Pre-Season 2015/16

[Periphery]

Some big assumptions that (a) Longer will continue on his trajectory and that (b) Hickey won't improve.

If you were referring to me: Where did I say I don't think Hickey will improve?

Also, Longer has been steadily improving so far and there's no indication that will change so it's not exactly a massive leap to suggest he'll keep improving.

 

[Defacto]

So now you are saying the coach is actually failing in his duty because he is giving some who in your own word is terrible a go in the forward line

Seems like you will throw anyone under the bus to further your hating on Hickey.

Going from poor to terrible. Only thing terrible is the constant bagging of one of our players.

But carry on.I am looking forward how you escalate your bagging of one of our players who in many minds is a better option than the plodder we have there at the moment

Da faq...

 

[DarkSaint]

You can play Hickey, Bruce, McCartin and Membrey in the same forward line. All it relies on is Membrey adding a strong defensive presence to his game while also being able to take stints in the middle.

Then you have a pretty conventional 3 tall forward line.

IMO Longer is way ahead of where Hickey was at the same age and has far greater potential to develop into a top end ruck. He just eneds to keep building his tank and then he'll start getting more of the ball around the ground and impacting more contests. It'll also have flow on effects into the quality of his ruck work. Plus, I vastly prefer his bash and crash style to whatever you'd consider Hickey's game style to be.

I agree and I would like to see Hickey in the forward line to Complement Bruce and McCartin. He will need to work on his marking and set shots for goal for that to happen.

My suggested forward line in other thread which I think in the next year or 2 is..

FF: Hickey McCartin Lonie
HF Members Bruce Sinclair/Billings

Now this will depend on A. Like you said Membrey improving his defensive game and B. Hickey being able to chip in with a goal or 2 a game while playing 30% or so in the Ruck.

 

[Defacto]

Sorry to kill the theory but we would have drafted Aiden Corr.

Ewwwww

 

[Defacto]

Below is my contribution to the rucking debate, while attempting to avoid the Hickey / Longer ****fight .
Warning long post ahead.


Personally, I find clearances to be a very clear metric of the success of a team. Below is a table of clearances for 2015. While there are some anomalies, (Brisbane and Carlton) overall the good teams dominate this statistic. My working assumption is therefore that if you are able to win the ball out of the middle more than the opposition, then you will win far more games than you lose.

View attachment 209390

Many people here appear to be in the Grant Thomas camp regarding the uselessness of ruckman and the irrelevance of hit-outs. Below is a table of hit out numbers for 2015. When you line it up next to the previous table what I see is a very very strong correlation between hitouts and clearances.

View attachment 209392

With the exception of two teams, it appears that the difference between your hitouts and clearances is no more than three spots on the ladder / rank. So the general rule is that if you want to be top two / four in the league in clearances then you probably also have to be in the top 6 in hitouts and no lower. The exceptions appear to be the Bulldogs poor ruckwork compared to clearances (code for Ayce Cordy is a VFL player) and that Melbourne has solid ruckwork but a poor clearance rate (code for Melbourne’s midfield struggles more than most).

So while hitouts to advantage are of course preferable, you still need to be winning more hitouts than you are losing to give your midfield an edge in clearances. If you flip the comparison to averages rather than totals most of the same correlations apply. The notable exceptions again are that the Brisbane and Carlton midfields are well above their ladder positions, and the Sydney and Richmond midfields are bottom 8.

However, I stand by the point that if you want to win a majority of clearances (which I see as a key to winning) you also need to win a majority of hitouts. Hence, IMO how well we contend may have as much to do with finding the right ruck setup, as it does with finding and developing mids.



Now there appears to be 3 models of ruckwork that the top teams currently use.

1. The Freemantle / North Melbourne model of a dominant ruckman (Clarke / Griffen don’t crack top 30 in the league and Zieball wins more hitouts than Petrie). Lets call this the 90/10 model (which Richmond and Adelaide also seem to use).
   
   
2. The West Coast / Sydney / Port model where hitouts are split 60/40 or 70/30 between a ruck (Natinui / Pyke / Lobbe) and a forward / ruck (Sinclair / Tippett / Ryder)
   
   
3. The Hawthorn model split between 3. McEvoy / Ceglar / Hale are all between 15th and 21st in the league over the course of 2015 for hitouts. However, I would argue that this is really just a variation on the 70/30 model, and it’s McEvoy’s inability to win hitouts that skews the statistics massively.

