defensive pressure will be non-existent.

At least Sinkers does the job he is in the side for, Fasolo was putrid today and Elliott wasn't much better (not that I want him dropped).

If you're a small crumbing forward with pace and actually get into the right spots, get front and square, be dangerous, hit the scoreboard and get your hands on the footy, then your opponent will actually worry about stopping you rather than heading onto the field knowing that his role in the team is too chase ar$e and tackle, therefore I can roll off, help my defenders and get a ton of the ball.

Sinkers isn't very good at either! Can't get near the footy, can't crumb, can't tackle.

Forwards jobs should be first and foremost to kick goals, crumb, present an option and work together in creating space for eachother, the harassment and defensive work will come if you get involved in the contest rather than waiting for an opportunity to tackle or chase someone.

Elliot - tried to take mark of the year too many times yesterday. You don't need to fly for everything, stay down and crumb.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Elliot - tried to take mark of the year too many times yesterday. You don't need to fly for everything, stay down and crumb.

Possibly, but I can also think of a couple of occasions where his effort to get involved in the marking contest, even without taking the mark, led to us winning the ball or holding it in when outnumbered.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Selection was awful this week. We made one change after a five day break and that one change was to put Goldy on the sub bench. Where were the fresh legs? Terrible thinking.

Whether its Sinclair or Fasolo dropped, I'm indifferent. I'd probably drop both of them now.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

With Toovey's injury, could we upgrade Mooney?.

I think we'll need to keep that spot for Dwyer who would have found himself relegated otherwise.

 

[rose jam]

Justifying Sinclair's selection on pressure acts and tackling and whatever is rubbish. Forwards need to be dangerous. It draws their opponents to them and stops defenders from sitting off and creating. That is where the kill is. The defender who sits out teh back gets the easy handball receive, switches play and the opposition have a free run into their uncongested forward line.
If forwards can not kick goals then they are not exerting pressure - case in point, Chris Dawes last year. Every defender didn't even bother standing next to him because he couldn't kick goals and they just rode off him and set up play. Sinclair is the same.

 

[DaVe86]

I think we need to start getting our 'best 22' out there.

I don't see Russell and SInclair in that...but I do see Fasolo. That said, some of Fasolo's tackling efforts were quite poor, and I wonder if you could afford a forward line with he and Didak putting next to no pressure on.

I want potency in the forward line. I think having Krakouer and Didak in there will at worst give Elliott some freedom.

The kid is good, but he is not ready to cop the best opposition defender just yet. He won't if Krakouer is up there or Fasolo is in some form.

I wouldn't be against dropping Fasolo to harden up. A direct swap with Didak is on the cards because both offer something similar, but at least Didak has put a solid VFL month behind him.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

It was, but I'll wait for the pressure acts to come out (which he was 4th for in the team last week) to confirm.

We have multiple small scoring options in Dwyer, Elliott and Fasolo and they did nothing or didn't take easy opportunities that came to them. Their job is primarily to kick goals and they contributed zilch.

The whole forwardline is a shambles, not just Sinclair who at least seems to be doing the job that he was in the side for.

I'm sorry, but you can't be in a side aspiring to win a premiership 'just to apply pressure' and then not even do that consistently. Stop making excuses.

Tyson Goldsack came onto the field, applied pressure AND kicked 2 goals. Sinclair diiiiiiid.......?

Is he a forward? Then he should be kicking goals. Way more regularly. Elliott puts on pressure and kicks goals. Krakouer and Didak may not put on pressure, but they are dangerous and require a decent defender.

Sinclair doesn't even get a decent defender, doesn't kick goals, and barely puts legitimate pressure on. We're essentially a man down.

 

[Stripes B and W]

Having a look at most of the game again last night, it seemed Sinclair was looking after Dempsey for the most part. Probably was reasonable in that role but he must be a scoreboard threat.
On balance, and with 18 hours of hindshight we made a fatal flaw at selection, and one that teams often do.

We largely stuck to a winning 22, rather than selected the best side available, particularly in light of the very heavy campaign we have been given for the first 5 rounds and particularly the short break leading into yesterdays game.

Jolly, Johnno, Goldsack ( as a starting 18 ), Krak probably were all considered but ultimately we went more with rewarding the group that beat the Tigers.

 

[stupidbigfootysh]

I think we need to start getting our 'best 22' out there.

I don't see Russell and SInclair in that...but I do see Fasolo. That said, some of Fasolo's tackling efforts were quite poor, and I wonder if you could afford a forward line with he and Didak putting next to no pressure on.

I want potency in the forward line. I think having Krakouer and Didak in there will at worst give Elliott some freedom.

