At the moment he's the only bloke who can kick goals. What was it yesterday, a dozen shots on goal, taking his tally to almost 30 scoring shots in 3 games ... the most in the league? Wiggins would have struggled to get his hands on it twice, and would probably have cocked it up anyway - We can't afford to have a bloke who doesn't even now how or when to lead (who can't kick) playing four quarters from the goal square. Dead set, you'd reckon people would rate Rhode more highly if Wiggins played 4 quarters and we lost by 10 goals instead of 5.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 9 - Indigenous Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Wtf?
- Thread starter -PC28-
- Start date
- Tagged users None
At the moment he's the only bloke who can kick goals. What was it yesterday, a dozen shots on goal, taking his tally to almost 30 scoring shots in 3 games ... the most in the league? Wiggins would have struggled to get his hands on it twice, and would probably have cocked it up anyway - We can't afford to have a bloke who doesn't even now how or when to lead (who can't kick) playing four quarters from the goal square. Dead set, you'd reckon people would rate Rhode more highly if Wiggins played 4 quarters and we lost by 10 goals instead of 5.
- Thread starter
- #27
Would rate him higher if he played a forward line with someone over 6ft
At least we'd have a structure that can be successfull. No matter what players you use in our current structure (and they get no better than Brown and Johnno at that role) we will not get anywhere much.
Do you think Browny would have done worse if Wiggins was standing next to him instead of Garlick or Gian? At least having a big guy there means you can kick long with confidence knowing that the ball will at least hit the ground and give your smaller guys a chance. Kicking long to Brown and Garlick vs their opponents plus Jeff White will NEVER be more successfull than Brown and a tall guy, no matter how much of a spud the tall guy is.
I'd prefer a taller forward line too and I'd prefer Wiggo to get a decent crack at it.
However, we haven't lost the last 2 because we've had a small forward line. Apart from Brown, who I would leave up forward, we haven't had too many winners on the forward line. But that isn't the main reason we have lost either.
We lost because their forwards were better than our backman and a lack of pressure in the midfield meant that they were able to kick it to their forwards advantage. We beat Geelong partly because of midfield pressure and partly because they kicked atrociously into their forward line even when they weren't under pressure.
We have to solve the midfield pressure problem.
Yep. Midfield was a problem too. Don't know the stats but I thought we were smashed at the stoppages. West and Dimma tried hard but I dreaded each bounce-down because Melbourne usually came away with it.
Backline-Midfield-Forwardline.... The whole team looked a rabble
But next week is another week. It annoys me that a team that looks good on paper can be so uncompetitive.
Backline-Midfield-Forwardline.... The whole team looked a rabble
But next week is another week. It annoys me that a team that looks good on paper can be so uncompetitive.
I agree with all that. I don't blame Rohde for the other problems, it will take time for him to create a more accountable midfield, and i thought his backline looked extremely good in round 1, and its weakness since then can hardly be blamed on him.
However, i can see no reason he would not be working towards developing someone with a bit of height into a geniune target inside 50. It is a basic mistake on his part, made all the more galling by his pre season doctrine that he would play a more traditional set up than had been the case most recently under Wallace.
I'd go for the bloke who'd be more productive in his own right - if it came down to a choice between having Gia or Wiggo in the forward line, I'd rather a player who'd get 20 touches and kick a couple of goals but get outmarked a couple of times by a ruckman dropping back into the hole over the bloke who'd get 3 touches but contest a couple of marks.
I seriously doubt that, say, Simon Cox alongside Brown will fare better than Brad Johnson alongside Brown in a contested situation. But even if we do assume a soft tall who can't lead for shlt nor take an overhead mark to save himself will be better, is it worth losing the productivity of a smaller guy with ten times the talent and footy smarts? It comes down to which player will have the bigger influence and therefore be of more value to the team.
Don't get me wrong - I reckon we'd look a hell of a lot better with an extra tall or two down there - but I don't think we should do it just for the sake of it. If we've got no-one over 190cm at the moment who's talented enough to get a kick, play someone who can at least get a few touches and kick a couple of goals.
To be honest, I don't know why people are focussing on (and saying Rohde is a crap coach because of) the forward line: despite being smashed in the midfield, the ball being in our back half for the majority of the time and some plss poor delivery, we're amongst the top 4 highest scorers in the league - short people or not, the forward line is getting the runs on the board.
At the expense of results?
Would you rather see us lose next week with both Wiggins and Skipper given 4 quarters as key forwards, or win with a forward line with no-one over 6ft?
39 Memories
Team Captain
Agree wholeheartedly with your summation of Royce Hart.
Found Rohde's decisions over the past three weeks a little hard to match to his comments at the end of the games.
Found Rohde's decisions over the past three weeks a little hard to match to his comments at the end of the games.
Your stats are completely made up, so bare no relevence to the argument. The reason we have no forwards to use effectively in the role is because we haven't developed any. If you have a tall contesting the ball in the air, all of a sudden Brown can get some easy touches (and easy shots at goal), instead of being forced to lead at the boundary line all day.
