Roast Goodbye Ryan Gamble

[OldStyle2007]

Back to the point: Gamble is doing it wrong

 

[Hinkley29]

It is well known that this is our one weak area in terms of the list, because bar Wojo, the backline lacks pace, and we don't have anyone who can consisently specifically play well on a good small forward (although Hunt had a good game last night). In time I think Taylor Hunt could develop into that, and I also have hopes for Weston in a similar role, but that's a long way off. In the short term, Kelly may need to go back there at times. I know it's robbing Peter to pay Paul, but he did the role well last year.

In order of preference (ie. defensive abilities):

Enright
Kelly
Hunt

Corey
Wojo

Obviously moving Kelly or Corey back means we weaken our midfield, but they have done it before and at full strength our midfield has serious depth to cover.

I like Kelly in the backline. He makes good decisions, and the defensive side of his game is better than people realise.

Hunt is a popular scapegoat when things don't go well. It is not very often that he gets taken to the cleaners by a small forward.

Wojo on the other hand is not a defender. He is a good rebounder and sets up attacks well with his pace, but his defensive game is ordinary.

Basically what I am saying is that when we are playing our best side (and I have strong belief that we will manage our list in order to have our best team out there when the games are really important) we have the cattle to cover teams with good small forwards.

We were trying some things out on Friday. Some things obviously worked less well than others. Better to try them now in a relatively unimportant game.

 

[cats2rise]

Yep! Blame the coach Gamble is a smaller version of McCarthy who hung around for years with everyone saying next year will be his year.

Ah the memories. Was always a fan.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

In order of preference (ie. defensive abilities):

Enright
Kelly
Hunt

Corey
Wojo

Obviously moving Kelly or Corey back means we weaken our midfield, but they have done it before and at full strength our midfield has serious depth to cover.

I like Kelly in the backline. He makes good decisions, and the defensive side of his game is better than people realise.

Hunt is a popular scapegoat when things don't go well. It is not very often that he gets taken to the cleaners by a small forward.

Wojo on the other hand is not a defender. He is a good rebounder and sets up attacks well with his pace, but his defensive game is ordinary.

Basically what I am saying is that when we are playing our best side (and I have strong belief that we will manage our list in order to have our best team out there when the games are really important) we have the cattle to cover teams with good small forwards.

We were trying some things out on Friday. Some things obviously worked less well than others. Better to try them now in a relatively unimportant game.

I agree with your points mostly. Kelly can do a decent job in the role but I struggle to see the coaches making it his full time job.

I'm not one of the Hunt baggers, I just don't think he should be set for that specific role because he can't do it full time and be the designated kicker.

Enright, gun, nuff said, needs to keep doing what he is doing.

Wojo, I agree with your sentiments.

Anyway, two things still stand out though in the names you mention 1) none (other than Wojo, who we have ruled out for the rule) have genuine pace and 2) they are all older players in the second half of the career.

So, particularly with the way the speed of the game is going, and good small forwards are coming through, we need to start putting someone to this specific role, and it wouldn't hurt if they were reasonably young and reasonably quick. Hence Travis certainly is in my thinking.

One thing I disagree with you on is friday not being a "really important" game. Until our spot in the top 4 is sewn up, and that is a long way off, every game is a really important game, and should be treated as such.

 

[SJ]

Ah the memories. Was always a fan.

McCarthy over the top! And that was the great McCarthy, great grab!

 

[LifeSpan-Void]

Re: Ryan Gamble, goodbye

I wouldn't say he is gone (although that may be possible) but tonight did show why this idea the coaching staff had to make him into a defender won't work, and if he ever plays seniors again, it should only be as a forward, and never ever again as a defender. He was ok when shifted forward to use his leap etc. As we saw he lacks the accountability to play well as a defender, he has neither the size nor the skill to play as a key back (unlike lonergan) and is not quick enough or accountable enough to play lockdown on a small.

I dunno about Gamble's future with Geelong, but I recall people saying "Goodbye Tom Lonergan" after he had to come to replace Scarlett against Brisbane and got himself towelled up by J. Brown. I guess you can't write anyone off until Balme has put a line through them.

 

[Partridge]

One would think that maybe Bomber didn't want to show all of his cards at once.

Which, IMO, is a bit stupid considering we are not top 4 guarentee.

I wouldn't mind betting that's part of it.

It's not the worst thing if a coach tries certain tactics to see how they work, as long as he doesn't repeat the mistakes. I am puzzled as to why they thought Gamble was suddenly a half back flanker though. If he does have a future it's as a forward.

I agree completely - we're not guaranteed anything yet. I hate the mindset that we're already there and can start chopping and changing. Friday night showed us quite clearly that when you miss 4-5 senior players you can't cover it against quality opposition. Pertinent fact to remember before the finals.

 

[Hoops4 Me]

If the squad they showed on the Footy Show last night is correct Gamble has been named at full forward this week.

 

[SJ]

If the squad they showed on the Footy Show last night is correct Gamble has been named at full forward this week.

It wasn't.

 

[Hoops4 Me]

It wasn't.

Well I must have been hallucinating because I reckon there was a graphic shown after Bill's comments with a Geelong squad. Maybe it was the pills.

 

[SJ]

Well I must have been hallucinating because I reckon there was a graphic shown after Bill's comments with a Geelong squad. Maybe it was the pills.

Yes, but The Footy Show have made that squad up.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Re: Ryan Gamble, goodbye

I dunno about Gamble's future with Geelong, but I recall people saying "Goodbye Tom Lonergan" after he had to come to replace Scarlett against Brisbane and got himself towelled up by J. Brown. I guess you can't write anyone off until Balme has put a line through them.

True, that is fair, we shouldn't write him off yet since things can change. I had written off Lonergan this time last year and it looks like I was wrong about that, so hopefully I'm wrong again.

 

[OldStyle2007]

Re: Ryan Gamble, goodbye

You think Mackie is casual in the backline? Gamble redefines the word

I think that weak chase by Gamble on Schneider displayed that he just doesn't have it as a defender

I've never seen a real AFL defender let his man straighten up and stroll into goal like that. It was truly horrific