NAB Cup Round 1 vs Geelong & Sydney Discussion

[Squizz]

Might be reading too much into things?

Let's be honest, the Cats (minus 6-8 top liners and not adjusting to playing a second game in a row) were quite poor.

Sippa is clever, and looks to have developed a better sense of when to run flat out. But not sure we will be adding quick acceleration / slippery to his CV just yet.

Happy though that our depth is starting to be confirmed as better than most have made out. Whilst disappointed in the way the younger players have been used by Lyon, and not real happy to lose Walsh and Lynch (and even Will Johnson even if his shoulders are a bit of a worry), there is some talent there in Cripps, Siposs, Ledger, Stanley, Simpkin and Winmar (and Crocker, Ferguson and Curren are likely types, Archer is a big body who can play different roles, and there seems a bit of ability in the new group).

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Might be reading too much into things?

Let's be honest, the Cats (minus 6-8 top liners and not adjusting to playing a second game in a row) were quite poor.

Sippa is clever, and looks to have developed a better sense of when to run flat out. But not sure we will be adding quick acceleration / slippery to his CV just yet.

Happy though that our depth is starting to be confirmed as better than most have made out. Whilst disappointed in the way the younger players have been used by Lyon, and not real happy to lose Walsh and Lynch (and even Will Johnson even if his shoulders are a bit of a worry), there is some talent there in Cripps, Siposs, Ledger, Stanley, Simpkin and Winmar (and Crocker, Ferguson and Curren are likely types, Archer is a big body who can play different roles, and there seems a bit of ability in the new group).

Lynch seems to have gone OK in initial Adelaide game. Playing as a forward.
But Hell, Siposs has gotten ahead of Lynch and Markworth ( who IS fast) isn't that far behind ( I hope), so I'm happy enough that we got Newnes for him.

 

[hayes]

If our midfield starts looking for anything outside Riewoldt it would be some kind of minor miracle.

I'll believe it when it happens.

First game - Riewoldt centric gameplan = suck

Second game - More free flowing style = win

This is the one thing that still worries me. Whenever he's out there and no matter how many people are on him we kick it in his direction. Can't blame them really because if you go to the games you see the serving Roo gives them if they pick a different option and it doesn't work.

 

[mysainters]

If our midfield starts looking for anything outside Riewoldt it would be some kind of minor miracle.

I'll believe it when it happens.

First game - Riewoldt centric gameplan = suck

Second game - More free flowing style = win

This.

I actually thought it was some weird strategy in the first game, but then realised in the second game when Roo and Kosi disappeared, that it was the same old.

Not saying they shouldn't look for him, I just wondered if there will ever be a good balance.

Then it dawned on me, that Watters may be trying to address it in another way.

Perhaps having some elite kicking skills in the midfield will help, the 'kick it to Roo' gang in the past haven't had the skills to nail the delivery. Trying the likes of Siposs in there, may be another way of attempting to address this over reliance?

Because really, if a mid that can execute a kick to Roo correctly inside 50, the defenders don't stand much chance.

 

[Papa Juggs]

The problem is Riewoldt can't hold marks like Jono Brown, Trav Cloke or even Pods.

He plays for the free way too often which is why the defenders will continually rape him with infringements. They know that the umps are very reluctant to pay him the free.

He has to start clonking them to prove he deserves the frees when he is infringed on.

I reckon he needs to play on half back to get his contested marking skills back up to scratch.

 

[One 2 Roo]

I didn't think Roo's marking skills were too bad when he was able to get one on one - he took what was presented to him. I thought the leading patterns were not good, pushing to the boundary a lot, this may have been a result of having a congested forward line with 3 talls up there?

Could be a case of having completely different lineups at stages this year, more akin to basketball styles in playing tall and small ball - defs have the players to provide a lot of flexibility up forward.

All in all a fairly decent display first up - forgetting the easy goals the Swans kicked as a result of the press failing. Good to see some promising young players starting to put there hands up.

A couple of glaring defficiencies for me - taps to advantage (particually centre square) BBM could not seem to out jump his opponent and give us first control although his value is more around the ground. On the flip side, the few times the Knife was thrown into the middle, he was able to easlily out leap his opponent...food for thought!

Our backline seemed heavily undersized and in particular lacked aerial strength, the Geelong boys weren't able to clunk many marks but I thought that was more there downfall rather than our good defending.

 

[Papa Juggs]

Another argument for putting Riewoldt into the backline.

We're mostly trying to run on for goals anyway.

Riewoldt as a lead up forward doesn't work and when we set up for it it's the most obvious play in the universe and teams break it down quickly and easily.

He needs to play more like Stevie J and less like Trav Cloke because he can't take a contested mark and needs the umpire too much.

 

[Simon Templar]

I think Riewoldt's kicking is more of a worry than his marking.
The game plan has obviously been to go to Riewoldt but the delivery in past couple of seasons has been woeful. Either change the game plan or improve on the delivery. Very hard for Riewoldt to out mark 2 or 3 defenders every time the ball gets bombed into the forward line. It's all too predictable for the defenders.