Here is how that looks is basic numbers.

View attachment 209394

So this gives us two options moving forward.

The first is that Longer rucks 90% at the Goldstien / Jacobs / Sandi standard, and we have to find about 5-10 hitouts a game in a 10% ruck role. Holmes can maybe be the backup if Longer is injured, but to pull this off Longer needs to become both an elite ruckman and very very durable. If we get lucky this might happen, but a lot has to go right for him to reach that level. I am really not sure you can plan for this, especially with the interchange cap putting even more TOG pressure (bonus if it happens but we can’t rely on it). So realistically this leaves us with the 60/40 – 70/30 model moving forward.

Looking at the best 70/30 combinations (and specifically at the second ruck role), the total hitouts for Tippet / Ryder / Sinclair is somewhere between 350 -500 per year.

That averages to somewhere between 15 to 25 hitouts a game, and IMO that is simply not a number we can find out of someone like Bruce, Goddard, Paddy or Carlisle. They are much better used forword / back then spending up to 40% time in the ruck, and you don’t want to damage your thoroughbreds in the ruck (Kozy, Goose say hi).

The forward / scoreboard contribution of these ruck / forwards was Tippett 44 goals, Ryder 18 goals, Sinclair >15 goals.

*Other second rucks from good teams who play play 80 -95% forward because of a dominant ruck: Jenkins 46 goals (79 hitouts), Brown 32 goals (63 hitouts), Vickery 31 goals (85 hitouts). Again, if Longer becomes a beast in the future, then we have this 90/10 option where we use a KPP (Goddard / Carlisle / Bruce / Paddy) for 5 hitouts a game. But we can’t plan for this and shouldn’t risk a young players development trying.

This leaves us with Hickey as the second ruck / forward (in the 70/30 role) as our only realistic option (unless we trade in this talent in the future).

While his defensive benchmarks and the setup will be determined elsewhere - looking at the top teams Hickey needs to average
Minimum 15-20 hitouts and a goal a game from 2017 onwards
About 20-25 hitouts and almost 1.5 goals a game if he wants to be considered an elite forward ruck.

For me, those are the metrics we judge his development by.


A few other observations based solely on the numbers above:

1. Regarding ruckman:

Natinui and Gawn are about to hit their prime (Gawn’s underrated) and look like the two most likely to dominate going forward (along with Lobbe).

Longer looks well advanced on Grundy and Nicholls as the best young ruckman in the league. That GC and Coll have better clearance rates and we have a higher hitout count just confirms to me that while we have prioritised the spine in our rebuild, other clubs are ahead in their midfields. Hence mids are our recruiting priority moving forward, and I think we will find it easier to unearth mids than they will KPP’s. While we all hope Billy develops his around the ground game more, on simple numbers he is the best young ruckman in the league.

2. Controversial:

The GWS midfield looks overrated! And they have just lost their best clearance player ...

Last word: Anyone remember when Cain Ackland and Michael Rix were our ruck choices? Or when we had to ruck Brett Cook in a grand final? Or when the difference in the highest standard of game I have ever seen played (rd 14 2009 vs Geelong at Etihad) was Michael Gardiner? This is a good problem to have people.

Go Saints

Great post!!!

 

[majortinkle]

I think if we play Hickey forward he needs to hold his spot as a forward and not as a 20% ruckman. And I don't think we will use the bench for Hickey. If we do everything I just said doesn't matter.

And according to his web chat Richo agrees.

 

[SpannaMan]

Below is my contribution to the rucking debate, while attempting to avoid the Hickey / Longer ****fight .
Warning long post ahead.


Personally, I find clearances to be a very clear metric of the success of a team. Below is a table of clearances for 2015. While there are some anomalies, (Brisbane and Carlton) overall the good teams dominate this statistic. My working assumption is therefore that if you are able to win the ball out of the middle more than the opposition, then you will win far more games than you lose.

View attachment 209390

Many people here appear to be in the Grant Thomas camp regarding the uselessness of ruckman and the irrelevance of hit-outs. Below is a table of hit out numbers for 2015. When you line it up next to the previous table what I see is a very very strong correlation between hitouts and clearances.

