Kosi at FF? Why?

[rodgerfox]

I keep reading that Kosi should play FF this year.

And I even read somewhere from a hack journo that the club does plan for this to be the case.

The question I ask is - Why?

The second question I'd ask in relation to this is - What would you expect from him at FF in terms of output?


I see FF in modern footy as almost the departure lounge. Clubs generally pinch hit at FF, or carry old hacks there. Gardiner played his last game at WC on one leg at FF, so did Luke Darcy at the Dogs.

The real forward posi these days is a roaming CHF. We're lucky enough to have one. A real good one.

I think FF is dead.

I also think it's interesting that the thought is to fill the void left by the Big G - with a similar player. Whereas others believe we became too focussed on a two pronged forward line.


So, for those wanting to waste potentially the best big man in the game in the goal square - what are your reasons behind it?

[yipper]

I actually think that a good FF is worth his weight in gold. Sure some clubs have used hacks at FF - The doggies used Darcy? True - and they flopped. But good FF's will help you win a game of footy as long as you have other good forwards around you. Gehrig was a good FF and played in a team that has a top class CHF. Kossi has enormous ability - both as a follower / ruck but also as a key marking forward. He could actually kick 70plus goals playing at FF all year. However, I reckon he will be rotated around where we need him according to who we play and where. Big, strong mobile targets can straighten the gameplan up, especially where there is good midfield in place. I'm not sure what the plans are for 2008 - but he will be at FF a fair bit of the time I reckon.

[Oh When the Saints]

Good post. You always challenge the accepted line which is good.


Having a lead-up CHF and a deep FF has worked for the Saints for the past 4-5 years in terms of contributing a large part of our score (about 35-40% over the past 3 years).

Thus with the retirement of one part of that combination, people naturally turn to a player who has the attributes requireed to play the position.

Why Kosi?
Every time Kosi has played at full-forward (Banger's 350th being a good example) he has succeeded.

So there is no reason to suggest he wouldn't succeed again, and he is quick on a lead (fast 20m time), has strong hands, is a reliable kick and can take a good contested mark.

All the qualities you look for in a full-forward.

Further to that - and here's the crucial difference with Gehrig - Kosi is capable of switching to a roaming role up the ground with a lot of success, and this allows you to play Gehrig deeper.

In effect, IMO I see Kosi and Rooey as interchangeable next year in terms of their roles in the forwardline.

The key question is can he contribute more to the team as a ruckman who drifts forward, or as a permanent FF?

I believe it to be about equal - whilst he is valuable in the ruck, IMO Kosi would be most settled in a permanent position, and it would give him a focus and a role that suits him. In short, I think his total contribution to the team would be similar if he was playing up forward.

Do we need 2 tall blokes up forward?

No, but if not then we must have a talented enough smaller-forward line to cover.

i.e. Kangaroos had Edwards, S. Grant, Corey Jones, Harvey and McMahon - all solid small forwards.

Does St Kilda have enough quality "other" forwards to kick a big enough score?

No - Schneider, Milne, X. Clarke and a Charlie Gardiner-type would have to kick 30 goals each for this to be the case IMO.

If we could get 120 goals out of those four players (or four others), then you wouldn't need to play 2 tall key forwards.

Edit: BTW, I would expect Kosi to average 2 goals per game next year at FF (45+ for the year)

[Armoooo]

Why?
See our game against West Coast and then our round 22 clash with Richmond.
Also if any team leaves Kosi one on one he will kick 4+ goals almost every single game (obviously he will be up and down and could struggle agaisnt the superstars in Glass and Scarlett) but either way he is likely to either take a defender off Roo or kick a bag himself.

IMO
Gilbert Riewoldt Xavier
Schneider Koschitzke Milne
looks a lot better than
C.Jones Riewoldt Xavier
Voss Gehrig Milne
or
Hamill Riewoldt Voss
Guerra Gehrig Milne

[rodgerfox]

Having a lead-up CHF and a deep FF has worked for the Saints for the past 4-5 years in terms of contributing a large part of our score (about 35-40% over the past 3 years).

Has our scoring been a result of the forward structure? Or the midfield?