 

[Papa Juggs]

It doesn't matter how well you do it. If Riewoldt is camped forward we're going to him because he demands the footy.

When he's not there and players aren't concious of him demanding the footy they play with a more natural flow going forward finding the best targets rather than the obvious one.

 

[Present Not Past]

That's the problem with having him as captain. When he calls for the ball, the other players see not only a key forward but also the team captain calling for the ball. Watters needs to sort this out before round one and let him know that everyone needs to follow the game plan.

I'm sure Nick always thinks that he gets himself into a position that his is the best option to go for goal, but I think only someone like the coach can see the bigger picture during the game.

 

[Persevering Saint]

For what it's worth, I think we should do a "Richo" with Riewoldt, and put him on the wing. Reckon he'd be pretty damaging, and could be a good kicker into the fifty. Also, they can't kick to Riewoldt if he isn't there.

 

[hayes]

For what it's worth, I think we should do a "Richo" with Riewoldt, and put him on the wing. Reckon he'd be pretty damaging, and could be a good kicker into the fifty. Also, they can't kick to Riewoldt if he isn't there.

That's definitely a possibility at some stage. I can remember Riewoldt talking about playing that sort of role down the line. Much better idea than the move to the backline.

A role like that could be used to help develop some forwards as well down the line.

 

[Persevering Saint]

At the very least, get him to do what Sippos did on Friday against Geelong, and swap them and Stanley around - make it that one of those three (and heck, even Kosi, if you like) doing that throughout the game, rotating them around. Nightmare for opposition matchups, and will teach the mids to kick to somebody other than Roo. I actually he'd kick more goals in that floating wing role than sitting him in the goal square, because the opposition wouldn't be continually peeling three players onto him.

 

[mysainters]

At the very least, get him to do what Sippos did on Friday against Geelong, and swap them and Stanley around - make it that one of those three (and heck, even Kosi, if you like) doing that throughout the game, rotating them around. Nightmare for opposition matchups, and will teach the mids to kick to somebody other than Roo. I actually he'd kick more goals in that floating wing role than sitting him in the goal square, because the opposition wouldn't be continually peeling three players onto him.

I like how you're thinking.

 

[Falchoon]

For what it's worth, I think we should do a "Richo" with Riewoldt, and put him on the wing. Reckon he'd be pretty damaging, and could be a good kicker into the fifty. Also, they can't kick to Riewoldt if he isn't there.

it also gives him 100m to burn off his opponent, rather than 20

 

[Sir Robert]

I like the idea. I'd also like it if Roo actually axed whoever stands in front of him for a change. Lockett and Carey did it, and to a lesser extent Kosi does. Players will think twice about getting in the way as the game goes on

 

[Squizz]

it also gives him 100m to burn off his opponent, rather than 20

For mine, he falls into the trap of trying to burn opponents by actually doing 100m+ of leads at a time within F50, zig-zagging all over the place with his hand flapping everywhere to get some attention (they know you're there Nick!).

If anyone has tried to kick to a bloke doing this it can be quite difficult (and distracting, and maybe even frustrating). Many other forwards do several leads, but more like little 10-15m bursts (fakies) until they think they've got a break on their opponent.

Unfortunately Rooey doesn't do this - it's all ballbreaking work, and makes it hard for anyone else to find space as he doesn't seem to do any decoy work to bring others into the game.

That's the bit I hope Watters has gleaned. But I wasn't encouraged by the first match.

Maybe people are right and he needs to work further afield.

 

[saintsrfreak]

I like the idea. I'd also like it if Roo actually axed whoever stands in front of him for a change. Lockett and Carey did it, and to a lesser extent Kosi does. Players will think twice about getting in the way as the game goes on

I don't think Roo has the physical presence to do this. Someone like Jonno Brown probably could but I think Roo would just injure himself if he tried to do this.

 

[Papa Juggs]

Riewoldt just doesn't have those huge guns/shoulders you need to clonk it.

I think we really relied on the G-Train for that and since we've lost him we've kinda expected Riewoldt to fill that role. Just doesn't have the upper body power.

We need players with strength in our forward line not necessarily height.

 

[hayes]

Riewoldt just doesn't have those huge guns/shoulders you need to clonk it.

I think we really relied on the G-Train for that and since we've lost him we've kinda expected Riewoldt to fill that role. Just doesn't have the upper body power.

We need players with strength in our forward line not necessarily height.

When was Fraser ever a 'clonk it' player? If it wasn't lace out he wasn't marking it.

 

[Papa Juggs]

Didn't do too bad here lol

[youtube]WFpDS7rzlU[/youtube]

Not much footage to be found really.

Strong enough to hold on to the ball and not drop it whenever the slightest pressure is applied.

 

[aussierulesrules]

Might be reading too much into things?

Let's be honest, the Cats (minus 6-8 top liners and not adjusting to playing a second game in a row) were quite poor.

Sippa is clever, and looks to have developed a better sense of when to run flat out. But not sure we will be adding quick acceleration / slippery to his CV just yet.