View attachment 209392

With the exception of two teams, it appears that the difference between your hitouts and clearances is no more than three spots on the ladder / rank. So the general rule is that if you want to be top two / four in the league in clearances then you probably also have to be in the top 6 in hitouts and no lower. The exceptions appear to be the Bulldogs poor ruckwork compared to clearances (code for Ayce Cordy is a VFL player) and that Melbourne has solid ruckwork but a poor clearance rate (code for Melbourne’s midfield struggles more than most).

So while hitouts to advantage are of course preferable, you still need to be winning more hitouts than you are losing to give your midfield an edge in clearances. If you flip the comparison to averages rather than totals most of the same correlations apply. The notable exceptions again are that the Brisbane and Carlton midfields are well above their ladder positions, and the Sydney and Richmond midfields are bottom 8.

However, I stand by the point that if you want to win a majority of clearances (which I see as a key to winning) you also need to win a majority of hitouts. Hence, IMO how well we contend may have as much to do with finding the right ruck setup, as it does with finding and developing mids.



Now there appears to be 3 models of ruckwork that the top teams currently use.

1. The Freemantle / North Melbourne model of a dominant ruckman (Clarke / Griffen don’t crack top 30 in the league and Zieball wins more hitouts than Petrie). Lets call this the 90/10 model (which Richmond and Adelaide also seem to use).
   
   
2. The West Coast / Sydney / Port model where hitouts are split 60/40 or 70/30 between a ruck (Natinui / Pyke / Lobbe) and a forward / ruck (Sinclair / Tippett / Ryder)
   
   
3. The Hawthorn model split between 3. McEvoy / Ceglar / Hale are all between 15th and 21st in the league over the course of 2015 for hitouts. However, I would argue that this is really just a variation on the 70/30 model, and it’s McEvoy’s inability to win hitouts that skews the statistics massively.

Here is how that looks is basic numbers.

View attachment 209394

So this gives us two options moving forward.

The first is that Longer rucks 90% at the Goldstien / Jacobs / Sandi standard, and we have to find about 5-10 hitouts a game in a 10% ruck role. Holmes can maybe be the backup if Longer is injured, but to pull this off Longer needs to become both an elite ruckman and very very durable. If we get lucky this might happen, but a lot has to go right for him to reach that level. I am really not sure you can plan for this, especially with the interchange cap putting even more TOG pressure (bonus if it happens but we can’t rely on it). So realistically this leaves us with the 60/40 – 70/30 model moving forward.

Looking at the best 70/30 combinations (and specifically at the second ruck role), the total hitouts for Tippet / Ryder / Sinclair is somewhere between 350 -500 per year.

That averages to somewhere between 15 to 25 hitouts a game, and IMO that is simply not a number we can find out of someone like Bruce, Goddard, Paddy or Carlisle. They are much better used forword / back then spending up to 40% time in the ruck, and you don’t want to damage your thoroughbreds in the ruck (Kozy, Goose say hi).

The forward / scoreboard contribution of these ruck / forwards was Tippett 44 goals, Ryder 18 goals, Sinclair >15 goals.

*Other second rucks from good teams who play play 80 -95% forward because of a dominant ruck: Jenkins 46 goals (79 hitouts), Brown 32 goals (63 hitouts), Vickery 31 goals (85 hitouts). Again, if Longer becomes a beast in the future, then we have this 90/10 option where we use a KPP (Goddard / Carlisle / Bruce / Paddy) for 5 hitouts a game. But we can’t plan for this and shouldn’t risk a young players development trying.

This leaves us with Hickey as the second ruck / forward (in the 70/30 role) as our only realistic option (unless we trade in this talent in the future).

While his defensive benchmarks and the setup will be determined elsewhere - looking at the top teams Hickey needs to average
Minimum 15-20 hitouts and a goal a game from 2017 onwards
About 20-25 hitouts and almost 1.5 goals a game if he wants to be considered an elite forward ruck.

For me, those are the metrics we judge his development by.


A few other observations based solely on the numbers above:

1. Regarding ruckman:

Natinui and Gawn are about to hit their prime (Gawn’s underrated) and look like the two most likely to dominate going forward (along with Lobbe).

Longer looks well advanced on Grundy and Nicholls as the best young ruckman in the league. That GC and Coll have better clearance rates and we have a higher hitout count just confirms to me that while we have prioritised the spine in our rebuild, other clubs are ahead in their midfields. Hence mids are our recruiting priority moving forward, and I think we will find it easier to unearth mids than they will KPP’s. While we all hope Billy develops his around the ground game more, on simple numbers he is the best young ruckman in the league.

