Roughead to CHB - A move so obvious even Clarko can't miss it

[ventor1]

Re: Roughead to Defense?

Yeah, I threw this idea up yesterday... so obviously there are a few people thinking about it.

Should this happen, it means that we can finally pull Murphy out of defense, and I would give him a stint in the forward line. From time to time he has displayed that he can take a good grab.

But yeah, I reckon' Roughy to the back line has plenty of merit!

 

[wallyt99]

Re: Roughead to Defense?

Now that he is signed up for 4 years I cannot see a problem with it for a game or two.

Could unify the team also.

 

[Gold Member]

Re: Roughead to Defense?

Precedence has been set in turning ugly ranga centre half forwards into triple premiership centre half backs.

 

[NicG]

Re: Roughead to Defense?

I'm only hoping that they were holding off making this move until contract negotiations were finalized. Now that he's signed on, they don't have to worry about p1ssing him off by playing him in his non-preferred position!

From a similar thread ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brishawk
(Recent) Precedence of moving a good FF/CHF to CHB/FB

Chad Cornes
Trent Croad
Justin Leppitsch
Chris Tarrant

Given his current momentum-killing accuracy woes, it is such an obvious move that no-one at Hawthorn can have failed to consider it. The question is: why has it been dismissed without even giving it a try? Can he really be so bad at it? I seem to remember him playing in defense on Richardson (and others) early on in his career and breaking even.

Roughead was training with the forward group today ... not that that really means anything. It was just quick hit-out to loosen up after the weekend, and I'm sure they wouldn't telegraph the move so openly in a public training session.

Last year we were so bereft of a KPD that Robbie Campbell was played down there, even to the point of having two other ruckman in the team. Nothing has changed this year (now that Gibson is gone) and Clarkson has publicly said that Gilham is a better player when he doesn't have to mind the big forward. There literally is no better option than Roughead.

Franklin will obviously need help up forward to avoid being triple-teamed and Schoenmakers and/or Dowler should be first cabs of the rank there.

 

[mr_hawk74]

Re: Roughead to Defense?

Roughy, Gilham Gibson 3 talls down back.

Buddy, Dowler, Skipper up front to stretch defenses. Although skipper will be used to Ruck with Renouf , but the resting ruck in the forward pocket can work........... i think.



HURRY UP AND GET FIT

 

[matty_hawk]

Re: Roughead to Defense?

Id say maybe 90% of hawk supporters have been either thinking or voicing this opinion since gibbo went down.

The 2 questions are;
1. Do we have enough firepower to actually kick a winning score without him
2. Does he have the ability to stop the opposition from kicking a winning score.

On the 1st question, with Dowler not up to it at the moment, and shoey being the only logical replacement, I'd have to say probably not.

The second question though, id have to say yes. If the move happens, we might be back here in four week, 5 and 5 for the year and being shit stirred on BF for st.kilda Vs Bulldogs like games.

But an ugly win is better than a pretty loss, and if the change doesn't happen soon, and we keep losing, a lot of supporters will be infuriated.

 

[Hungry Hawk]

Re: Roughead to Defense?

I can confirm Dowler has an issue issue with his hip and is in some doubt.

Does this mean he was being considered? I like the idea of Rough back and Dowler forward. Rough can play either end but Dowler is limited.

As has been said before Lisle is no chance, but what have got to lose?

 

[WoGiTaLiA]

Re: Roughead to Defense?

Good to see I'm not crazy.

I think the Hawks biggest problems right now stem from defense, what I remember from 2008 was the way they would cluster back and force a long kick into the 50 which would either be marked by a Birchall or Hodge floating across or brought to ground and then swept up and then you would hit Crawford, Young, Birchall, Hodge and the other "prime" ball movers and Franklin with a 50 to operate. Right now you just aren't getting anywhere because you can't start the chain, the cluster is there but Hodge is busy either manning up or covering for the undersized talls and thus the rest of it never happens because the opposition get the mark or bring it down to their players advantage. The finale of that whole structure was having Lewis, Sewell and Mitchell just straight bullying people around stoppages so opponents couldn't get that clear breakaway that stopped the cluster setting up.

Roughy just seems so obvious down back right now, where the problems begin with the way the Hawks are structured. If a neutral fan can see that you would hope the coaching staff can also...

 

[WoGiTaLiA]

Re: Roughead to Defense?

On the 1st question, with Dowler not up to it at the moment, and shoey being the only logical replacement, I'd have to say probably not.

The second question though, id have to say yes. If the move happens, we might be back here in four week, 5 and 5 for the year and being shit stirred on BF for st.kilda Vs Bulldogs like games.

But an ugly win is better than a pretty loss, and if the change doesn't happen soon, and we keep losing, a lot of supporters will be infuriated.

