For many who want Michael Gardiner to play
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
For many who want Michael Gardiner to play
To those who have posted recently you will know that I think only one of MG or Ben can play and I think it should be Ben. My reason is that when they both played Saturday night our forward line just didnt function due to one of the ruckmen having to rest there quite often because of the new interchange rule. It allowed Carlton to control the ball in the backline and set up from there. They had the ball so much that they had 90 possessions more than us at half time as well as having 13 shots to our 7.
The Blues kicked the first goal of the third and then MG was subsituted. It could have been coincidence but all of a sudden we stopped their run out of the backline and even had more possessions than them by the end of the game which didnt look possible at half time.
I know Ray wasnt great when he came on but it did allow us to have a smaller forward line and it also allowed Kosi to go into the ruck for short periods and get into the game which he and Rooy didnt do in the first half. Also having Kosi, Rooy and one of the ruckman in the first hald didnt stop Carlton from getting 2 onto Rooy as i reckon they took the punt and thought our ruckmen wont be much of a danger in the forward line because they are to slow on the lead and players dont really take contested marks now.
Anyway after all my question to those who want both Ruckman to play is why will us as a team do better this week with both ruckman playing when we clearly struggled last week until one went off the ground.
The Blues kicked the first goal of the third and then MG was subsituted. It could have been coincidence but all of a sudden we stopped their run out of the backline and even had more possessions than them by the end of the game which didnt look possible at half time.
I know Ray wasnt great when he came on but it did allow us to have a smaller forward line and it also allowed Kosi to go into the ruck for short periods and get into the game which he and Rooy didnt do in the first half. Also having Kosi, Rooy and one of the ruckman in the first hald didnt stop Carlton from getting 2 onto Rooy as i reckon they took the punt and thought our ruckmen wont be much of a danger in the forward line because they are to slow on the lead and players dont really take contested marks now.
Anyway after all my question to those who want both Ruckman to play is why will us as a team do better this week with both ruckman playing when we clearly struggled last week until one went off the ground.
That again leaves a very slow forward line and that is where the Swans set up all their run from.Old Mate wrote:He should play.
I didn't agree with playing Gardiner and Mac against the Blues however the Swans are a different kettle of fish. They play tall so we can afford to play two ruckman as well as Kosi.
Mummy is a concern therefor Gardiner is a must. Mac to provide relief. Kosi if needed.
- Hurricane
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4038
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 9:24pm
- Location: The isle of Besaid, Spira
Agree 100% with this.Old Mate wrote:He should play.
I didn't agree with playing Gardiner and Mac against the Blues however the Swans are a different kettle of fish. They play tall so we can afford to play two ruckman as well as Kosi.
Mummy is a concern therefor Gardiner is a must. Mac to provide relief. Kosi if needed.
The Swines are a much differant prospect than the Brown Baggers.
Gardi and Mac will tage team in the ruck, Kosi and Roo up foward and JB to take (no)Goodes
BANG BANG
Mitsuharu Misawa 1962 - 2009.
I am vengeance....I am the night...I....AM.....BATMAN
I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass and im all out of bubblegum
I am vengeance....I am the night...I....AM.....BATMAN
I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass and im all out of bubblegum
Kosi and Roo up forward with Milne, Schneider and Armo as per normal.plugger66 wrote:That again leaves a very slow forward line and that is where the Swans set up all their run from.Old Mate wrote:He should play.
I didn't agree with playing Gardiner and Mac against the Blues however the Swans are a different kettle of fish. They play tall so we can afford to play two ruckman as well as Kosi.
Mummy is a concern therefor Gardiner is a must. Mac to provide relief. Kosi if needed.
But you cant have the ruckman changing off the bench the whole game. That only leaves 2 other spots for all the rotations. Even last week they were only on the bench for short periods.Old Mate wrote:Kosi and Roo up forward with Milne, Schneider and Armo as per normal.plugger66 wrote:That again leaves a very slow forward line and that is where the Swans set up all their run from.Old Mate wrote:He should play.
I didn't agree with playing Gardiner and Mac against the Blues however the Swans are a different kettle of fish. They play tall so we can afford to play two ruckman as well as Kosi.
Mummy is a concern therefor Gardiner is a must. Mac to provide relief. Kosi if needed.
- degruch
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8948
- Joined: Mon 19 May 2008 4:29pm
- Location: Croydonia
- Has thanked: 146 times
- Been thanked: 237 times
Moreso the Blues than the Swans, I would have thought. The Swans rely on pressure at stoppages and clearances around the ground a lot more than the Blues, and have a very dominant in-form ruckman to assist there, who was almost the difference between the two teams last time. We can't go in with the same team, the same plan and expect a different result...Swans are playing with more confidence now than we we last played them.plugger66 wrote:That again leaves a very slow forward line and that is where the Swans set up all their run from.Old Mate wrote:He should play.
I didn't agree with playing Gardiner and Mac against the Blues however the Swans are a different kettle of fish. They play tall so we can afford to play two ruckman as well as Kosi.
Mummy is a concern therefor Gardiner is a must. Mac to provide relief. Kosi if needed.