2. Controversial:

The GWS midfield looks overrated! And they have just lost their best clearance player ...

Last word: Anyone remember when Cain Ackland and Michael Rix were our ruck choices? Or when we had to ruck Brett Cook in a grand final? Or when the difference in the highest standard of game I have ever seen played (rd 14 2009 vs Geelong at Etihad) was Michael Gardiner? This is a good problem to have people.

Go Saints

Fantastic post! Really good research.

Your numbers are based on number of hit outs. I would be curious on if you can find some time on ground stats to go with them. Would be interesting to see how much game time the 70-30 style rucks play. Also, if possible, some numbers on how long they spent rucking/forward would be great too. Would really give us a good groundwork to understand what is happening.

 

[plugger66]

That's semantics though. We know when Bruce plays as a chop out ruck man he's a forward playing ruck in spells. The guys recruited as rucks probably get called a ruck man when they get played forward out of habit.

Its not semantics at all. If you play 70% of the game forward then you are a forward for that game. You are dropped because your forward play isn't good enough. Hickey was dropped last season because his forward play wasn't good enough, not his ruck work. When Fev played FB on G train he was a FB for the day not a FF. the same for Barry Hall under Blight. The decision on whether you play is your form in the position you are playing. Mathematics tells us that. If you only have 20% in the other position you cant possibly we classed as a ruckman on that day. Hickey is a ruckman but unless he plays off the bench he is a forward that game and any game he plays forward. Lets face it he will certainly be picked or dropped for his forward play and not how he went for 20% in the ruck.

 

[plugger66]

Right him off at your peril Plugger.

Our issue with clearances probably has a bit to do with our midfielders too.

I'll back the coaching staff over supporters who refuse to acknowledge a young player's improvement anyway.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not writing him off at all. Id rather Hickey. Because you want Longer does that mean you are writing Hickey off? I wouldn't think so and wont say it. As for the coaches knowing more well blow me down who would have guessed but how boring would it be on here if we 100% agreed with coaches. I get told I agree with coaches far to much. I don't agree with them here.

 

[plugger66]

And to enclosed animal those stats show something but like any stats they can do anything if you want them to. Remember the finals side play up to 3 games more. I would suggest to do it in averages to make it fairer. I'm sure that drops the Hawks way down the list and the maximum of 3 spots wont be true.

 

[Axcellence]

Enclosed_Animal - Great analysis. I really think Billy needs to improve a lot more around the ground.

Grundy is averaging 4-5 tackles a game, whereas Billy is a lot less. McEvoy is a good mark in the backline and above average mark everywhere else.

It's all about having more strings to your bow...

 

[George]

Hope the knee isn't an ongoing issue if he plays this year.

 

[DarkSaint]

There is an article on the Afl website with Rich saying that there is a silver lining with the Carlisle suspension. The interesting thing that I got out of that is he said when we are Challenging that a backline of Goddard, Carlisle, Roberton and Webster will be an imposing unit.

Now some people rate Geary here highly but it's interesting that he wasn't mentioned in that sentence when talking about the backline. And also I think you can pretty much look in Webster to spend most of the year in the backline and not wing like some thought.

And also Freeman is still 1 week away from joining the main group..

 

[Defacto]

There is an article on the Afl website with Rich saying that there is a silver lining with the Carlisle suspension. The interesting thing that I got out of that is he said when we are Challenging that a backline of Goddard, Carlisle, Roberton and Webster will be an imposing unit.

Now some people rate Geary here highly but it's interesting that he wasn't mentioned in that sentence when talking about the backline. And also I think you can pretty much look in Webster to spend most of the year in the backline and not wing like some thought.

And also Freeman is still 1 week away from joining the main group..

Is roberton our third tall defender?

 

[DarkSaint]

Is roberton our third tall defender?

I'm guessing that he would be our third tall.. Unless Lee makes it, but that's a long shot at the moment.

 

[Jade Buddha]

I've never understood why one ruck man needs to keep running the whole length of the field. If you've got a ruck man forward (Hickey) why wouldn't he contest all the forward of centre stoppages and the other guy (Longer) contest the back of centre.

I must be thick.

