We need one of Raph or Gwilt

[skeptic]

some of you guys really make me laugh... no need to get nasty

MB's actually saying that we need 1 more medium forward and 1 less backman for a more balanced team

FWIW i agree

I also agree that atm Raph and Gwilt are the 2 best candidates for that role
Lynch is the smoky

I don't think the focus of this thread is "I want to drop Dawson"... that's MB opinion of who he thinks our weakest backman is... other ppl lean towards Blake (me+ others) or Baker

I think it's a fair point however that we can't have Hudghton, Dawson, Blake, Gilbert, Fisher, Baker and Goddard all i the team as backman.

Blake, Hudghton and Dawson... all only play in the backline and don't provide us with enough run but are all decent KPP

Baker is in a similar category to the 3 above but plays or medium to smaller, agile players

Gilbert and Fisher are both excellent elite running backman flanks but have not shown that they're good enough to play up the ground or in the midfield... tough but true

Goddard's a proven player who is very versatile who we can't afford to only use as a backman. He's an awesome medium sized forward and a decent midfielder but he can at times be tagged out of those positions and hence be more effective on a HBF

the bottom line is that having 7 backman cost us. It basically means that one of Gilbo, Goddard or Fisher plays out of position to cover a Gwilt or Raph so that we can fit an extra non running player in the team
It means that if Goddard goes forward, he has to stay forward.

The debate here really is can we have all of Baker, Hudghton, Blake and Dawson in the team?
iMO the answer is no unless we use Blake as a back up ruckman til King gets back

[Thinline]

Reasonable to suggest Zac is dropped???!!!
No, it is NOT reasonable,it is plain LUNACY!!!

91% kicking effieciency,highest in the league. Was an integral part of the first 9 rounds record breaking defence. The tightest defence the game has ever seen in it's history. Yet,some of you people,want to drop one of the revelations of this tight ass backline! What's more,some of you are suggesting we drop this revealtion for Raph Clarke??? To steal a phrase,FAIR DINKUM!

Mate I didn't get past the 'drop Zac' bit.

That, with the greatest respect, is akin to saying the Cats will drop Scarlett because this week we don't want a full back who runs...

It's responses like the bolded that leave me with respect for thought out ideas against the grain like the OP.

Dropping Dawson akin to dropping Scarlett? Scarlett is one of the short list of defenders who you're comfortable with against any key forward in the comp - Glass and Max being the other two. Scarlett is also the best rebounding fullback going round... the defense of Max, the rebound of Gilbert, and the marking of Fisher, that's Matthew Scarlett.

Some perspective on the stats - Dawson's efficiency (91.72 according to afl.com) is ridiculously good... it's also strongly affected by him always taking the safe option. In fact, when double checking the stats, the guy who I would have considered dropping in Dawson's place that astounded me even more was Jason Blake - 88% eff, 7 I50 and 17R50. Blake's never been the greatest disposal, but the inside 50s (Zac has 2) say he's doing some damage as well as linking up. If we look at clangers and frees against, Dawson's lower in both... but probably expectable, given the scenario. FWIW, after only 2 games, Max has yet to count himself out of this hit-a-target-fest with a DE of 92.86... again, we're not exactly talking about a guy pinpointing the FF amidst a flood, and frankly getting those numbers out of Blake and Max suggests the team's very good at providing easy options rather than any of them being superb playmakers.

We can absolutely guarantee that if Zac spends much time up front, that amazing number is going to fall off a cliff, and amazing as it is, in context of the group of players we're talking about, it doesn't make the decision for us.

Zac's been a revelation, but this is not what would be pressuring his spot.
Nor would the pressure be coming from Raph or Gwilt (or insert player x) individually.
It would be coming from team balance.

Dawson v Blake v Hudghton - is there room for all 3, or are we better off with a midsize forward or running defender?

For the time being, bigcarl's option makes more sense to me - move Blake into 2nd ruck and drop McEvoy if we want a change of balance... but that probably only delays the debate rather than solving it.

Mate 99% of the time I read your stuff and think 'this guy knows his stuff backwards' and then I read the above and go 'WTF?'.

I wasn't being nasty at all. I just thing the shift Dawson theorising is ridiculous. And for good reason. Dawson is an exceptional fullback. Fullstop. His form has been breathtakingly good and he has been there beginning to end.