A good couple of points here. Buddy, Cryil(even underdone like he is), Hooper, Hodge, Young, Bateman and maybe even Murphy who has been thrown up could do a bit of damage. I seem to recall that Hodge would pinch hit up forward very successfully in 08. Burgoyne when back would also greatly help with this. I think you be a little more West Coast like in the structure of how you get your goals. If you only need to kick 10-12 goals, 5 or 6 from Buddy is a pretty damn good start.

Also... winning ugly would be good for the Hawks right now, currently they are losing pretty, trying to play delicate football and outscore teams, perhaps this change could be symbolic of an entire teamwide change as well?

 

[matty_hawk]

Re: Roughead to Defense?

The only reason i can think of for not making the move is because our midfielders do not kick goals. Mitchell, Lewis, Bateman, Ellis, and even Hodge to an extent are probably guys who kick 4 goals between them for a game. Which wouldn't compare favorably with Geelongs, St.Kilda's or the Dogs midfielders.

We rely on 2 guys to kick about 70% of our score and with Buddy not playing every week due to umpire loving and rougie kicking like richo did in the early naughties we are in trouble.

 

[HawksILove]

I love to see schoenmakers up forward, I think he will do better than done back

 

[QuietB]

I have always been in the Roughead to CHB camp. He will be AA for 5 years in a row as soon as they do it.

Every time he goes back he excells. Every time he goes back he is in the game and stays in the game. He gets his hand on the ball more often and he uses it well.

There are so many positives.

I have always thought that the Rough and Buddy want the same space - deep in the forward line. Neither excells at a true CHF position. They both want the goal square and what we are getting now is a massive hole at CHF and 2 blokes standing in the square not knowing what to do or where to go.

The Hawks have recruited 5 1st round key posotion forwards in the last 7 or 8 drafts. Buddy, Rough, Dowler, Thorp (gone) & Shoemakers. Obviously they cannot all play forward, and I really dont give a rats which one plays back. If Buddy is the best suited to go back then he gets the gig.

Peter Knights did it, Croad did it, Hodge did it, he is signed up for 4 years, it is Rougheads turn to do it.

 

[mess]

Who's you pick for CHF QB?

 

[Leather Poisoning]

We have a FF and a CHB that are both way down on confidence.

Roughy can get the ball often enough but needs to be in the goal square, on the run to nail the goal.

Meanwhile at the other end we've got a raw Schoenmakers who is in desperate need of some quality/experience players around him to steepen his learning curve.


If Roughy was on track to kick his 50-70 I wouldn't dream of making the change. Likewise if Schoenmakers was still nullifying opponents and delivering laserlike passes out of defence.

But here we are and I would love to see this

 

[QuietB]

Who's you pick for CHF QB?

Put Shoenmakers and Dowler on the half forward line and tell them to get on their bikes and move. Instructions should be as simple as;

• Present to the ball carrier - no one is currently doing this
• Get out of Buddy's way inside 50

As it is all of the hawks half forwards and forward pockets for that matter are less than 6" and are getting dragged way up the ground. Every time it comes in there is basically no option at CHF, no movement, and no one at Buddy and Roughead's feet when the ball inevitably gets put on top of their heads.

That was absolutely infuriating on Saturday night - seeing Buddy and Roughead competing with 4 opponents with no crumbers in sight. It has been infuriating all year.

The structure is appalling and in my opinion it is because of the following;

1. Backline is getting smashed
2. Midfield and forwards are getting dragged up field to help out
3. Buddy and Roughead essentially want to play the same position
4. Team is way too small and short accross the ground (this is the sole reason IMO why the hawks lost the Geelong game - 2nd half Ottens, Taylor, Mooney etc. dominated our guys who were simply to small to cope)

It might work, it might not. What is happening now is definitely not working.

 

[QuietB]

One very important thing to note is that wanting to see this tried is on no way a sledge against Roughead - in fact it is the opposite.

Dowler has not shown he can do it. Shoenmakers is in his 2nd year. Buddy simply does not have the game or ability to do it. Roughead does.