I'd argue that you could play Teflon and B4Eva in the forward line and still kick a good score if our midfield was on top.

Why Kosi?
Every time Kosi has played at full-forward (Banger's 350th being a good example) he has succeeded.

So there is no reason to suggest he wouldn't succeed again, and he is quick on a lead (fast 20m time), has strong hands, is a reliable kick and can take a good contested mark.

A problem with Kossie, and the good FBs found it out quite quickly - is that he needs a run at the contest. Against Essendon, when Mal Michael pulled his pants down, he simply blocked his run at the contest. It rendered Kosi useless.

This concerned me. I actually don't think he's a very good at FF. He's a good footballer who can play FF at times, but I don't think he's a natural FF.

The key question is can he contribute more to the team as a ruckman who drifts forward, or as a permanent FF?

That is the question.

And I'd answer it no. The games he has dominated were around the ground, and drifting into the forward line.

[Oh When the Saints]

Having a lead-up CHF and a deep FF has worked for the Saints for the past 4-5 years in terms of contributing a large part of our score (about 35-40% over the past 3 years).

Has our scoring been a result of the forward structure? Or the midfield?

I'd argue that you could play Teflon and B4Eva in the forward line and still kick a good score if our midfield was on top.

No doubt a good midfield improves the returns of forwards (see Mooney kicking 50 with silver service this year).

Our scoring has been a result of a good midfield delivering it to a superb forwardline.

You might kick 50 goals if you're a hack with an awesome midfield, but you don't win two Colemans.

Our scoring was not structural, but based on the ability of players who simply beat their opponents most weeks.

I believe Ross Lyon is trying to make our scoring more structural with a more deliberate setting up of the forwardline to give us a better chance of scoring. It has worked at times but not consistently yet.

Another argument is ... if a fully fit Steven King was rucking, then is he better in the ruck than Kosi?

IMO yes.

Therefore Kosi is squeezed of the ruck, and he's too valuable to have sitting on the bench. So you play him forward.

[Riewoldting]

So, for those wanting to waste potentially the best big man in the game in the goal square - what are your reasons behind it?

It's a loaded question; you're asking people to justify "wasting" potentially the best big man in the game in the goal square, when those that advocate playing him in that position don't view it as a "waste" at all.

The underlying rationale for playing someone like Koschitzke at full-forward is that you are confident in his ability to beat his opponent in a one-on-one contest. That is the essence of what footy is traditionally about and it has gradually been eroded over the years by tactics such as double-teaming and flooding, which has led to teams finding other avenues to goal.

But that doesn’t change the fact that if you have a player capable of beating an opponent in a one-on-one, you should instruct him to try to isolate that contest, and instruct his team-mates to kick to that contest, putting their faith in the ability of that player to win the footy.

This was the basis behind playing Gehrig at full-forward for many years. It’s why Darren Jarman was played at full-forward by the Crows, Johnson is played at full-forward by the Dogs, and Neitz was played at full-forward by the Demons. Essendon has for many years based its forward line around Matthew Lloyd. Geelong and North Melbourne built consistently winning performance and finals appearances around playing Ablett and Carey at full-forward and centre half-forward respectively. Their teammates just had to kick it in the general vicinity, and seven or eight times out of 10 those players would goal.

Although the trend has been moving away from 100-goal full-forwards for some time, that should not be used as a basis to argue that the modern full-forward is redundant. As long as goals from other avenues make up the shortfall, does it matter that a full-forward might only kick 60 or 80? If the team wins a premiership with a 70-goal full-forward, will it be hollow because he didn’t crack the ton?

This is the very reason why Carlton has had a full-forward at or near the top of the goalkicking table, yet hasn’t been able to drag itself off the foot of the ladder: lack of other forward options. How many goals have been kicked by Hocking and Riccardi crumbing off Ablett, by Stevens and Allison crumbing off Carey, and by Milne crumbing off Gehrig? With the Blues it’s Fevola or bust.

