Player Watch Darcy Fogarty - Re-Signed to End of 2031

[George Kramer]

I think it was his best game in a long while... but a lot of that is based on the first couple of minutes, when he had a huge mismatch on Jones. How would you judge the rest of his game, without those 2 opening goals? He was very good up the ground, but as effective as a fly screen door on a submarine inside the F50, once Ratugolea was moved onto him.

... and yet Ratugolea pantsed Fogarty. Preventing Fog from scoring is/was his main job, and he did it exceptionally well.

Absolutely. Our back line were outstanding!

So the other 7 marks were on who?

Do you think he pushed up the ground in error or could it have been instruction to drag Rat out of the defence creating opportunities for our other forwards?

How many one on ones where the ball was directed to Fog did Rat beat him?

 

[George Kramer]

I thought it was probably a strategy to push him up the ground when the switch was made in order to keep Ratugolea out of the 50 where he’s more effective at rolling off his man be the 3rd man up on marking contests. If Jones had stayed on him he probably would have stayed deeper to exploit that mismatch.

But I might be giving Nicks too much credit?

Snap.

So Vader likes this and yet hasn’t edited his post bagging Fog?

 

[dogs105]

Fogarty was a big part of why we won last night

 

[AFC979810]

Looked like Carey at times. What a great game.

Tell me you were too young to watch Wayne Carey play football without telling me you were too young to watch Wayne Carey play football.

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

Whilst not trying to be over-dramatic this week’s showdown could be the most important game of his career to date.

Thought again against North he didn’t pull his weight and this time he didn’t even have his usual excuses given the team’s dominance for long periods of time. He needs to show an ability to really hit the scoreboard again, he has barely shown it for 12 months now and it can’t all be due to like his cheerleaders would have you believe that no player is able to hit him on a lead inside 50.

The problems he had on the weekend were systemic of his issues he’s always had as a forward - he is way too easy to play on for his opposition defender. For someone we’ve been told since his junior days was a ‘leading forward’ his leading patterns are so basic, he just leads in a straight line up for the ball, which would be very effective if you had Darren Jarman kicking you the ball, or you had lightning burst speed or if there were no opposition defenders in the forward 50 but given that’s not the case it is a problem for him as it’s basically all he does as a forward. He doesn’t try to lose his defender prior or use an arc or any change of direction he just leads straight up and is finding it nearly impossible to get any separation with any AFL standard defender he plays on being able to read the play, keep up with him and pressure the marking contest, hell he couldn’t even find much separation or get a hold of the non-competent ones in North’s backline.

Another issue that has crept into his game in the last 12 months is he’s now consistently misreading the flight of the ball inside 50, lots of people on here are saying players are constantly kicking it over his head but I’m more of the other view I believe Fogarty is a lot of the time just misreading the ball off the boot, I also point out specifically inside 50 because for some reason he seems to not have the same issues when he goes out on long leads to take a mark on the wing but when he’s inside 50 and he’s out on a lead or when he tries to leap for the ball he totally misjudges it.

Sure like those that constantly defend him you can certainly blame some of it on poor delivery and the team’s lack of ability to consistently kick it to a forwards advantage but surely as a forward you have to be a bit more flexible and prepare as you’re not always going to get the perfect ball delivered to you and for 12 months now Fog just seems to be wanting it always perfect and wants his defender to just disappear and apply no pressure to him while he goes for the mark.

i think that's a harsh reading of his game against north, didn't dominate but was solid after qtr time, and set up goals for other players.

 

[WeeBlake]

So the other 7 marks were on who?

Do you think he pushed up the ground in error or could it have been instruction to drag Rat out of the defence creating opportunities for our other forwards?

How many one on ones where the ball was directed to Fog did Rat beat him?

He was good. You’d take that performance every week.

 

[MrBarry]

Another thing I love about Fog is he lays some crunching tackles and isn't afraid to hurt the opposition. He laid a massive tackle on Ratagolia at one point drove him into the ground, who's a huge man. Then later in the game slammed Burgoyne into the ground which was borderline but he disguised it well.

He's just not a player I'd want to be running into or play on from that perspective.

 

[MrBarry]

I think it was his best game in a long while... but a lot of that is based on the first couple of minutes, when he had a huge mismatch on Jones. How would you judge the rest of his game, without those 2 opening goals? He was very good up the ground, but as effective as a fly screen door on a submarine inside the F50, once Ratugolea was moved onto him.

... and yet Ratugolea pantsed Fogarty. Preventing Fog from scoring is/was his main job, and he did it exceptionally well.

Absolutely. Our back line were outstanding!

Mate give over, Ratugolea didn't go anywhere near "pantsing" Fogarty, at best he broke even but ultimately he was having to chase Fogarty all over the place who was also involved in 4 other scores.

Fog had the where with all to realise it was better to drag him up the field and he did.

 

[ABAB]

I think it was his best game in a long while... but a lot of that is based on the first couple of minutes, when he had a huge mismatch on Jones. How would you judge the rest of his game, without those 2 opening goals? He was very good up the ground, but as effective as a fly screen door on a submarine inside the F50, once Ratugolea was moved onto him.

... and yet Ratugolea pantsed Fogarty. Preventing Fog from scoring is/was his main job, and he did it exceptionally well.

Absolutely. Our back line were outstanding!

More likely whoever Ratugolea was on, the plan was to drag him outside 50 which was why Fogarty initially kicked those goals early and as you said, Forgarty was very good up the ground.

