Ben Long forward

[groupie1]

You all will criticize this mercilessly, and the time is not now until he shows some form in the twos, but give it some thought:

He's lost his spot at half-back to Sinclair
He's been deplorable this year, panicky at times
He can kick goals
We can't afford to carry 3 small forwards due to lack of midfield depth

and most important: HE CAN FLY

Seems our forward line could do with a pack cruncher, high flying type player...

Thoughts? Worth a try?

[mad saint guy]

Was no good up forward in the past, don't see why anything is different now. I say just go with 2 small forwards and rotate mids through

[Scollop]

Was no good up forward in the past, don't see why anything is different now. I say just go with 2 small forwards and rotate mids through

He could have a blinder and do what Cyril was doing with 10 meaningful possessions and you'd still call him no good!!

He has more ability to create opportunities for others and stick his tackles in the forward line AND kick straight for goal than a couple of others who are getting games

Long should be a permanent fixture in the team if he is fit and if he is training to standards. Play him in the ruck for all I care (like Marlion Pickett is doing for Richmond). I bet you he'll offer more than some of our other mids. Or... play him off the wing or half back as the receiver and see if he can do the same as Hill. Gees, how hard is it to receive the footy 20 times a game??

Just on the Hill or Billings or Seb Ross style of player, we have seen with Sinclair that it's not that hard to be in the best performing players or highest possession getters when you are the player nominated by the coach to receive the footy. I think part of the reason that Hill has not been as effective in games is because it is too obvious that we are looking to play through him

[groupie1]

I agree about the 2 smalls (hopefully, when in form, Butler and Higgins)... I remember Ben Long as being unpredictable and flighty as a forward. He can certainly kick the ball and I'm just thinking he may create some fear and havoc with his physicality and his ability to jump. He don't have a flyer in the forward line (Ryder and Marshall are the only 2 we really have)

[groupie1]

Was no good up forward in the past, don't see why anything is different now. I say just go with 2 small forwards and rotate mids through

He could have a blinder and do what Cyril was doing with 10 meaningful possessions and you'd still call him no good!!

He has more ability to create opportunities for others and stick his tackles in the forward line AND kick straight for goal than a couple of others who are getting games

Long should be a permanent fixture in the team if he is fit and if he is training to standards. Play him in the ruck for all I care (like Marlion Pickett is doing for Richmond). I bet you he'll offer more than some of our other mids. Or... play him off the wing or half back as the receiver and see if he can do the same as Hill. Gees, how hard is it to receive the footy 20 times a game??

Just on the Hill or Billings or Seb Ross style of player, we have seen with Sinclair that it's not that hard to be in the best performing players or highest possession getters when you are the player nominated by the coach to receive the footy. I think part of the reason that Hill has not been as effective in games is because it is too obvious that we are looking to play through him

So you reckon it's worth a try?

And I totally agree its blindingly obvious to opposition coaches we're going to look for B. Hill ... which speaks to some poor coaching nouse among us.

[groupie1]

"He has more ability to create opportunities for others and stick his tackles in the forward line AND kick straight for goal than a couple of others who are getting games"

I really agree with this. And he's physically brutal. He's not Flying Ryan maybe, but he's one of the few Saints who can fly and that brings a level of chaos in the F50 (and the impetus is largely b/c he's not playing well in D50 and has lost his spot)

[mad saint guy]

Long played his first 30 games as a forward for a return of 21.15 while averaging 10.3 disposals, 0.3 goal assists and 2.9 tackles per game. He also gave away 29 free kicks. Do we need to return to this?

[groupie1]

Long played his first 30 games as a forward for a return of 21.15 while averaging 10.3 disposals, 0.3 goal assists and 2.9 tackles per game. He also gave away 29 free kicks. Do we need to return to this?

No, absolutely not.
I'd expect his tackle count would be better; the free kicks is a disaster; but 21 goals in 30 games plus a goal assist per 3 games is a good start. I reckon his time down back would make him a more effective forward. (and 21/15 isn't bad at all, by our standards
)

[bangaulegend]

Didn't he kick 7 goals in a VFL final for the Dog's a few years back ?

[PADDLEPOP1001]

Correct he was recruited as a forward & he kicked those goals in a winning granny,surely worth a shot!