St Kilda clearly has more forward options than the Blues, and in addition has traded to add to its forward stocks. It might further add to it via the drafts. It also has a whole summer of closed training sessions to trial new and improved forward structures. This all suggests that St Kilda is planning something far more comprehensive than a sole avenue to goal. I think it is shortsighted to simply assume that Koschitzke would be a “straight swapâ€

[bigcarl]

In my opinion it would be a waste to play him anywhere but in the goalsquare.

agree. far better than using him for hack work in the ruck when he's not a particularly good tap ruckman anyway.

so, why play him at ff? simple really. apart from riewoldt (who is comfortably settled at chf) he's the best candidate for the role of spearhead

[rodgerfox]

Therefore Kosi is squeezed of the ruck, and he's too valuable to have sitting on the bench. So you play him forward.

Kosi plays his own posi. A new position which I just invented called 'Kosi-Half-Back'.

Generally fills a hole in defence, and drifts forward when he feels the time is right.

He effectively plays the old 'kick behind play' role, with a pointy edge where he has the green light to be a 'kick ahead of play' too.

[rodgerfox]

[quote="Riewoldting"]
You say that full-forward is dead, that clubs generally pinch-hit at full-forward, or carry old hacks there. While this might be true, don’t tarnish the position with the decision of a coach to play a player in that position. Would the pinch-hitters or “old hacksâ€

[BAM! (shhhh)]

I keep reading that Kosi should play FF this year.

And I even read somewhere from a hack journo that the club does plan for this to be the case.

The question I ask is - Why?

I agree with you. I think this is going to waste Kosi's best abilities, that the impact of a mobile ruckman in the midfield exceeds that of a FF, and that FF as a whole is not overly important in the modern game - the team makes the FF much more than the FF makes the team as was once the case. I also think Kosi's greatest abilities are in the middle rather than up front.

But as you say (or at least the article does...), it appears Kosi will play FF in '08.

I'll let it pan out and fail in reality before I vent my spleen at Ross Lyon for not realising that my way was better all along and refer to this post as evidence of my genious. And of course if it works brilliantly and Kosi wins the Coleman, this post doesn't exist and I was on board with the plan the entire time since I would never question the knowledge of the Ross (These are not the droids you're looking for).

[busso mick]

[quote="Riewoldting"]
It's a loaded question; you're asking people to justify "wasting" potentially the best big man in the game in the goal square, when those that advocate playing him in that position don't view it as a "waste" at all.

The underlying rationale for playing someone like Koschitzke at full-forward is that you are confident in his ability to beat his opponent in a one-on-one contest. That is the essence of what footy is traditionally about and it has gradually been eroded over the years by tactics such as double-teaming and flooding, which has led to teams finding other avenues to goal.

But that doesn’t change the fact that if you have a player capable of beating an opponent in a one-on-one, you should instruct him to try to isolate that contest, and instruct his team-mates to kick to that contest, putting their faith in the ability of that player to win the footy.

This was the basis behind playing Gehrig at full-forward for many years. It’s why Darren Jarman was played at full-forward by the Crows, Johnson is played at full-forward by the Dogs, and Neitz was played at full-forward by the Demons. Essendon has for many years based its forward line around Matthew Lloyd. Geelong and North Melbourne built consistently winning performance and finals appearances around playing Ablett and Carey at full-forward and centre half-forward respectively. Their teammates just had to kick it in the general vicinity, and seven or eight times out of 10 those players would goal.

Although the trend has been moving away from 100-goal full-forwards for some time, that should not be used as a basis to argue that the modern full-forward is redundant. As long as goals from other avenues make up the shortfall, does it matter that a full-forward might only kick 60 or 80? If the team wins a premiership with a 70-goal full-forward, will it be hollow because he didn’t crack the ton?

This is the very reason why Carlton has had a full-forward at or near the top of the goalkicking table, yet hasn’t been able to drag itself off the foot of the ladder: lack of other forward options. How many goals have been kicked by Hocking and Riccardi crumbing off Ablett, by Stevens and Allison crumbing off Carey, and by Milne crumbing off Gehrig? With the Blues it’s Fevola or bust.

