Laidley undecided over Kangaroos attack

[1jasonoz]

http://www.theage.com.au/news/Sport...angaroos-attack/2007/04/05/1175366397975.html

Laidley undecided over Kangaroos attack
April 5, 2007 - 5:29PM

Kangaroos coach Dean Laidley is considering more tinkering with his AFL attack, this time to combat Port Adelaide's deadly ruck duo at AAMI Stadium on Sunday.

The Roos used David Hale predominantly as a forward in the round one loss to Collingwood, but the presence of Port's Brendon Lade and Dean Brogan might prompt a re-think.

Brogan was instrumental in helping curb Fremantle giant Aaron Sandilands and taking the Power to an upset over the Dockers, and with Lade, the 2006 All-Australian ruckman, forms a strong one-two combination.

Laidley is yet to decide whether to back young ruck Hamish McIntosh against the Port pair after his great effort against Collingwood's Josh Fraser, but might have to use Hale more around the ground as support.

That will mean more re-jigging of the Kangaroos' attack, which Laidley admitted was likely to be a weekly occurrence because full-forward Nathan Thompson was sidelined for the season.

"That's something we're throwing around," Laidley said.

"Since Nathan's gone down we've got to keep throwing up and having a look at some scenarios each week, depending on the opponents we play."

Recruit Aaron Edwards, a century goalkicker in the VFL last year, and versatile tall player Jonathan Moran are set to be included in the squad to give Laidley more options.

Port's storming finish over the Dockers was at odds with the Kangaroos' inability to put Collingwood away, as Laidley's side managed only 3.9 after half-time and lost the game by three points.

But he was certain fade-outs were not a problem at Arden Street.

"If we had kicked 9.3 would you be asking that question? No," he said.

"It wouldn't be fatigue and it wouldn't be form.

"We were not overrun ... just (out-possessed)."

The Kangaroos boast a fine 13-3 record against Port, but Laidley said his side would have to be playing at their peak to maintain that dominance.

"They've got some very good players," he said.

"Last week they were saying before the game who was going to kick the goals and they kicked 19.7.

"We'll have to play at our best over there and we understand where we're at.

"We'll field another young side, but it's exciting to coach and I'm sure our supporters will think it's exciting to watch."

© 2007 AAP

 

[giantroo]

Jonathan Moran. Did we ever have a jonathan Moran?


But good to hear that Moran and Azza will come in.


Our forward line will look like this if campbell does nto get omitted

HF: Jones Hale/Brown Grant/Thomas
F: Harvey Edwards Campbell

Just imagine that forward line with Thompson. How deadly would it be. Even with out him, it looks deadly bar for brown.

 

[micky_11]

lets go johno

 

[Pres]

At least they didn't say Jason Moran.

 

[pharro]

At least they didn't say Jason Moran.

A more lively performer than certain favoured individuals. At least he had a killer instinct.

 

[giantroo]

At least they didn't say Jason Moron.

You mean that!

 

[Tas]

Edwards will play FF and Monster/Hale will ruck.

 

[year of the roo]

Edwards will play FF and Monster/Hale will ruck.

Yep. Edwards at FF then Brown and Hansen as the tall marking options up forward. Not delighted with that, but if we get first use of it in the middle and if we start to use it better, it could work. If we kick straight.

Too many 'ifs' above for my liking.

 

[The Other Dean]

Yep. Edwards at FF then Brown and Hansen as the tall marking options up forward.

I could even see it going the other way. Brown at FF and Edwards leading out of a Pocket or off a Flank. That's where Laids had Az against the Pies in the NAB Cup. (Saying that, Thomo was still playing at that stage.) But, what, with Brownie's commanding presence in the goal square, and his incredible new found talent for "assists", it might just turn out be how Laids initially places them. But, m'eh. Not that fussed really. Just keen to see what Edwards can do.

 

[The Zebra]

Yep. Edwards at FF then Brown and Hansen as the tall marking options up forward. Not delighted with that, but if we get first use of it in the middle and if we start to use it better, it could work. If we kick straight.

Too many 'ifs' above for my liking.