[Yorkeys]

Not a kid any more. Might well give Sinclair's football and fitness advisers a call. Not just stalled but going backwards even though given plenty of chances others might not get. Possibly needs to decide if he really wants to play firsts, looks preoccupied on the field, relying on athleticism and random proximity to the ball rather than putting himself in position and nailing disposal. Perhaps something going on outside of footy is troubling him, stopping him from focusing. Too big a risk to keep playing him until he can show some improvement. Terrible waste of talent. Change of club might do him good, but that would be a sad outcome.

[The_Dud]

With his talent he should be in the team. If it's not working at half back right now then try something different, the year is lost anyway so may as well find out who can really make it and who can't.

[skeptic]

I don’t see the harm in trying it again

It’s not like he can do much worse.

[freely]

We should play him forward but get him to pretend he's still playing back. See if he can manage to 'turn it over' to Membrey or King.

[whiskers3614]

We should play him forward but get him to pretend he's still playing back. See if he can manage to 'turn it over' to Membrey or King.

Never saw this bloke's good points, apart from aggression!
Maybe graft him onto Hill?

[B.M]

He’s been s***

[Wayne42]

Hopefully B. Long can become a very good player for Sandy.

[spert]

Anyone who can physically win a contest and get a football in their hands in order to have a shot at goal is worth a try. Long could be played deep in the forward line so when he gives away yet another dumb-as$ed free kick, it won't do as much damage. I wish we should have kept Parker and just played him into some kind of form.

[shanegrambeau]

He did that role and failed...hence moved back.

Parker was our high flying, unpredictable arrack player up there last year. The one who doesn’t necessarily mesh with team structure, flies up against friendly players etc.,

I also suggested Long as a forward on here, and no traction among the fans!

But perhaps, someone here knows of a precedent - a player who is a bit of a loose nut like Long, who suddenly becomes an asset? I imagine he must be difficult to coach game day. I think we kept picking Kent, though far worse than Long, because he would follow the plan, even if minimally effective.

[Scollop]

He did that role and failed...hence moved back.

Really!? That’s how AFL clubs operate do they? Grab a player that’s ‘failing’ and find a new role for them. Jesus fc. Some of the crap on this site never ceases to amaze

What if an astute new panel of footy people that came in after Richo, including the new senior coach saw attributes like elite decision making and effective disposal under pressure and they gave Long the role at half back because they realised we need playmakers and defenders with the ability to set us up for attacking plays...

What if the reason he was starved of opportunity for success in the forward line was because the whole forward line was starved of opportunity (same sort of crap was happening here on this forum with criticism of Josh Bruce). Most young players takes
a while to find their feet, don't they?

Ratts instilled trust in the young player and highlighted his strengths and that inturn gave Longy belief that he was important to the team and valued for what he could bring and guess what? Long delivered

Here's the thing right.. We were a winning team and Longy was an important cog in our winning machine. As soon as the wheels fall off the usual suspects start looking for scapegoats. I think the coach’s roles need to be to get the best out of him again. Maybe they are failing in this respect.

Whether it's stuff in his personal life or whether he has issues with his form or whether he's not getting the support from the leaders or if there's issues with coach player relationships, I reckon we are a better team when Long is fit and firing

[shanegrambeau]

He did that role and failed...hence moved back.

Really!? That’s how AFL clubs operate do they? Grab a player that’s ‘failing’ and find a new role for them. Jesus fc. Some of the crap on this site never ceases to amaze

What if an astute new panel of footy people that came in after Richo, including the new senior coach saw attributes like elite decision making and effective disposal under pressure and they gave Long the role at half back because they realised we need playmakers and defenders with the ability to set us up for attacking plays...

What if the reason he was starved of opportunity for success in the forward line was because the whole forward line was starved of opportunity (same sort of crap was happening here on this forum with criticism of Josh Bruce). Most young players takes
a while to find their feet, don't they?

Ratts instilled trust in the young player and highlighted his strengths and that inturn gave Longy belief that he was important to the team and valued for what he could bring and guess what? Long delivered

Here's the thing right.. We were a winning team and Longy was an important cog in our winning machine. As soon as the wheels fall off the usual suspects start looking for scapegoats. I think the coach’s roles need to be to get the best out of him again. Maybe they are failing in this respect.