Champion players will always have the most influence, no matter where you play them. You do not lose their productivity by playing a tall guy forward. Brown and Johnson would make close to the best back pocket combination in the league, that is not a strong argument to play them there.
Giving our midfielders a tall option to kick to is imperative in cutting out many turnovers that come about because they have to turn sideways when under pressure instead of being able to belt it long. These turnovers also leave our undermanned backline exposed. The forward set up is very important not just for how much we score, but how much the opposition scores.
How will we ever get a tall that can play there if we don't actually play a tall there? The more we play the midget forward line the harder it will be to ever revert to anything else. It will take at least half a season before our players get used to playing to a conventional forward line again. If we think we need that type of system to be geniunely successfull, why wait to implement it? It may see worse results in the immediate future (we lost by over 5 goals anyway, may as well have been developing a young tall whilst doing it), but our chances of future success will be much improved.
The difference between Laidley and Rohde is. North had a great game plan than won them 2 premierships while our was suspect under pressure. Laidley's North is different from Pagans North but not as much as Rohdes Dogs needs to be different from Wallaces Dogs.
yep, yes and yeah.
It is to early to come up with a definitive call on Rohde's capabilities ATM. He made some mistakes on sunday as did the players and his comments in the press has me thinking that at least he can see what our problems were and the payers who have continually let us down over the last few years are now on notice.
Give the guy a chance. He has very little in the way of assisitance.
Westy, the forward line and the midfield (and the backline) are not seperate units. The structure of the forward line dictates how the midfield can deliver the ball into the F50 with any hope of success.
If you have a small forward line, you must deliver the ball precisely. The midfield doesnt have the luxury of being able to spot up a tall and bomb the ball 70m under intense pressure. Instead they have to handball, shortpass or whatever and generaly over-use the ball which will create turnovers and make them look like idiots.
Wiggo seems to be intent on making a contest, and if he can do that, and keep an oppostion tall defender occupied, then the browns and garlicks can feed off the crumbs.
Bulldog1954
Brownlow Medallist
Veteran
10k Posts
BeanCoiNFT Investor
SuperCoach Club Board Championship League Member
Western Bulldogs - Honeychurch/Austin/Prudden Player Sponsor 2014
Western Bulldogs - Christian Howard/Mark Austin Player Sponsor 2013
Western Bulldogs - Christian Howard/Mark Austin 2012 Player Sponsor
Western Bulldogs - Ryan Hargrave 2007 Player Sponsor
Rohde can not be blamed for us not developing any key forwards. Wiggo should have been developing while playing for Werribee in the past, he should chop them up at that level yet doesn't. At senior level we can't afford to play a guy all day at full forward if he isn't getting a kick. Wiggo has hardly taken advantage of the chances he has been given this season. Even if the are only 15 mins stints, you should be able to at least get a solitary kick
If there was a decent tall forward on our list Rohde would probably play with a more traditional set up. Rohde planned on being able to use Crofty as a full forward, but then he got injured, then Granty and Harro got injured, and now Kritter has got injured so he can't do that. Rohde can't be blamed for us not having a decent tall forward, there weren't any when he got the job and injuries certainly are not helping. If Grant, Harro, Kritter and Crofty had have been fit over the last 2 weeks we would have had a more traditional set-up, blaming Rohde for everything and saying he is our worse coach ever is completely unfair
Having said that I think Wiggo should be dropped and hopefully he can carve them up at that levele and gain some confidence. I would give K-Mac a crack at full forward, he isn't as big as Wiggo but has some size and showed more in his first game at senior level then Wiggo has in his 8 games. Plus he dominated for the Bees
- Thread starter
- #42
Did you want him to devolop before or after his knee reco?
Not when the footy is delievered into the F50 in the manner that it has been as of late! Overall though he has struggled, a few times on Sunday he could've been in a good position to take a grab / make a lead but due to either inexperience or lack of talk he was not there.
Obviously he isn't the smartest footballer going around, but he has shown some promise - Rohde should tell him to just play in the square, provide an option deep in the forward line. Keep it simple and let the the smaller blokes crumb. Browny and Johnno also have the luxury of providing a second option. A bit of leadership keeping Wiggo on track from the likes of Browny and Johnno (and Bandy) would go a long way IMO.
I just can't see how him playing on the bench is doing us any good. If he needs to find form again drop him but I personally think his height and presence in the goal square would be a positive attribute for the team. Provided the ball actually is won out of the middle and delivered in a manner that is of a reasonable advantage to us I can see Wiggo kicking 2-3 a game plus providing plenty of opportunities for the smaller blokes to crumb a few to.
Fair enough. You rate our young talls much lower than i do. However it is Rohde's choice to have them on the list, so if his reasons are like yours (just thinks they are crap) he should never have kept them at the club, let alone picked them in the 22 and sit them on the bench all day. Either way i can't see a way Rohde is not in the wrong.