My point, I think valid, is that FB is a specialist role and every good team has one.

Fiddle with the ribs, keep the spine.

Baker or Blake or Raph depending on opposition.

McEvoy stays in ruck until King comes back.

[BAM! (shhhh)]

Mate I didn't get past the 'drop Zac' bit.

That, with the greatest respect, is akin to saying the Cats will drop Scarlett because this week we don't want a full back who runs...

It's responses like the bolded that leave me with respect for thought out ideas against the grain like the OP.

Dropping Dawson akin to dropping Scarlett? Scarlett is one of the short list of defenders who you're comfortable with against any key forward in the comp - Glass and Max being the other two. Scarlett is also the best rebounding fullback going round... the defense of Max, the rebound of Gilbert, and the marking of Fisher, that's Matthew Scarlett.

Some perspective on the stats - Dawson's efficiency (91.72 according to afl.com) is ridiculously good... it's also strongly affected by him always taking the safe option. In fact, when double checking the stats, the guy who I would have considered dropping in Dawson's place that astounded me even more was Jason Blake - 88% eff, 7 I50 and 17R50. Blake's never been the greatest disposal, but the inside 50s (Zac has 2) say he's doing some damage as well as linking up. If we look at clangers and frees against, Dawson's lower in both... but probably expectable, given the scenario. FWIW, after only 2 games, Max has yet to count himself out of this hit-a-target-fest with a DE of 92.86... again, we're not exactly talking about a guy pinpointing the FF amidst a flood, and frankly getting those numbers out of Blake and Max suggests the team's very good at providing easy options rather than any of them being superb playmakers.

We can absolutely guarantee that if Zac spends much time up front, that amazing number is going to fall off a cliff, and amazing as it is, in context of the group of players we're talking about, it doesn't make the decision for us.

Zac's been a revelation, but this is not what would be pressuring his spot.
Nor would the pressure be coming from Raph or Gwilt (or insert player x) individually.
It would be coming from team balance.

Dawson v Blake v Hudghton - is there room for all 3, or are we better off with a midsize forward or running defender?

For the time being, bigcarl's option makes more sense to me - move Blake into 2nd ruck and drop McEvoy if we want a change of balance... but that probably only delays the debate rather than solving it.

Mate 99% of the time I read your stuff and think 'this guy knows his stuff backwards' and then I read the above and go 'WTF?'.

I wasn't being nasty at all. I just thing the shift Dawson theorising is ridiculous. And for good reason. Dawson is an exceptional fullback. Fullstop. His form has been breathtakingly good and he has been there beginning to end.

FWIW, on the personal type level I didn't think you were being nasty, I thought you were being offhand with the hyperbole. It's the weight of hyperbole that makes one roll the eyes at times.

And thanks on the 99%. Don't tell anyone, but that's far more often than I think I know my stuff;)

My point, I think valid, is that FB is a specialist role and every good team has one.

Fiddle with the ribs, keep the spine.

Baker or Blake or Raph depending on opposition.

McEvoy stays in ruck until King comes back.

Point regarding FB being a specialist position IS a valid one and every good team having one IS a valid one. Once Max retires, I'm sold in Zac as his successor for years to come.

Trouble is we've got two. And Jason Blake... TBH, I'm not 100% convinced it's a problem, but if we do decide we want more in another area, once King's back on board, it's where we've got the option.

[ace]

Look, I know that Gwilt isn't (and will probably never become) a superstar.

And I know Raph has played pretty poorly this season (other than in the second quarter of our round 1 game).

But I reckon we need one of them to come back into the team for the rest of the season. Probably for Zac, with Blake next in line (but I reckon it has to be Zac).

I know that the 22 who played against the Blues all had thoroughly earned their senior spots. But, for mine, the structure doesn't work.

Max, the two Sams, Baker and Ray (or similar types of players) are all essential players down back IMO. On top of that group, we need a CHB: for mine this role should be played by one of Zac or Blake. Having them both down back denies us another running player: and we definitely need another one, particularly against the Cats.

We saw how Carlton were able to keep Sam Fisher out of the game while BJ was spending a lot of time forward. That left Gilbert as our main attacking weapon out of our back 50, and he couldn't do it on his own.