Given how much you see them play for Sandy, you would have seen him more than me, but watching him at ground level the other night, right in front of us, I saw acceleration from him that I didn't realise he had, having also seen him live a few times last year.
I'm not saying he's beat Stephen Hill, or Rhys Stanley, in a 100m sprint, or C Rioli in a 10m sprint, but on at least two occasions the other night he burst clear of packs (once he got the ball) with really impressive bursts of acceleration. That sort of short burst of acceleration is going to hold him in good stead, both when he plays in the midfield and also when on the lead up forward, and was really exciting to see, considering his other attributes.

At the very least, get him (Roo) to do what Sippos did on Friday against Geelong, and swap them and Stanley around - make it that one of those three doing that throughout the game, rotating them around. Nightmare for opposition matchups, and will teach the mids to kick to somebody other than Roo. I actually he'd kick more goals in that floating wing role than sitting him in the goal square, because the opposition wouldn't be continually peeling three players onto him.

That's exactly what I've said a few times over the past year or so. He'd be able to just drift forward and fly for his marks largely on his own (over packs), as he would probably have burned whoever is playing on him off, or run back into space pretty much on his own, especially if the whole team has been up the other end and we're going forward on a fast break. I also think it could help to get his marking confidence back closer to how it was when he first started, when he marked basically everything he got his hands to. (Because he'd be taking quite a few easy marks around the ground). He would also be able to provide great support to our backline when playing on the wing and would provide us with a vital marking option, when kicking it out of defence (including on kick-outs).

I actually suggested we do this for the GF replay against Collingwood, in 2010, as it was pretty obvious after the first game that Collingwood had his measure up forward and that he was going to struggle to take a mark up there, especially with Maxwell sitting in front of him. If we'd put him on the wing, instead, and gone with a shorter forward line, it would have completely thrown Collingwood's backline out of balance and may have meant that Maxwell would have to have played on him (on the wing), which would have stopped him just sitting in the hole and picking off all our forward forays.

We had been very successful with a smaller and more mobile forward line earlier in that season, (when Roo was out injured for half the year) and I felt if we could have gone back to that sort of forward line, with the bonus of having Roo running around on the wing and pushing forward into space, we could have thrown Collingwood right off and delivered a killer punch.

I still think that could prove to be a winning move for us now, especially if Nick doesn't get back to his dominant ways up forward. It would probably be even better for Nick now, as the way the game has gone in the past 12 months has meant that there is less space for anyone like him to lead into, so he has lost his main advantage; his ability to burn whoever's on him off, with long leads. Putting him on the wing will give him back that competitive advantage, as whoever is put on him will be unlikely to be able to go with him both in the air and also with regards to covering the miles.

It would also probably be like a holiday for him (change is as good as a holiday) and could be just the thing to help him get his mojo back and to not feel like kicking a winning score is so much on his shoulders. It worked brilliantly for Richo and he didn't have Roo's endurance. The other thing it noticeably did for Richmond was bring the crowd into it. They loved it every time he took a mark (and he took a shitload of them) when playing on the wing and if Roo started to take a heap of them again, it might make us a bit more excited about him and our chances again. There just seem to be so many good reasons to put him on the wing.

 

[FlyingSledghamer]

One of the things I love about Sipposs is that when ever he's played. You notice him play. He's only played 5 games but he has a real presence. When he goes near the ball, whether its up forward or down back, he makes something happen. For a kid with only 5 games of experience, it really says something. That's why I think he has to play. He's got something special. I think he should take Gram's spot in the side as a utility swing man. So much more upside.

Sipposs, Ledger, Saad and Cripps have to come into the team IMO. I would replace Gram, Ray, Geary, Polo with these guys who are quicker, and better distributers than those guys, I just think they have become too one dimensional for the pace and pressure of modern football.
Simpkin should come in for Gwilt, he is the perfect replacement. Can play FB, keeps his cool under pressure and has a beautiful kick. Wilkes doesn't look ready for AFL yet and shouldn't come into the team until he improves.

 

[Strahany]

I completely agree with aussierulesrules' ideas about Riewoldt, and it sounds like a perfect role for Siposs as well. I wouldn't be against Roo and Sipa rotating through HFF/Wing/Bench. Maybe this could be a position that Watters has filled almost 100% of the time if it is effective?

 

[Sir Robert]

For mine, he falls into the trap of trying to burn opponents by actually doing 100m+ of leads at a time within F50, zig-zagging all over the place with his hand flapping everywhere to get some attention (they know you're there Nick!).

If anyone has tried to kick to a bloke doing this it can be quite difficult (and distracting, and maybe even frustrating). Many other forwards do several leads, but more like little 10-15m bursts (fakies) until they think they've got a break on their opponent.

Unfortunately Rooey doesn't do this - it's all ballbreaking work, and makes it hard for anyone else to find space as he doesn't seem to do any decoy work to bring others into the game.

That's the bit I hope Watters has gleaned. But I wasn't encouraged by the first match.

Maybe people are right and he needs to work further afield.

I agree he never provides a decoy. Pretty obvious thing to do you'd think if you're covered by two players???