I reckon it would be a lot different to last time even if MG didnt play. Zac and Kosi playing. Other players not having gastro. Our home ground under lights in perfect conditions compared to that crap ground away last time. Kosi can ruck this time. We had no one apart from Ben last time.degruch wrote:Moreso the Blues than the Swans, I would have thought. The Swans rely on pressure at stoppages and clearances around the ground a lot more than the Blues, and have a very dominant in-form ruckman to assist there, who was almost the difference between the two teams last time. We can't go in with the same team, the same plan and expect a different result...Swans are playing with more confidence now than we we last played them.plugger66 wrote:That again leaves a very slow forward line and that is where the Swans set up all their run from.Old Mate wrote:He should play.
I didn't agree with playing Gardiner and Mac against the Blues however the Swans are a different kettle of fish. They play tall so we can afford to play two ruckman as well as Kosi.
Mummy is a concern therefor Gardiner is a must. Mac to provide relief. Kosi if needed.
So I reckon there is a huge difference without trying to make us even slower than we normally are. And Armo will play and if it isnt MG dropped then it could easily be Geary. That makes us slower again.
Saints flood back so you rarely see a congested forward line. Sure Mac and Gardy may rest forward (or back) but it doesn't mean we will always have Kosi, Roo and Mac or Gard in the forward 50 at the same time. Whilst Mac or Gard are resting deep forward Roo and / or Kosi will likely play further away from goal.plugger66 wrote:But you cant have the ruckman changing off the bench the whole game. That only leaves 2 other spots for all the rotations. Even last week they were only on the bench for short periods.Old Mate wrote:Kosi and Roo up forward with Milne, Schneider and Armo as per normal.plugger66 wrote:That again leaves a very slow forward line and that is where the Swans set up all their run from.Old Mate wrote:He should play.
I didn't agree with playing Gardiner and Mac against the Blues however the Swans are a different kettle of fish. They play tall so we can afford to play two ruckman as well as Kosi.
Mummy is a concern therefor Gardiner is a must. Mac to provide relief. Kosi if needed.
- degruch
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8948
- Joined: Mon 19 May 2008 4:29pm
- Location: Croydonia
- Has thanked: 146 times
- Been thanked: 237 times
Very true...see, you do know something.plugger66 wrote:I reckon it would be a lot different to last time even if MG didnt play. Zac and Kosi playing. Other players not having gastro. Our home ground under lights in perfect conditions compared to that crap ground away last time. Kosi can ruck this time. We had no one apart from Ben last time.degruch wrote:Moreso the Blues than the Swans, I would have thought. The Swans rely on pressure at stoppages and clearances around the ground a lot more than the Blues, and have a very dominant in-form ruckman to assist there, who was almost the difference between the two teams last time. We can't go in with the same team, the same plan and expect a different result...Swans are playing with more confidence now than we we last played them.plugger66 wrote:That again leaves a very slow forward line and that is where the Swans set up all their run from.Old Mate wrote:He should play.
I didn't agree with playing Gardiner and Mac against the Blues however the Swans are a different kettle of fish. They play tall so we can afford to play two ruckman as well as Kosi.
Mummy is a concern therefor Gardiner is a must. Mac to provide relief. Kosi if needed.
So I reckon there is a huge difference without trying to make us even slower than we normally are. And Armo will play and if it isnt MG dropped then it could easily be Geary. That makes us slower again.
Yes, Armo will come in, I'd still be surprised to Gardi dropped...who comes out for Armo? Geary would lose us speed, Ray would lose us speed, I'd prefer Blake than Fisher on Goodes, but it may not happen...which leaves Blake and Zac '5th wheels' on the backline. However, we're unlikely to substitute a full back for a ruckman. Curious.
- prwilkinson
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 1999
- Joined: Tue 21 Sep 2010 12:17pm
- Has thanked: 67 times
- Been thanked: 132 times
I thought our use of the ball changed the game more than Gardi being subbed. Everytime we moved forward in the first half we just kicked the ball straight back to them without any real lowering of the eyes or kicks to advantage.
I thought Gardiner's game itself was fine. He'll play against Sydney, we'll work over Mummy BIG time.... But yeah... it is tough to carry so many talls these days.
I thought Gardiner's game itself was fine. He'll play against Sydney, we'll work over Mummy BIG time.... But yeah... it is tough to carry so many talls these days.
- SaintPav
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 19095
- Joined: Wed 16 Jun 2010 9:24pm
- Location: Alma Road
- Has thanked: 1603 times
- Been thanked: 2018 times
To me our back line is out of whack. We have 2 tall forwards in Roo and kosi, 2 rucks in Mac and Gardiner and 4 tall backs in Gilbert, Fisher, Blake and Dawson. Gilbert and Fisher can play on mediums or in different positions however it still doesn't look right. IMO if we are to drop a tall it should be either Blake or Dawson. Unlikely though.prwilkinson wrote:I thought our use of the ball changed the game more than Gardi being subbed. Everytime we moved forward in the first half we just kicked the ball straight back to them without any real lowering of the eyes or kicks to advantage.