Raph for Zac is the obvious solution, with BJ remaining up forward. Otherwise, put BJ down back and bring back Gwilt as the third forward.

Like others, I don't believe that Gilbert up forward is the answer to anything. Nor Sam Fisher. Zac Dawson could possibly fill in for Kosi, but I don't think he can do the job that Gwilt was doing. BJ definitely can, but then - as I have suggested - we need Raph down back.

In the long run, Lynch may well be better than Gwilt, but is now the time.

I hear a lot about Dempster's qualities on here, but he has always been a low possession stopper (look at his stats) and I'm far from certain that he can do what Raph can do. However, he will undoubtedly be pushing Baker and Ray for their spots.

I know that the idea of dropping Zac will bring howls from many on here. But, if we are going to beat the Cats, Hawks and Doggies in the next couple of months, getting the structure right is going to be critically important.

Comments....?

Zac has been absolutely brilliant all year, a revelation, automatic selection for mine,

Considering you wanted Lyon sacked this time last year and replaced with Rendell, it's very hard to take anything you say seriously,
me babble your buffoonery knows no limits,
"Sack Lyon, he's a dinosaur, a Sydney clone, a clown, an imposter, we should never have sacked Grant, appoint Rendell as senior coach, yada yada, blah blah blah, etc...etc..."
FAIR DINKUM
and now for the latest installment of your dumbed down, dingbat, dung dump drivel, seriously are you trolling?, are you on drugs?........ I think not, the answer is quite obvious, you're merely a numbnutted, nit witted, nuff nuff, a genuine real McCoy goofball who knows SFA about all matters, football.

Barks4eva would I be correct in concluding that you disagree with Meher Baba on a few things to do with football?

[meher baba]

Hi - I've been travelling for a few days and have only just had a chance to look at this. Thanks for the interesting feedback on my suggestions.

I have a few comments in response.

1. I love ya too, B4E

2. I hadn't realised that Zac had such an amazing effectiveness rate with his disposals. It might perhaps be churlish of me to point out that he only averages 12 possessions per game, and that the majority of these are presumably chip kicks and handballs to other backline players standing totally in the clear. While it is of course possible to muck these sorts of disposals up, and it's a good thing that he is less inclined that most towards such stuff-ups, I don't think it's a sign that Zac is about to develop into another playmaker like BJ or NDS.

3. In the short term (eg, this Sunday), there is clearly scope to move Blake into the ruck and, say, elevating Raph or Gwilt (or Eddy or Dempster or Miles or Steven or some such) and shuffling the team around to get a better structure. But such a move is a cop out in the longer term IMO. It is the nature of ageing ruckman to get injured (or, in the case of our guys, suspended), so we have to be prepared the possibility that either King or Gardi might be missing in critical games later in the season. But the current game plan seems to demand two genuine ruckmen. This means that we need to bring McEvoy along ASAP. And this means that we should play him at AFL level as much as possible IMO.

4. I have read a lot of players calling for Maguire to be brought back in. But I reckon he's a long way off. Blake and Zac are currently ahead of him in the queue for the sort of position that he can play, and - as I have stated - I think that we can't afford to play both of them down back in the big games.

Anyway, please don't fret, one thing I know for sure is that my views aren't going to have any influence!!

[meher baba]

Update (Thursday evening after the teams are named).

It seems that the selection committee at least see Raph and Gwilt as being on the fringe of selection.

[Thinline]

To be honest, I do not see based on what we've seen at AFL and VFL levels how Raph can be further up the pole than Maguire.

Or maybe that says more about Raph's alleged utility that Maguire's lack of ability.

[saintsRrising]

Update (Thursday evening after the teams are named).

It seems that the selection committee at least see Raph and Gwilt as being on the fringe of selection.

I would be very syprised if Raph played.

I would not at all be surprised if Gwilt played.

[saint64]

My guess is Gwilt will come in and Geary will be rested

[plugger66]

My guess is Gwilt will come in and Geary will be rested

He will be dropped not rested if he doesnt play.

[Milton66]

My guess is Gwilt will come in and Geary will be rested

He will be dropped not rested if he doesnt play.

I saw Geary down at the shops today. He was yawning, so maybe he needs a rest.