 

[The Cats Teeth]

Interesting thread...Having watched most of Hawks games, it is totally clear the defensive group lacks confidence and experience working as a cohesive unit. Roughhead to CHB, Campbell Brown into a back pocket and if looking at other scoring options why not rest Hodge ( a la Ablett ) at FF for 10 minutews here and there. Shoenmaker is clearly a tall and skilled guy, but looks a couple of years away fom producing the goods..maybe back to the VFL for a few weeks. You don't want the 2008 version of Zac Dawson in your midst

 

[King Elvis]

I've been saying this for ages

 

[Brant]

Put Shoenmakers and Dowler on the half forward line and tell them to get on their bikes and move. Instructions should be as simple as;

• Present to the ball carrier - no one is currently doing this
• Get out of Buddy's way inside 50

The structure is appalling and in my opinion it is because of the following;

1. Backline is getting smashed
2. Midfield and forwards are getting dragged up field to help out
3. Buddy and Roughead essentially want to play the same position
4. Team is way too small and short accross the ground (this is the sole reason IMO why the hawks lost the Geelong game - 2nd half Ottens, Taylor, Mooney etc. dominated our guys who were simply to small to cope)

It might work, it might not. What is happening now is definitely not working.

Hodge to HBF as well - play Lewis.

That way we have rebound out of the backline & little need for the mids & F-Flankers to get dragged up the ground.

 

[thebiff]

Club is a complete basket case and people think we should not make some moves or try something different? I don't give a shit if we lose "firepower", cant say we have any firepower anyway so there is none to lose. Roughead down back is an obvious move, the guy is a real classy player just seems to have no confidence infront of goal. Keeping him down there missing goals from 10meters out is pointless. No brainer

 

[eros]

Derm was asked about this on the radio this morning. Claims that if Rough was sent to CHB the opposition coach would simply put a nimble half forward on him (eg Robert Murphy) who would beat him for pace on the lead every time. In his opinion, Rough does not have the leg speed to play the position as it must be played nowadays. Says that out problem in defence is a lack of leg speed in general, and that sending Rough down there would only compound the problem.

 

[lethalselbow]

Derm was asked about this on the radio this morning. Claims that if Rough was sent to CHB the opposition coach would simply put a nimble half forward on him (eg Robert Murphy) who would beat him for pace on the lead every time. In his opinion, Rough does not have the leg speed to play the position as it must be played nowadays. Says that out problem in defence is a lack of leg speed in general, and that sending Rough down there would only compound the problem.

Nicely pointed out. I'm sure the coaching panel know what's going on and the 2-3 goals he averages a game would be hard to replace. We don't have as much up forward as everybody pretends to think we do.

 

[Cynic]

Derm was asked about this on the radio this morning. Claims that if Rough was sent to CHB the opposition coach would simply put a nimble half forward on him (eg Robert Murphy) who would beat him for pace on the lead every time. In his opinion, Rough does not have the leg speed to play the position as it must be played nowadays. Says that out problem in defence is a lack of leg speed in general, and that sending Rough down there would only compound the problem.

While a good point isn't it normally the defending players that choose their opponents? Otherwise isn't that the same as saying oh well we won't play Corey Enright in the backline as other wise they'll put Jonathan Brown or a ruck on him.

 

[King Elvis]

Derm was asked about this on the radio this morning. Claims that if Rough was sent to CHB the opposition coach would simply put a nimble half forward on him (eg Robert Murphy) who would beat him for pace on the lead every time. In his opinion, Rough does not have the leg speed to play the position as it must be played nowadays. Says that out problem in defence is a lack of leg speed in general, and that sending Rough down there would only compound the problem.

In that case, you'd shift Schoey to Murphy, Roughy to Hall, Brown to Johnson.

The Crows backline (which, inspite of our shit efforts this year, is still doing 'ok' - most of the goals have been from lightning quick turnovers) is built around Ben Rutten and then Nathan Bock. Bocky has been out most of this year, but Rutten has been an absolute rock for us.

You guys don't have those two guys, but Roughy could play a role halfway between them, Brown is obviously a quality backman, and having those two down there would allow Schoey to play as the second/third tall - which would then allow him to use his fitness/pace to help the other guys out, and, more importantly, be the guy running out of the backline using his excellent footskills to get things going.

 

[NicG]

Derm was asked about this on the radio this morning. Claims that if Rough was sent to CHB the opposition coach would simply put a nimble half forward on him (eg Robert Murphy) who would beat him for pace on the lead every time. In his opinion, Rough does not have the leg speed to play the position as it must be played nowadays. Says that out problem in defence is a lack of leg speed in general, and that sending Rough down there would only compound the problem.

While a good point isn't it normally the defending players that choose their opponents? Otherwise isn't that the same as saying oh well we won't play Corey Enright in the backline as other wise they'll put Jonathan Brown or a ruck on him.

Definitely agree with Cynic here. And whilst we nominally use CHB for the optimal Roughead-in-defense position, it would actually be the Trent-Croad-position of taking the biggest forward whether he be at CHF or FF. Roughead has the pace to go with at least the majority of these. The rest of backline - Gilham, Stratton, Guerra - would then pick up the most appropriate opposition forward.

This is not rocket science. Hopefully Dermie is just creating a smokescreen ...