Time for Roo to go back.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

As I suggested last week, I think it's time for us to send Roo to defence, at least if we're going to persist with Blake in the ruck, with Mac out and especially now that Fisher is out.

Wilkes showed that he can handle FF last week and I think we have to see if he will do it on a weekly basis.

I just don't see us winning any of our next 3 (next two especially) with the current set-up we have and we only have two matches in our next 12 that we'd be super confident of winning, IMO, unless something pretty dramatic happens.

Our backline is just too vulnerable at the moment, especially with Fisher out. Gwilt will hopefully be back very soon, but he's likely to be playing on the last line and we need more help across HB, or in the "hole".

As I said last week, I believe we have nothing to lose in trying it and seeing how Wilkes, Kosi and Stanley, who are all in form, plus Milne, Milera and co., go as a unit up forward. Plus it would make our defence about 100% stronger if we had Roo marshalling the troops back there and hopefully taking mark after mark, cutting off the other side's forward forays. We've seen him do it numerous times late in quarters, or close games (go back into defence, to help out) and has shown that he reads and marks the ball just as well back there as he does for us up forward.

One thing that made us so strong 2-4 years ago was that we had so much marking strength down back, especially intercepting marks from the other team's kicks forward. Gilbert, Fisher and Blake in particular would just take high mark after high mark (the ultimate example of this was probably the final against Collingwood in 2008 I think it was, when the three of them all took about 12+ marks each for the game). But now Fisher will be out for a bit and Gilbert has dropped right off in that department (just 5 intercepting marks for the year so far, compared to 58 for 2010- at his current rate he'd get 22 this year and dropped at least 3 last night) and Blake is not going as well as he was back there and will be needed in the ruck, so we have virtually no marking strength across HB, in particular, right now. Plus we have a "rookie" back there in Simkin, although he is doing very well.

Adding Roo down there, especially if he largely played loose, would give us that marking strength there again and give us the chance to see if Wilkes will do a Heatley, or Podsiadly and hold down full forward. I think it could be a winning move overall.

Wilkes looked terrific while it was dry the other night (before the match became a slippery scrap) and even once it got wet he ended up kicking 3 goals in just 53% of game time, so there's every chance he would have kicked 4 or 5 as it was, if he'd stayed on for the whole game. If it had remained dry and he'd played the whole match, there's no reason he couldn't have kicked even more than 4 or 5, the way he was looking. He's obviously been in very good form since the middle of last year (40 or so goals in his last 10 games last year and very good form for Sandy and then for us, so far this year), so there's nothing to suggest last week was just a "flash in the pan".

We've shown in the past couple of years that we can win without Roo in our side at all, so we can certainly win with him helping out and taking lots of marks in our backline and with these extra forward options that we have now playing forward.

I'd much rather we roll the dice and do something like this, which could put us in contention again, than just go on to make up the numbers, by doing "same old same old".

[bobmurray]

Roo would get the ball but what he did with it could be an issue.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

But his field kicking is generally excellent and has been much better than his goalkicking over the journey. That is why he's apparently trying to emulate his field kicking this year when kicking for goal and has been relatively successful with it so far.

[8856brother]

Roo would get the ball but what he did with it could be an issue.

I think Roo's field kicking is very good. I don'think that would be an issue.

[dcstkfc]

More receptive to the idea at the moment than previously but Kosi, Wilkes and Stanley would be a bit too volatile a forward set-up for my liking. Have to keep champions where they play best

[bobmurray]

Roo would get the ball but what he did with it could be an issue.

I think Roo's field kicking is very good. I don'think that would be an issue.

I'd like to see him there just to see if you lot are correct...I do know his hand passing is ordinary, comical at times....

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

More receptive to the idea at the moment than previously but Kosi, Wilkes and Stanley would be a bit too volatile a forward set-up for my liking. Have to keep champions where they play best

If he was still at his dominant best then I wouldn't want to move him from the forward line any time soon, but he's not at that level at the moment, and hasn't been since he did his hammy early in 2010, so I think there's every chance he could be just as effective for us down back as he is up forward at the moment. I think if we're fair dinkum about contending this year, we need our backline to be as strong as we can make it and I reckon he could dominate back there more than he's dominating forward at the moment.

With Fisher (for the moment) and Dawson gone, Gilbert horribly out of form and Blake probably needed in the ruck, I don't reckon we have a better alternative.