No matter what else you think, playing with a midget forward line fosters bad habits of over using the ball when under pressure through the middle of the ground. Habits that will take a long time to break as it is, and for every game we use the midget system it will take longer still to successfully revert to a normal system(ie one that can be successful in finals). For me that just seems to equal an acknowledgement that we are looking to be short term competitive (5 goal losses instead of say 8) instead of long term successfull, and i think that is a sure way to continued mediocrity.
Saying he is our worst coach ever was just a tad tongue in cheek (obvioulsy your committment to seriousness on this board may have made that hard to pick up), and i hardly think i am blaming him for everything. We have been hurt by injuries, and he has inherited the list from a coach obssessed with running players...that doesn't mean there is not reason to think he is not a good coach.
Dogs r Roos
Rookie
PC28 on the coach
PC you are a tosser, WHY ??? because you seem to think you are the only one allowed to have opinions on pre and post game highlights - I have sat back pre-season and waited until this round to see how much of a tosser you are. I have read every new post of yours and your replys to other posters for 2003.
There is a common pattern, you want to dominate the Bulldogs' board and the few posters that disagree with you, you start name calling (how old and mature are you ?).
Posters have given their opinions and thoughts on the game and you have berated them. Who died and made you football and the Western Bulldogs God ? to say that the coach is at fault for the teams' poor performances in 2003 is a joke and utter crap.
It comes down to the players (the cattle as one poster so appropriately put it) and how much their mind is on the job. Can they focus on another year or are they caught up in the financial woes of the club ?
Do not even attempt to have a go at me, you did enough of that last year, because I wasn't allowed to have an opinion on which players I thought should pull their fingers out and have a real go.
Enough said I look forward to another season of football and genuine individual opinions and thoughts by my fellow bulldog supporters and posters (you are all allowed to have an opinion) don't let the likes of PC bully you.
Happy Easter to you all.
PC you are a tosser, WHY ??? because you seem to think you are the only one allowed to have opinions on pre and post game highlights - I have sat back pre-season and waited until this round to see how much of a tosser you are. I have read every new post of yours and your replys to other posters for 2003.
There is a common pattern, you want to dominate the Bulldogs' board and the few posters that disagree with you, you start name calling (how old and mature are you ?).
Posters have given their opinions and thoughts on the game and you have berated them. Who died and made you football and the Western Bulldogs God ? to say that the coach is at fault for the teams' poor performances in 2003 is a joke and utter crap.
It comes down to the players (the cattle as one poster so appropriately put it) and how much their mind is on the job. Can they focus on another year or are they caught up in the financial woes of the club ?
Do not even attempt to have a go at me, you did enough of that last year, because I wasn't allowed to have an opinion on which players I thought should pull their fingers out and have a real go.
Enough said I look forward to another season of football and genuine individual opinions and thoughts by my fellow bulldog supporters and posters (you are all allowed to have an opinion) don't let the likes of PC bully you.
Happy Easter to you all.
So if we won the next 8 games in a row with a short forward line you still wouldn't like him??
I don't like having the quality midfielders in the forward line all day but browny's getting heaps of the ball and its probably gonna do better than some other options.
I think you're just looking for a reaction.
- Thread starter
- #47
If we win the next 8 games in a row with the forward line we have then i'll... see i can't think of anything as ridiculous as winning 8 games to say i'll do your comment is that obserd.
As someone pointed out else where (but you typically only reading what you want to) the whole "worst coach ever" was a little tongue in cheek, but that does not detract from the fact that his forward structure is a rabble and is a hinderence on the rest of the game plan.
Way to early to tell on Rhode.What I will say is it is foolish of people to think the game plan will be completely reversed from last season.The list was recruited to play fast,attacking skillful football and it should be encouraged to play that way.You can still play to your strengths without being unaccountable and soft.At the moment I think they look confused as to how they are supposed to play.He has taken the instinct out of there play and the mistakes are coming in high numbers because they are second guessing themselves.He just needs time to figure out the best way combine there attacking abilities with his defensive ideas.It might not come off but its to early to tell yet.For the record I wanted Laidley
Rohde has a 2-2 record at the moment. The first game he coached was won easily against a team that almost took the flag. Sure, some will say the boys were primed, but I'd argue that he dragged them up by the scruff of the neck. They had no right to win that match with all the confusion around the club that week.
His second game followed his prescribed plan of accountabilty and the Doggies had another good win. The third and fourth matches were bad losses, but after the first two I wouldn't think that Peter would be changing his strategy at all. I say the blame rests with the players and their inability to mind an opponent.
His second game followed his prescribed plan of accountabilty and the Doggies had another good win. The third and fourth matches were bad losses, but after the first two I wouldn't think that Peter would be changing his strategy at all. I say the blame rests with the players and their inability to mind an opponent.