I think Moran in and Hale forward is the better option, but I am coming around to this. At first I thought Laids had underestimated Port's rucks, now it is obvious he knows how danerous they are and is going to throw our best ruck combo at them.

Problem is Brown as our only tall forward if he is getting killed we will have to ask Hale/McIntosh to play forward while resting, and that could lead to tired rucks and a massacre.

Becoming clear that our squad is really weak in depth in a couple of areas and we will have to roll the dice each week. Rolling the dice can make players. Step up Edwards.

 

[Psychic Roo]

The port rucks are tough because they drift forward and kick goals so we have to put moran in and let him run with them defensively - its the perfect job for him at this stage of his career and will p^&^ off lade/brogan who are used to drifting into the 50 and getting looked for uncontested. Let Moran see where a smart ruckman like Lade drifts to and how he gets forward.
When he's on, let hamish/hale drift forward on our side and make port accountable. Chad cornes won't (he just zones off) so who will take Hale and Hamish when the go into our 50?
What we dont want is our rucks dropping back into the defensive 50 and getting a few cheap kicks while we get towelled. We should hurt other teams by aiming for our rucks to kick goals - H and H were both forwards in juniors and can kick straight. I remember when mckernan was "on" - in the mid nineties - other teams had to run with him and were scared of him- Mcintosh has some similar skills - can catch better too.....

 

[giantroo]

Step up Edwards.

He WILL!

 

[Mr Reliable]

"Since Nathan's gone down we've got to keep throwing up and having a look at some scenarios each week, depending on the opponents we play."

Thanks for that Dean. I'm going to keep throwing up until we win one.

Brown and Hale will not take enough contested forward line marks to win the game. Our fate will be decided in the midfield (we're a chance) and by how we use it when we get it (oh,oh!).

 

[Angus1]

Looks like Hale may play in the ruck with Mcintosh. I'm happy with that .
Edwards gets his chance to impress up forward and H and H do battle with Brogan and Lade.
Bring it on.

 

[Woodson]

"If we had kicked 9.3 would you be asking that question? No," he said.

We ask the question of 'since when do IF's win matches' ??

"It wouldn't be fatigue and it wouldn't be form

**cough** 4 x fade outs in 2007 **cough** North losing streak count in premiership games is : 5

"We were not overrun ... just (out-possessed)."

Perhaps getting too comfortable about a flimsy 25 lead is why this happens..players too happy to play 2 quarters worth and rest up... AGAIN!!

WHERE IS THE DEFENSIVE PRESSURE DAMN IT!!!????

The Kangaroos boast a fine 13-3 record against Port, but Laidley said his side would have to be playing at their peak to maintain that dominance.

Can't argue but let's get one thing clear, Harris needs to play MORE GAME TIME for this to occur and his teammates MUST HELP each other out...otherwise it all falls to pieces... that forward thrust without crumbers is asking for trouble and when inside 50... Kick LONG and GO FOR GOAL !!

"They've got some very good players," he said.

And if you don't respect that for 4 quarters, you'll PAY !! I want accountability for FOUR QUARTERS damn it!!

"Last week they were saying before the game who was going to kick the goals and they kicked 19.7.

Didn't see the game but thier 26 scoring shots beat our 29 scoring shots plus the countless other poor penetrated kicked falling to a LONE collingwood defender on the last line was UNFORGIVABLE!!

"We'll have to play at our best over there and we understand where we're at.

"We'll field another young side, but it's exciting to coach and I'm sure our supporters will think it's exciting to watch."

Please, remind the players that they are on a embarrassing FIVE GAME LOSING STREAK and one weak link will not be good enough on Sunday... play as a team and back each other up... I'd prefer Arch in the goalsquare. Thanx.

 

[giantroo]

Thats why i want this substitute thing to come in. It will show if a player can run the 120 minutes without going on. This could also win us games because grant, harvey, swallow, harris will stay on the ground.

 

[Mr Reliable]

We ask the question of 'since when do IF's win matches' ??



**cough** 4 x fade outs in 2007 **cough** North losing streak count in premiership games is : 5


Perhaps getting too comfortable about a flimsy 25 lead is why this happens..players too happy to play 2 quarters worth and rest up... AGAIN!!