 

[majortinkle]

I've never understood why one ruck man needs to keep running the whole length of the field. If you've got a ruck man forward (Hickey) why wouldn't he contest all the forward of centre stoppages and the other guy (Longer) contest the back of centre.

I must be thick.

If your forward ruck was as good in the ruck as your main guy and just as good as a forward then you could. They tend not to be though so you end up trying to cut down one or the other as much as possible.

 

[Kilroy]

Is roberton our third tall defender?

Dempster is the better tall defender currently even though he's 3cms shorter and I'm one who expects Dempster to play on next year. He's a better mark and spoil than Robbo and has an enormous leap.

In an ideal scenario Delaney or Lee would grab that spot this year or next, leaving Robbo to be more attacking.

 

[Joffaboy]

Da faq...

Shit man you really gangsta.

 

[Rors]

Didn't Grundy do similar to what Wingard did & pretty much declare he only wanted to play for Collingwood? This would be why we jumped at the chance to take Hickey + pick 25 + pick 46 for picks 13, 36 & 55.

Now if we look at those trades, taking into account who was taken where in the draft & where players have ended up as at this present time, it looks like this...

Hickey + White (delisted) + Membrey* for Lonergan + McBean + Tim Sumner (retired)....

Sure we could argue that we could have taken so & so with this pick, & someone else with that pick, but as BS has stated above, all likelihood was that we would have taken Aidan Corr at pick 13 anyway (who went to GWS at pick 14).... Not sure how many would be over the moon with that one

Give me Hickey & Membrey* over Lonergan (or Corr) & McBean anyday!


* I am aware Membrey was taken by Sydney at pick 46 in 2012 after we traded the pick for TDL. Now considering we delisted TDL & then got Membrey for free as a DFA at the end of 2014, we've caught a lucky break & I'm just rolling with it

 

[Enclosed_Animal]

Okay at the request of others I am including some more stats to add to the conversation.

Once again I want to point out that I am not making a case either way for or against Hickey. The major point I wanted to make from my previous analysis, was that while it will be great if Billy can do the 90% ruckwork in the Sandi / Jacobs / Goldstein role:

1. We would be incredibly naive to plan for this as so much can go wrong with young ruckman
   
   
2. Our 4 KPP’s are too valuable to risk as a second ruck (Bruce / Paddy / Goddard / Carslisle). Where teams have a second ruck in the 90/10 scenario they usually either contribute goals and next to no hitouts (Jenkins 46 goals - 79 hitouts, Brown 32 goals - 63 hitouts, Vickery 31 goals - 85 hitouts)
3. Or in the 70/30 split they contribute hitouts as a genuine second ruck but less than a goal a game (Ryder 18 goals – 412 hitouts, Sinclair 369 hitouts - >15 goals, Hale 13 goals and 285 hitouts).

As we want to protect our KPP assets and not Kozy/Goose them, for now we need to plan for the 70/30 split. And unless we recruit someone to play this role in the future, our only current option is Hickey. My last analysis simply aimed to develop some fair metrics for his development.


What I personally think is unfair, is saying because someone plays 70% as a forward he should be judged as a forward and compared to say Paddy or Membery’s output. Paddy or Membery don’t spend 30 or 40% of their time rucking, nor should they. You have to judge the total sum of what an individual contributes, and I believe it is more fair to judge Hickey against other players who play the same role at other clubs, then to expect him to match the numbers of someone internally who plays a single role (ie he didn’t get Paddys numbers or Longers hitouts therefore he doesn’t contribute as much). Its not as simple as he is a ruck or a forward and using such a simplistic binary distinction makes for unfair assesments of development and success.

For me he should be judged in the 70/30 role, and against players such as Ryder, Hale, Sinclair, Tippet etc. Many of the people here want that level of ruck contribution, while also wanting Jenkins, Vickery, Brown like contribution in the forward line. But those guys play a 90/10 split, so their contribution is valued differently. The only players in the league that kick more than a goal a game while contributing over 300 hitouts are Tippet and Ryder (just).

*Note: I cant find the stat for time forward vs ruck anywhere unfortunately. Hence my artificial creation of 70/30 or 90/10 to explain the difference between their overall contribution. If anyone does have this stat, then we can make some better guesses / metrics for success, but that is all I have for now.