The kid is good, but he is not ready to cop the best opposition defender just yet. He won't if Krakouer is up there or Fasolo is in some form.

I wouldn't be against dropping Fasolo to harden up. A direct swap with Didak is on the cards because both offer something similar, but at least Didak has put a solid VFL month behind him.

I've heard Buckley talk about how premiership teams need to find a couple of players in their premiership year in order to win it. In 2010 we had Ball, Jolly and Blair with Sidebottom and Beams (maybe others I've forgotten) making a big rise - so that was at least five, this year who knows? Lynch, Young, Russell, Dwyer are obviously new but I think Bucks also believes we need a big rise from a couple, who Elliott, Sinclair, Williams, Josh Thomas, Keefe?

Personally I'd rather Bucks stick to plan and work out who is the 'new best 22' that could win us a flag this year rather than rely on a 'historic best 22'.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

People have forgotten Marley Williams too. We have plenty of depth options coming through, they all need game time.

 

[rose jam]

Pressure comes from danger in the forward line not tackling.

Case in point: Leon Davis. Had a poor year in 2010, but his reputation for scoring goals from small windows of opportunity always forced a man to play on him. Sinclair is having about the same impact as Leon was in that period, but has zero reputation for scoring, hence his man sags off and sets up play. Game, set, match.

 

[half_back_flank]

I'm sorry, but you can't be in a side aspiring to win a premiership 'just to apply pressure' and then not even do that consistently. Stop making excuses.

Tyson Goldsack came onto the field, applied pressure AND kicked 2 goals. Sinclair diiiiiiid.......?

Is he a forward? Then he should be kicking goals. Way more regularly. Elliott puts on pressure and kicks goals. Krakouer and Didak may not put on pressure, but they are dangerous and require a decent defender.

Sinclair doesn't even get a decent defender, doesn't kick goals, and barely puts legitimate pressure on. We're essentially a man down.

Last week he said the role Buckley has given him in the side is primarily defensive. He has shown that he can get into dangerous spots (albeit the last two games this has been basically non-existent) and just lacks the composure to finish.

I think it's simplistic in modern football to just simply judge forwards solely by their goals. Granted I would like to see him get in some more dangerous spots but at the moment, but he's performing his role adequately. He held Dempsey this week and besides Birchall who has destroyed everyone this year he has restricted his opponent this year and has taken much more challenging opponents than say an Elliott.

Buckley sees something in him or he wouldn't of given him 20 games plus finals last year (where he restricted Birchall to 11 possessions in the QF). I see something too, he had a must win contest on the HBF against two Essendon players and he was able beat them and dish off the handball. It was impressive.

If we are going to play attacking players with poor defensive skills such as Krakeour and Didak (who is as one way as they come) or even bring in a third tall in Paine we are going to need Sinkers to sacrifice his attacking game and do the dirty work to ensure our forward line does't act like a trampoline.


I'm well aware i'm in the minority (possibly I am the minority) but the days are gone where you pick your six most dangerous forwards and just stick them in the forward line. I'm sure Sinclair could be finding more offensive ball but that isn't his role, he is in the team to do the dirty work to ensure that Elliott/Fasolo and whoever else is down there can get into those dangerous positions with at least one player on hand if it doesn't work.

 

[Stripes B and W]

Last week he said the role Buckley has given him in the side is primarily defensive. He has shown that he can get into dangerous spots (albeit the last two games this has been basically non-existent) and just lacks the composure to finish.

I think it's simplistic in modern football to just simply judge forwards solely by their goals. Granted I would like to see him get in some more dangerous spots but at the moment, but he's performing his role adequately. He held Dempsey this week and besides Birchall who has destroyed everyone this year he has restricted his opponent this year and has taken much more challenging opponents than say an Elliott.

Buckley sees something in him or he wouldn't of given him 20 games plus finals last year (where he restricted Birchall to 11 possessions in the QF). I see something too, he had a must win contest on the HBF against two Essendon players and he was able beat them and dish off the handball. It was impressive.

If we are going to play attacking players with poor defensive skills such as Krakeour and Didak (who is as one way as they come) or even bring in a third tall in Paine we are going to need Sinkers to sacrifice his attacking game and do the dirty work to ensure our forward line does't act like a trampoline.


I'm well aware i'm in the minority (possibly I am the minority) but the days are gone where you pick your six most dangerous forwards and just stick them in the forward line. I'm sure Sinclair could be finding more offensive ball but that isn't his role, he is in the team to do the dirty work to ensure that Elliott/Fasolo and whoever else is down there can get into those dangerous positions with at least one player on hand if it doesn't work.