And does anyone see us winning many of our next bunch of games if we don't have a strong backline? We have relied on the "third man up" in the backline so much in the last few years and it's hard to see who that's going to be for the next few weeks. If we're going to continue to be undersized at FB without someone effectively coming over the top, we could be in for a world of hurt, especially against West Coast.

[plugger66]

More receptive to the idea at the moment than previously but Kosi, Wilkes and Stanley would be a bit too volatile a forward set-up for my liking. Have to keep champions where they play best

If he was still at his dominant best then I wouldn't want to move him from the forward line any time soon, but he's not at that level at the moment, and hasn't been since he did his hammy early in 2010, so I think there's every chance he could be just as effective for us down back as he is up forward at the moment. I think if we're fair dinkum about this year we need our backline to be as strong as we can make it and I reckon he could dominate back there more than he's dominating forward at the moment.

With Fisher (for the moment) and Dawson gone, Gilbert horribly out of form and Blake probably needed in the ruck, I don't reckon we have a better alternative.

And does anyone see us winning many of our next bunch of games if we don't have a strong backline?

Well I dont see us winning many with Rooy out of the forward line. There is more to forward play than goals. Rooy is clearly our hardest working forward and to lose him out of that position would have a huge impact on our side. Stanley, Kosi and Wilkes doesnt quite have the same ring to it as Rooy, Kosi and Stanley especially for hard work. If I was an opposition coach I would love Rooy back just as I wish Franklin and Rioli were in the midfield last night. Alas they werent and they won the game for them.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

We found ways to win just about as comfortably without Roo up forward in the past couple of years (and he wasn't in our team at all, this time he'd be causing the other teams big headaches down back) and we didn't have other options like Wilkes and a more mature and ready Stanley then.

We're probably going to lose either way, so I'd rather go down trying everything that could very well work, rather than just going in with a set-up that we pretty much know isn't going to be good enough against the best teams. Our backline just isn't going to be strong enough and when that happens, there's very little point in trying to contend.

I also reckon the added responsibility that the move would put onto Kosi would inspire him to play like he did last night more often.

[bobmurray]

As I suggested last week, I think it's time for us to send Roo to defence, at least if we're going to persist with Blake in the ruck, with Mac out and especially now that Fisher is out.

Wilkes showed that he can handle FF last week and I think we have to see if he will do it on a weekly basis.

I just don't see us winning any of our next 3 (next two especially) with the current set-up we have and we only have two matches in our next 12 that we'd be super confident of winning, IMO, unless something pretty dramatic happens.

Our backline is just too vulnerable at the moment, especially with Fisher out. Gwilt will hopefully be back very soon, but he's likely to be playing on the last line and we need more help across HB, or in the "hole".

As I said last week, I believe we have nothing to lose in trying it and seeing how Wilkes, Kosi and Stanley, who are all in form, plus Milne, Milera and co., go as a unit up forward. Plus it would make our defence about 100% stronger if we had Roo marshalling the troops back there and hopefully taking mark after mark, cutting off the other side's forward forays. We've seen him do it numerous times late in quarters, or close games (go back into defence, to help out) and has shown that he reads and marks the ball just as well back there as he does for us up forward.

One thing that made us so strong 2-4 years ago was that we had so much marking strength down back, especially intercepting marks from the other team's kicks forward. Gilbert, Fisher and Blake in particular would just take high mark after high mark (the ultimate example of this was probably the final against Collingwood in 2008 I think it was, when the three of them all took about 12+ marks each for the game). But now Fisher will be out for a bit and Gilbert has dropped right off in that department (just 5 intercepting marks for the year so far, compared to 58 for 2010- at his current rate he'd get 22 this year and dropped at least 3 last night) and Blake is not going as well as he was back there and will be needed in the ruck, so we have virtually no marking strength across HB, in particular, right now. Plus we have a "rookie" back there in Simkin, although he is doing very well.

Adding Roo down there, especially if he largely played loose, would give us that marking strength there again and give us the chance to see if Wilkes will do a Heatley, or Podsiadly and hold down full forward. I think it could be a winning move overall.

Wilkes looked terrific while it was dry the other night (before the match became a slippery scrap) and even once it got wet he ended up kicking 3 goals in just 53% of game time, so there's every chance he would have kicked 4 or 5 as it was, if he'd stayed on for the whole game. If it had remained dry and he'd played the whole match, there's no reason he couldn't have kicked even more than 4 or 5, the way he was looking. He's obviously been in very good form since the middle of last year (40 or so goals in his last 10 games last year and very good form for Sandy and then for us, so far this year), so there's nothing to suggest last week was just a "flash in the pan".