Whether it's stuff in his personal life or whether he has issues with his form or whether he's not getting the support from the leaders or if there's issues with coach player relationships, I reckon we are a better team when Long is fit and firing

[bangaulegend]

He did that role and failed...hence moved back.

Really!? That’s how AFL clubs operate do they? Grab a player that’s ‘failing’ and find a new role for them. Jesus fc. Some of the crap on this site never ceases to amaze

What if an astute new panel of footy people that came in after Richo, including the new senior coach saw attributes like elite decision making and effective disposal under pressure and they gave Long the role at half back because they realised we need playmakers and defenders with the ability to set us up for attacking plays...

What if the reason he was starved of opportunity for success in the forward line was because the whole forward line was starved of opportunity (same sort of crap was happening here on this forum with criticism of Josh Bruce). Most young players takes
a while to find their feet, don't they?

Ratts instilled trust in the young player and highlighted his strengths and that inturn gave Longy belief that he was important to the team and valued for what he could bring and guess what? Long delivered

Here's the thing right.. We were a winning team and Longy was an important cog in our winning machine. As soon as the wheels fall off the usual suspects start looking for scapegoats. I think the coach’s roles need to be to get the best out of him again. Maybe they are failing in this respect.

Whether it's stuff in his personal life or whether he has issues with his form or whether he's not getting the support from the leaders or if there's issues with coach player relationships, I reckon we are a better team when Long is fit and firing

Thats the Ben Long I want to see

[repta]

Need to try him somewhere. Been very ordinary this year.
He is going to be gifted a game this week due to poor outcomes from the game last week. Therefore should give him a go in the forward line.

[mad saint guy]

Ratts instilled trust in the young player and highlighted his strengths and that inturn gave Longy belief that he was important to the team and valued for what he could bring and guess what? Long delivered

Here's the thing right.. We were a winning team and Longy was an important cog in our winning machine. As soon as the wheels fall off the usual suspects start looking for scapegoats. I think the coach’s roles need to be to get the best out of him again. Maybe they are failing in this respect.

Whether it's stuff in his personal life or whether he has issues with his form or whether he's not getting the support from the leaders or if there's issues with coach player relationships, I reckon we are a better team when Long is fit and firing

Long certainly had his best season in 2020 at half back but he was by no means a world-beater. He still struggled to get much of the footy and gave away too many undisciplined free kicks. Sinclair has taken his role and ran with it. Sincs offers more skill and composure with the ball, doesn't give away dumb frees and gets more of the footy. Long has that madman intensity but that's a double-edged sword which can be costly in defence.

[Scollop]

Long has that madman intensity but that's a double-edged sword which can be costly in defence.

Blokes who play on the edge with hardness and aggression are going to help you win against the top teams and eventually to help you win finals. It takes good coaches to help a young player understand the discipline required to retain that intensity and play with controlled aggression.

I would rather intensity than blokes who play with a softcock mentality and don’t put their body on the line or don’t go hard at the contest. Long is taller and has better ability to contest in the air. He’s also more agile than half the blokes in the team

I noticed you gave Battle one of your minus votes. I watched the game carefully. He was far from the fifth worst on ground. I don’t count soft possessions and easy disposal stats from handball receives.

I’d rather a guy who has passion and cares and goes in hard instead of a lazy timid bloke in the team. There were Saints in that match against the Dogs that were probably favoured to win loose ground balls but they chose not to put their head over the footy. Butler and Billings were woeful in that second quarter. I’d love to see both Billings and Butlers stats for that second quarter.

When Bontempelli was hot in that second quarter, who would you have go to him? Sinclair or Clark or Brad Hill? Wilkie and Webster seemed to share the duties when Bont lined up or started as a forward but sometimes the Bont would drift forward as a mid and that’s when he hurt us. That’s where Long is a better option

Our defenders were hard at it and constantly under the pump in that second quarter, but they ALL gave away costly frees. Hill was trying to fend off and got caught. Wilkie gave away a dumb free against the Dogs by grabbing little Cody Weightman high and worrying about him jumping for a mark when there were talls to cover the marking contest in a pack situation. Frawley gave away frees because he couldn’t jump or because he wasn’t fast enough to get a fist on the ball.

Others gave away frees deep in defence after getting caught red handed with the footy and not being able to dispose of it... point is all defenders give away frees. It’s normal and it happens when we are getting smashed in defence.