WHERE IS THE DEFENSIVE PRESSURE DAMN IT!!!????




Can't argue but let's get one thing clear, Harris needs to play MORE GAME TIME for this to occur and his teammates MUST HELP each other out...otherwise it all falls to pieces... that forward thrust without crumbers is asking for trouble and when inside 50... Kick LONG and GO FOR GOAL !!




And if you don't respect that for 4 quarters, you'll PAY !! I want accountability for FOUR QUARTERS damn it!!



Didn't see the game but thier 26 scoring shots beat our 29 scoring shots plus the countless other poor penetrated kicked falling to a LONE collingwood defender on the last line was UNFORGIVABLE!!



Please, remind the players that they are on a embarrassing FIVE GAME LOSING STREAK and one weak link will not be good enough on Sunday... play as a team and back each other up... I'd prefer Arch in the goalsquare. Thanx.

Good on ya, Woodson. I like a man who sets standards for everyone to follow and DEMANDS results! Whether a player is young (the kids), old (Arch- sorry mate), experienced (Simmo, Boomer), inexperienced (McIntosh), brilliant (Wells) or hopeless (xxx), standards need to be adhered to and team rules enforced.

Quoting meaningless "would ifs" as lame excuses for losing is not going to improve us. All it does is "spin" the attention away from what was a very ordinary effort against pathetic opposition for 3 quarters. It also contributes to a losers atmosphere. You lose all too often but everyone comes up with hard luck stories and bull shyte excuses and if only's. After a while losing doesn't hurt like it should.

 

[Michele]

I love the headline especially in light of the all out attack on the 'infamous' Carey.

But it does highlight my post on the Laids v Carey thread.

At least when Carey played - and led from the front - every single North supporter knew that we would fight hard to win, that North would play strong attacking footy.

Whether North won or lost, at least we played hard fought footy. And that is all any supporter can ask.

Whilst I realise that the headline is a newspaper headline, what I don't like is the attitude if North kicked x amount of goals, would the journos still ask stupid questions.

And Laidley cannot reply with stupid answers. If he wants to be/remain an understudy to Malthouse and his stupid antics and answers, then Collingwood is his go.

The fact is Woodson makes a good point, a point I made in another post, that our fadeouts are unacceptable.

And it is not that we lost one game, but the fact that over the course of a few years, we have succumbed.

 

[Woodson]

Whilst I realise that the headline is a newspaper headline, what I don't like is the attitude if North kicked x amount of goals, would the journos still ask stupid questions.

And Laidley cannot reply with stupid answers. If he wants to be/remain an understudy to Malthouse and his stupid antics and answers, then Collingwood is his go.

I think you'll find that Mick Malthouse is living in denial when he needs to reach for oppressive expresions that journalists have NADA idea what he is talking about and that leaves the journos thinking...did we ask a bad question??...did he make us look dumb?? If Denis Pagan doesn't want to answer a question, he fires a simpleton question back that makes the journo think twice... Kevin Sheedy waves it off like a fly on his honker and blames the martians and Matthews plays the journalists like gung-fu toys trying to twist the argument to interstate warfare...poor JYD is learning the A-B-C's of the caper with fiddling 'If' this 'If' that... sheesh... as If we have time to put up with more excuses after four seasons.

I think JYD should take a leaf from John Kennedy's mantra...." don't stand there, just DO SOMETHING !! "

 

[Michele]

I think you'll find that Mick Malthouse is living in denial when he needs to reach for oppressive expresions that journalists have NADA idea what he is talking about and that leaves the journos thinking...did we ask a bad question??...did he make us look dumb?? If Denis Pagan doesn't want to answer a question, he fires a simpleton question back that makes the journo think twice... Kevin Sheedy waves it off like a fly on his honker and blames the martians and Matthews plays the journalists like gung-fu toys trying to twist the argument to interstate warfare...poor JYD is learning the A-B-C's of the caper with fiddling 'If' this 'If' that... sheesh... as If we have time to put up with more excuses after four seasons.

I think JYD should take a leaf from John Kennedy's mantra...." don't stand there, just DO SOMETHING !! "