St Kilda clearly has more forward options than the Blues, and in addition has traded to add to its forward stocks. It might further add to it via the drafts. It also has a whole summer of closed training sessions to trial new and improved forward structures. This all suggests that St Kilda is planning something far more comprehensive than a sole avenue to goal. I think it is shortsighted to simply assume that Koschitzke would be a “straight swapâ€

[Go Sainters Go]

Rodger, do you ever have anything positive to say, is there anything the club does that you agree with? You seem to me to be the knocker of all knockers.

[joffaboy]

I expect Kosi to be playing FF for the Scorps because our new 100 goal FF - Charlie Gardiner will be in the seniors.

Mabye Kosi can crack it for a spot somewhere elses in the team

[karnaby]

Rodger, do you ever have anything positive to say, is there anything the club does that you agree with? You seem to me to be the knocker of all knockers.

Sorry but I disagree, in this instance & some others that I've noticed recently, rodgerfox has sought to generate discussion on legitimate points of interest. Kosi's performance next season will potentially have a significant impact on how the team goes throughout the year, discussion about how best to use his talents is a lot better than some of the boring rot that we're left to discuss in the off-season.

[Saint Mik]

FF is for hacks and blokes on the way out you reckon Rodgerfox?

Dont waste Kossi there you think its best to play someone with a frame like G's deep in the goal square who is slow and on one leg?

FF is dead and a waste of time!!!!

Bring out the RIX he seems perfect for the position

[mad saint guy]

It isn't like a full forward spends 100% of the game inside 50.

If Kosi was played predominantly as a forward, I would expect him to be a marking target inside 60m for about 65% of the game, rucking for 15% of the game, up the ground/flooding for 5% and on the bench for 5%.

If he could play that role and average 15 possessions, 8 marks, 2.5 goals and 8 hitouts per game then he will be a key contributer.

Since we've got King, Gardiner and Rix on the list I don't see why we should let Kosi battle away and wear himself out in ruck contests (whoch he isn't very good at) when we could throw in more expendable players who would do a better job. And that would leave us with Riewoldt being triple-teamed every game.

[Riewoldting]

Kosi plays his own posi. A new position which I just invented called 'Kosi-Half-Back'.

Oh dear.

One point on Fevola though, is that he kicks goals from anywhere within 70m. And he kicks alot of them on short leads outside the 50m.

Most defenders will let you have those touches, because you won't score. It doesn't hurt. With Fevola he can. But in doing that, he's really becoming that roaming CHF I spoke about - he doesn't do alot of his work in the goal square.

Rodgerfox I think you’ve just proved my point, or at least damaged your own. Fevola is a full-forward that often MUST venture to 40m out and beyond to win his footy, because he relies so heavily on beating his opponent on the lead. But that’s OK, because he can dob them from anywhere within 70m (with a breeze; 69.9m is a bloody long way).

There’s no point in our best ball winners getting the footy that far out from goal unless they can spot up someone within goal-scoring range. If our best one-on-one ball winners are Roo and Kosi, but for different reasons (Roo for height + pace + endurance, Kosi for height + strength + marking ability), why not play the running ball winner out of CHF, and the strong, marking ball winner out of FF?

If Riewoldt is leading and marking between 50m and 70m but has no one to kick it to, why would the opposition care? Just give him a cheap possession. He certainly can’t kick a goal from that distance, and would more than likely turn the ball over trying to spot up Milne, Schneider or X Clarke.

What if Riewoldt is leading and marking between 50m and 70m, but then can turn around and kick it to a 6’6â€

[fonz_#15]

Rodger, do you ever have anything positive to say, is there anything the club does that you agree with? You seem to me to be the knocker of all knockers.

at least he is generating discussion..and who said the club was going to play kosi at FF anyway? We havent heard the saints say kosi will play there.

[Shaggy]

Kosi plays his own posi. A new position which I just invented called 'Kosi-Half-Back'.

Oh dear.

Works for the Swans with Adam Goodes so I wouldn't be too dismissive.

The same arguements you raise for Kosi to FF can be raised for Goodes being moved to FF for the Swans. Goodes averages as many goals as Kosi per game.

But Goodes is not a FF. He is a great reader of the play. FFs on the other hand need to make the play.

The best FFs nearly all have the same attributes: they are fast over 10 to 20 meters, and tend to be bulky and extra strong to push players off and open up packs. They are of a reasonable height but rarely tall.