I thought Gardiner's game itself was fine. He'll play against Sydney, we'll work over Mummy BIG time.... But yeah... it is tough to carry so many talls these days.
- degruch
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8948
- Joined: Mon 19 May 2008 4:29pm
- Location: Croydonia
- Has thanked: 146 times
- Been thanked: 237 times
We can try dominating the clearances via the ruck, or we try shut them down...either way we're carrying risk. At least we can eliminate the shitty playing surface and gastro this time!SaintPav wrote:I have to agree with Plugger on this. Ross is taing a big risk if he decides to go this way and it could leave us exposed. If Mumford smashes Gardey, we will be in big trouble.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5021
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 10:42am
- Location: Bayside
- Has thanked: 9 times
- Been thanked: 93 times
Fair enough, the first half we launched big bombs from half back and gave our forwards no chance, they flooded back and killed us on the counter attack.
Was this the structure or the execution?
As harsh as it would be, Gardiner is a better ruckman than McEvoy and will lift our clearances as a result. We won them 34-31 on the night, what were they in the first half, anyone know?
Will he last the game, that is the big question for me.
Was this the structure or the execution?
As harsh as it would be, Gardiner is a better ruckman than McEvoy and will lift our clearances as a result. We won them 34-31 on the night, what were they in the first half, anyone know?
Will he last the game, that is the big question for me.
Luckily you have said Rooy shouldnt be Captain just once on this site. I actually wanted to know what others thought and why they wanted 2 ruckmen.SainterK wrote:If Gardiner gets a run over Ben this week Maverick, you'd think Blake retains his spot just in case?
I am quite surprised by this thread, that plugger didn't agree with two dedicated ruckmen, it's not like his expressed this sentiment already.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5021
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 10:42am
- Location: Bayside
- Has thanked: 9 times
- Been thanked: 93 times
I think Blake definitely retains his spot, I reckon he has Gwilt's defensive spot. Blake can play 3rd man up, run transition, provide chop out and at a pinch play on Goodes and even as a forward defensive if necessary. Unfortunately he can't kick like Gwilt...SainterK wrote:If Gardiner gets a run over Ben this week Maverick, you'd think Blake retains his spot just in case?
I am quite surprised by this thread, that plugger didn't agree with two dedicated ruckmen, it's not like his expressed this sentiment already.
As good as Ben will be, Gardy is the one that will get us through a heavy stoppage game. He has presence, he hits hard and hurts people, legally.
We talk about missing Lenny with regards to stoppages, I think we miss Gardy more myself.
- Devilhead
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8393
- Joined: Mon 08 Mar 2004 11:56pm
- Has thanked: 138 times
- Been thanked: 1174 times
Davis v. Magpies
Shaw v. Swans
Yarren v. Blues
Were all pretty much bog against us in the last month.
All running, linking, ball carrying half backs.
Clearly we can't afford to continue this trend, as it can cut a team to pieces.
For that reason, MG & Ben can't play in the same side.
I like them both, and was impressed by MG's game, and am a massive wrap for Mac, but it cannot work..
We have Kosi this time around to help with Mumford (who isn't a jumping ruck so kos should hold his own, and try to hurt him pushing forward)..
I'd even be inclined to drop Blake (as good as he's been) or Zac for another smaller, more offensive type.. Perhaps Gamble (as much as I don't rate him, he can make one of the running half backs a little more accountable.
As such, my changes would be:
Out: Gardi, Blake
In: Armo, Gamble
Shaw v. Swans
Yarren v. Blues
Were all pretty much bog against us in the last month.
All running, linking, ball carrying half backs.
Clearly we can't afford to continue this trend, as it can cut a team to pieces.
For that reason, MG & Ben can't play in the same side.
I like them both, and was impressed by MG's game, and am a massive wrap for Mac, but it cannot work..
We have Kosi this time around to help with Mumford (who isn't a jumping ruck so kos should hold his own, and try to hurt him pushing forward)..
I'd even be inclined to drop Blake (as good as he's been) or Zac for another smaller, more offensive type.. Perhaps Gamble (as much as I don't rate him, he can make one of the running half backs a little more accountable.
As such, my changes would be:
Out: Gardi, Blake
In: Armo, Gamble
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1224
- Joined: Mon 04 Oct 2010 11:34pm
- Has thanked: 14 times
- Been thanked: 16 times
Don't agree at all. It didn't work because Ben had an off night. We played Zac on the forward line and that worked. Ben has improved vastly this season no doubt, but he is not so flash up against the really big name ruckmen. Where as Gardi on the other hand is fantastic, but can the knee hold up? Leaves us no option but to play both of them.
- kosifantutti23
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2388
- Joined: Fri 26 Sep 2008 12:55am
- Location: Horgen
Re: For many who want Michael Gardiner to play
According to the AFL match centreplugger66 wrote:
The Blues kicked the first goal of the third and then MG was subsituted. It could have been coincidence but all of a sudden we stopped their run out of the backline and even had more possessions than them by the end of the game which didnt look possible at half time.
Carlton 424
St Kilda 352
Are you just making stuff up?
Furtius Quo Rdelious