 

[Vader]

Mate give over, Ratugolea didn't go anywhere near "pantsing" Fogarty, at best he broke even but ultimately he was having to chase Fogarty all over the place who was also involved in 4 other scores.

Fog had 4 score involvements, 3 of which were his own scores (he kicked 2.1) - he wasn't involved in "4 other scores" (at least not according to the stats on the AFL website). Two of those 4 score involvements were the goals he kicked on Jones, before Ratugolea was shifted onto him. If you think 2 score involvements (including his behind) in 3+ quarters of football is "breaking even", then that's disappointing.

Fog had the where with all to realise it was better to drag him up the field and he did.

That's one way of spinning it. The other way is that he couldn't get near the ball inside the F50, so he was forced to go further upfield to get himself involved in the game.

Port's whole gameplan is pressing up into their forward half of the ground (which is what Nicks exploited so ruthlessly), so I'm not sure Fog did much "dragging".

It's probably a bit from column A, and a bit from B - but mostly A (i.e. having to play further up the ground to get himself involved in the game).

I think Fog did make a reasonable contribution further up the field, but Esava pantsed him inside the F50.

 

[Vader]

More likely whoever Ratugolea was on, the plan was to drag him outside 50 which was why Fogarty initially kicked those goals early and as you said, Forgarty was very good up the ground.

Those early goals were kicked on Jones, not Ratugolea.

He was good when he played up the ground, but Ratugolea didn't let him get anywhere near it once it went into our F50. I'm not at all convinced that Ratugolea required much "dragging" anyway, given that Port's game plan is basically to press all their players into their F50.

 

[ABAB]

Those early goals were kicked on Jones, not Ratugolea.

He was good when he played up the ground, but Ratugolea didn't let him get anywhere near it once it went into our F50. I'm not at all convinced that Ratugolea required much "dragging" anyway, given that Port's game plan is basically to press all their players into their F50.

That's my point, Ratugolea was dragged outside the 50 by whoever was on him (likely Walker).

 

[Vader]

That's my point, Ratugolea was dragged outside the 50 by whoever was on him (likely Walker).

Was dragged... or played up the ground as per Port's gameplan? I'm not convinced Fog had much agency in Ratugolea playing up the field, ergo very little "dragging" involved.

 

[ABAB]

Was dragged... or played up the ground as per Port's gameplan? I'm not convinced Fog had much agency in Ratugolea playing up the field, ergo very little "dragging" involved.

So they prefer to have Jones play deep?

 

[Sanders]

Maybe I should have been clearer. His first 4 games, played from R1-6, fall into the "Good Fog" era. It's the games from R5-24 that I was referring to.

He kicked 13 of his 34 goals in the first 4 games, and only 19 in the remaining 17 games. During the latter period, he went at an average of just 1.1 goals per game, well down on the 2.75 goals per game he was averaging during the "Good Fog" period. His accuracy during that time was just 51%, down from 74% during the "Good Fog" period. That, for him, is a failure to impact the scoreboard.

Stop it

 

[MrBarry]

Was dragged... or played up the ground as per Port's gameplan? I'm not convinced Fog had much agency in Ratugolea playing up the field, ergo very little "dragging" involved.

Your disdain of Fog just makes.your evaluation of him not objective.

 

[Sanders]

"ChatGPT write me a post from someone who understands nothing about football"

Cringe factor 100

 

[WeeBlake]

Has anyone mentioned he tried the Tex-dummy-and kick-it-on-the-left from last years showdown but just couldn’t quite

 

[MrBarry]

Has anyone mentioned he tried the Tex-dummy-and kick-it-on-the-left from last years showdown but just couldn’t quite

Got touched on the line for memory

 

[Southerntakeover]

Your disdain of Fog just makes.your evaluation of him not objective.

I mean, it's not like his opinions on non-Fog subjects are ever valuable.

 

[George Kramer]

I mean, it's not like his opinions on non-Fog subjects are ever valuable.

He knows a bit about cruising

 

[Vader]

So they prefer to have Jones play deep?

I don't know why they hell they thought starting Jones on Fogarty was a good idea. Yet another example of Hinkley/Carr coaching last night really badly, and being comprehensively outcoached by Nicks.

 

[ABAB]

I don't know why they hell they thought starting Jones on Fogarty was a good idea. Yet another example of Hinkley/Carr coaching last night really badly, and being comprehensively outcoached by Nicks.

Probably was the match up because they thought Fogarty would start up the ground with Walker playing deep.

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

I thought it was probably a strategy to push him up the ground when the switch was made in order to keep Ratugolea out of the 50 where he’s more effective at rolling off his man be the 3rd man up on marking contests. If Jones had stayed on him he probably would have stayed deeper to exploit that mismatch.

But I might be giving Nicks too much credit?

i think you're right. I don't remember Fog having too many marking contests inside 50 after qtr

 

[Southerntakeover]

The bigfooty board, where Vader spends pages trying to discredit Fog's goals based upon being on Jones being small, a point so bad it doesn't withstand watching like three minutes of the game to realise that he got his first from a pack mark over Port's ruckman, all so we can work out whether this is part of the arbitrary boundaries of 'new good good new Fog' or 'new bad good new bad Fog'.

Because if we keep waffling on with that nonsense people will totally forget that Vader's assessment was that he had no AFL traits.