The only tall I can ever remember making a decent FF was Salmon. But coaches continue to try mobile talls at FF to their detriment - Ottens, Simmonds, Darcy, Gardiner have all failed when tried as permanent FFs to name a few in recent years.

You could not get more opposite positions on the footy field than being a follower compared to FF. FF is a very restrictive position and pace and strength are the key attributes required to play it and open up opportunities ... not height (IMO).

G-Train was a wonderful FF for us but he was a very different type of player to Kosi.

[Riewoldting]

Kosi plays his own posi. A new position which I just invented called 'Kosi-Half-Back'.

Oh dear.

Works for the Swans with Adam Goodes so I wouldn't be too dismissive.

And rodgerfox didn't just invent it, so I would be.

[Teflon]

Kosi plays his own posi. A new position which I just invented called 'Kosi-Half-Back'.

Oh dear.

One point on Fevola though, is that he kicks goals from anywhere within 70m. And he kicks alot of them on short leads outside the 50m.

Most defenders will let you have those touches, because you won't score. It doesn't hurt. With Fevola he can. But in doing that, he's really becoming that roaming CHF I spoke about - he doesn't do alot of his work in the goal square.

Rodgerfox I think you’ve just proved my point, or at least damaged your own. Fevola is a full-forward that often MUST venture to 40m out and beyond to win his footy, because he relies so heavily on beating his opponent on the lead. But that’s OK, because he can dob them from anywhere within 70m (with a breeze; 69.9m is a bloody long way).

There’s no point in our best ball winners getting the footy that far out from goal unless they can spot up someone within goal-scoring range. If our best one-on-one ball winners are Roo and Kosi, but for different reasons (Roo for height + pace + endurance, Kosi for height + strength + marking ability), why not play the running ball winner out of CHF, and the strong, marking ball winner out of FF?

If Riewoldt is leading and marking between 50m and 70m but has no one to kick it to, why would the opposition care? Just give him a cheap possession. He certainly can’t kick a goal from that distance, and would more than likely turn the ball over trying to spot up Milne, Schneider or X Clarke.

What if Riewoldt is leading and marking between 50m and 70m, but then can turn around and kick it to a 6’6â€

[st.byron]

Good topic Roger. Since we were the lowest scoring team this year, I'm sure RL will be looking to increase the spread of goal kickers next year. It hasn't helped that none of of our top mid-fielders has the knack of regularly kicking goals, increasing our reliance on Roo and Fraser and Milney who seems to have lost his edge.
Now that Fraser's gone and we've recruited Schneider, IMO there's a good argument to play Kosi at FF as part of a more potent forward set-up. Kosi's a great mark, is strong and quick. He'll have Milne and Schneider and perhaps X working around him. And of course Roo at CHF.
As Riewoldting has said, Roo's possessions 70 or 80 from goal will have more value with Kosi as a go to at FF.
Look at it from the other side of the glass Roger. If we don't play Kosi at FF, how do you see the forward set-up working? Who's going to kick the goals? Roo will kick a few bags, Schneider and Milne will chip in 20 - 40 each, but where else are they going to come from? For all of your saying that FF is dead, Fraser kicked I think 59 goals this year. We don't have a Judd or Hodge, a class mid that kicks plenty of goals. Where will the goals from without a target like Kosi at FF?

[Broodruff]

I tend to agree with you that the traditional full forward position has all but disappeared from the game.

That being the Frazer Gherig, Tony Lockett full forwards
I think that these days, its hard to find someone big enough, quick enough and equipped with the skills, to make a truley effective FF.

Its late at night and I'm mentally alseep, so forgive me if I'm wrong:
But I'm not quite sure there are many players out there with the height, speed, skills and ability to read the play, quite like Kosi. He's someone who can stand tall, take a big contested mark; but unlike the traditional FF's of old, he has the ability to run around and contribute outside of the goalsquare

The big-bellied lumbering oafs of full-forwards are well and truley gone, they have stepped aside for the likes of Kosi.

[karnak]

Kosi will play CHB imo.

Don't believe we have our FF yet.