Balanced post HBF, i dont think he is a certain out, his role does need a bit of tinkering. For example use him from time to time, rather than Cloke and Elliot, give him a few minutes through the mid field making the defence just rejig if Swan or Blair etc work though it. He could have spent a few minutes on Goddard, Harry was struggling with him.
For the potential replacement Krak is way ahead of Dids for mine, but as you point out, it gives a different slant to the setup. Teams will automatically structure to exploit the more one way player.
Re Dids, a player we all love, I dont believe his kicking is anywhere near the level it once was. He has had a terrible run with injury for about the last 2 years, lets hope he can have an uninterrupted run from now and really demand a place in the best 22.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

Last week he said the role Buckley has given him in the side is primarily defensive. He has shown that he can get into dangerous spots (albeit the last two games this has been basically non-existent) and just lacks the composure to finish.

I think it's simplistic in modern football to just simply judge forwards solely by their goals. Granted I would like to see him get in some more dangerous spots but at the moment, but he's performing his role adequately. He held Dempsey this week and besides Birchall who has destroyed everyone this year he has restricted his opponent this year and has taken much more challenging opponents than say an Elliott.

Buckley sees something in him or he wouldn't of given him 20 games plus finals last year (where he restricted Birchall to 11 possessions in the QF). I see something too, he had a must win contest on the HBF against two Essendon players and he was able beat them and dish off the handball. It was impressive.

If we are going to play attacking players with poor defensive skills such as Krakeour and Didak (who is as one way as they come) or even bring in a third tall in Paine we are going to need Sinkers to sacrifice his attacking game and do the dirty work to ensure our forward line does't act like a trampoline.


I'm well aware i'm in the minority (possibly I am the minority) but the days are gone where you pick your six most dangerous forwards and just stick them in the forward line. I'm sure Sinclair could be finding more offensive ball but that isn't his role, he is in the team to do the dirty work to ensure that Elliott/Fasolo and whoever else is down there can get into those dangerous positions with at least one player on hand if it doesn't work.

While I agree with everything you said, there's one hle in the argument. A caveat if you will.

Our forward line is still a trampoline despite his role. THAT'S the main reaso he now needs to go. I'd rather our inside 50 to goal conversion be higher if the ball is going to come out easy when we don't score anyway.

 

[dingoboy]

Sinclair and fas prob in strife.

 

[HFF]

The time is right for Sinclair to have a spell in the twos.

You can talk up "forward pressure" all you like but there's no substitute for scoreboard pressure and Sinclair unfortunately does not impact the scoreboard anywhere near enough to warrant a spot in the forward half.

We lack quality small forwards Elliott and Fasolo aside who are capable of kicking goals. Whilst we may not get anything defensively from Didak or Krak at least you know attacking wise they have tricks up their sleeve and can hurt the opposition in minutes.

 

[TheGreatGrundy]

I'd be happy to see Sinclair dropped from the side never to return. We need forwards who can kick goals, not forwards who are in the side for 'defensive pressure' and get less than 10 possessions each week. If he remains in the side for the next game, then I will begin to seriously question Buckley's competence as a coach.

 

[TradeDraft]

I'd be happy to see Sinclair dropped from the side never to return. We need forwards who can kick goals, not forwards who are in the side for 'defensive pressure' and get less than 10 possessions each week. If he remains in the side for the next game, then I will begin to seriously question Buckley's competence as a coach.

AMEN - I agree he is not a AFL Player. Too Skinny and Does not Stick Tackles and Skills are Poor

 

[76woodenspooners]

I think in a perfect world Sinclair would go back to the VFL to refine his craft, and Blair moves to the forward line and stays there. Blair can tackle, apply pressure, kick goals, keep his head under pressure, crumb - even take speckies! Blair is the small forward we're crying out for and his talents are being wasted in the midfield. Park Blair in the forward arc and you can pen him in for two goals a game (at least), which is to more than Sinclair is good for ATM.

Elliott and Lynch need to swap roles. Lynch needs to be the one going up and breaking packs and Elliott needs to be staying down. Yes, Elliott is a strong mark, and by all means he should go up for the 1v1 contests. But in a pack situation he needs to stay down.

Our third tall is a bit of a problem at the moment. Caff is way off form - it's been 2.5 years since he was playing at his best, he's going to need more time to find form. Goldy is a strong mark, and gives good pressure, but I just don't trust his kicking. I reckon it's now time to start thinking about parking Swanny in the forward line - it's fast becoming time.

So I've just r*ped our midfield - how to fill that vacuum? Let me get back to you about that