Spannaman, you ask an interesting question about TOG. A question which becomes a bit of an unknown with the new interchange restrictions. FWIW below are the stats which include hitouts, TOG, clearances and goals. I posted the stats using total hitouts at the primary indicator. If you use averages, unfortunately there is no way to filter out those who only played a few games. Hence the list becomes too long and it is too hard to compare the players you want to find.

And yes, there will always be somebody who says you can make stats say anything. This is true. But as someone who doesn’t have inner sanctum access, they are all I have to back up my gameday observations. At least it gives the ability to compare apples with apples (as opposed to the apples and elephants which are sometimes used to make an arguement).





Just based on these stats I would argue Tippet and Ryder to be elite at their output as a second ruck.

What I personally would like to see, is Hickey up his 2016 stats beyond his current output (which is very similar to Stanley as other have already noted using more nuanced analysis then me), to something around the Hale, Kruezer, Luenberger level of output. Interestingly reaching these stats requires a significant raise in his output as a ruckman, not as a forward. If Hick also increases his forward output then we can talk Tippet / Ryder metrics, but that is elite company and a way off.

I also agree with Axecellence that Billy needs to develop his around the ground game more. For me, the ideal scenario is if he could develop the presence that Gardiner / McEvoy had a kick behind the play. Not only were they able to clunk marks, but after they did this once or twice teams would often switch the way they moved out of half back, because players would see the ruckman filling the hole down the line. Everyone remembers Gardiners mark in the goalsquare against Geelong in 09 with 1.30 left, but how many remember his mark on the halfbackline with 20 seconds left? The intangible presence that comes with that would be what I personally hope Billy develops going forward. But on the stats above (which are directly relevant to assess ruckwork) IMO he is tracking very very nicely.


So ideally what I would like to see in 2016, is Hickey continue to contribute as a forward, but also to pick up more ruckwork around the ground - particularly in the forward half. This would increase his overall contribution (but in the 2nd ruck role moreso than as a forward) and allow Billy to play similar TOG to 2015 without as many rotations (by reducing his need to cover as much ground). On the flip side, I would like to see Billy spending more time in the back half and really developing that kick behind the play ‘presence’. If he can begin to clunk a few marks down the line, this will significantly ease the pressure on the back half. That is the way I personally think they can work as a combo.

Just my 2c

 

[cooperrules]

Hope the knee isn't an ongoing issue if he plays this year.

He looked injured when he was running.

 

[VDS66]

I guess it all comes down to how the coach sees it.

IF they have anointed Longer as our preferred long term 1st ruck, then he will continue to get game time.

So the challenges as I see them for Hickey are as follows:

He has to improve as ruck man in 20016 to force Longer out of the team. If 1st spot is still up for grabs, then stands a good chance if he works hard enough.

The only other alternative is to develop himself as a handy forward, which is a big ask IMO. Frankly, I reckon Lee has more chance of becoming that 3rd fwd and part time ruck.

Unless there is a profound shift in the way the game is played, I can't see us carrying an extra player mere as a ruck back up in the starting 22. with the cap on interchanges, it's more likely that teams will play 4 mids on the bench.

The only exception is we had a Spider type player who could rest forward and kick goals, whilst Lazar would come off the bench.

It would be interesting if both Hickey and Longer could go 50/50 in ruck duties and both rest in the fwd 50 and be capable of a goal or 2 each per game. But unfortunately the modern game demands defensive pressure from the forwards. This is where Kosi was a liability in that defenders just ran off him.

It seems that with Longer, Hickey and Holmes we have all the right attributes you'd want... except they are spread over the 3 men.

 

[St Pauls]

So when is the leadership group being decided?

I'm picking Roo gets the captaincy again.

I think that the leadership group will remain the same with the inclusion of either Dunston or Ross. Maybe Shinner will make way for one of the younger guys.

 

[hayes]

There is an article on the Afl website with Rich saying that there is a silver lining with the Carlisle suspension. The interesting thing that I got out of that is he said when we are Challenging that a backline of Goddard, Carlisle, Roberton and Webster will be an imposing unit.

Now some people rate Geary here highly but it's interesting that he wasn't mentioned in that sentence when talking about the backline. And also I think you can pretty much look in Webster to spend most of the year in the backline and not wing like some thought.

And also Freeman is still 1 week away from joining the main group..

I was starting to think that myself. Webster is too valuable of a defender ATM particularly when we don't have many options there. I'm more than happy for him to stay in the backline, I've still got hopes that he can be our Malceski.