We've shown in the past couple of years that we can win without Roo in our side at all, so we can certainly win with him helping out and taking lots of marks in our backline and with these extra forward options that we have now playing forward.

I'd much rather we roll the dice and do something like this, which could put us in contention again, than just go on to make up the numbers, by doing "same old same old".

If Roo went back he probably wouldn't get crunched every time he went for the ball, which is definitely an opposition tactic...

[matrix]

CHF

.

[BringBackMadDog]

I agree with Roo to CHB, he could be a weapon off HB his field kicking is better than most, can run and create, would not get crunched half as much which could prolong his career. Wilkes and Kosi Deep with Stanley playing the roaming half forward role, Saad, Milne, Sippa and Milera playing the supporting roles we become less predicatable.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

CHF

.

So who are we going to be beating in the next few weeks with a backline that contains no Fisher, Dawson (from the past 3 years), probably Blake and with an underdone and coming off a knee reco Gwilt and a horribly out of form Gilbert?

If we're not prepared to think outside the square a bit and get the most out of our whole list then we could be in for an ugly period.

[plugger66]

CHF

.

So who are we going to be beating in the next few weeks with a backline that contains no Fisher, Dawson (from the past 3 years), probably Blake and with an underdone and coming off a knee reco Gwilt and a horribly out of form Gilbert?

Well who has decided Rooy can even play back? So we are going to kick a winning acore without Rooy, probably Stanley or Kosi rucking and being replaced by Wilkes who couldnt kick a goal in an ordinary competition today.

[matrix]

blimey, if putting one of the gun CHF's of the league back to CHB automatically increases the chances enough for a win against the top 5 sides of the comp then what is the coach thinking


who on earth in their right mind would play him in the position he has dominated for the last 5+ years

utter stupidity by watters

[Richter]

CHF

.

So who are we going to be beating in the next few weeks with a backline that contains no Fisher, Dawson (from the past 3 years), probably Blake and with an underdone and coming off a knee reco Gwilt and a horribly out of form Gilbert?

If we're not prepared to think outside the square a bit and get the most out of our whole list then we could be in for an ugly period.

The likelihood is that either way we won't win any of those games. What's important is that we think of what is best for the future development of the team over the next few years. I personally believe that as part of a newly reconstituted multi-pronged forward line Rooey can play another 2 seasons minimum after this one and that is where I would like him to remain. Yes we have a problem down back without Fisher, who is the glue around which the rest of the defence function, but moving Rooey to cover that is in the longer term pointless IMO because as soon as Chips gets back then Rooey would not stay down back. If someone plays more back then I would prefer it to be Blake with Stanley playing as no.1 ruck, with Wilkes in as the 3rd Tall.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

blimey, if putting one of the gun CHF's of the league back to CHB automatically increases the chances enough for a win against the top 5 sides of the comp then what is the coach thinking


who on earth in their right mind would play him in the position he has dominated for the last 5+ years

utter stupidity by watters

Yeah I said it would automatically do that.

But we have too many options up forward and not enough down back (especially at the moment), so I don't think it's too much of a stretch to figure that we'll be better off overall if we put one of those options that usually plays forward into the backline, especially since it's generally easier to play down back than it is to play forward, especially for someone of Nick's football ability. I'm pretty sure it's been done very successfully in the past and will be done successfully again in the future. And when we've shown so many times in the past two years that we can win without Roo at all, despite having less forward options than we have now, it makes it even more likely to be successful.

As for the Watters argument, is this the same Watters that decided it would be a good idea to not have Dempster on Rioli on Saturday night, despite him apparently having done a great job on him the last two times, but to have him on the much bigger Franklin instead, resulting in the two of them having 18 SCORING SHOTS BETWEEN THEM, with Rioli kicking 6 and Franklin having 11 scoring shots and kicking 5 and pretty much beating us on their own?

Or the same Watters that seemingly was perfectly happy for us to lose Zac Dawson, our best and most experienced option at full back, while apparently trying hard to make sure we kept all of Peake, Ray, Raph Clarke and so on, who are now at best on the fringe and at worst playing in the VFL and likely to stay there? I'm not sure I'd be pulling the "in Watters we trust" card, as though that's a sure thing, just yet.

That is the sort of arguement that someone else on here usually makes ("the coach is always right and never makes a mistake, or pulls the wrong reign, so I'll just always go with what he does or says and won't think for myself").

[Con Gorozidis]

i think roo back is an extreme measure. but maybe we should try it sometime and leave kosi and wilkes fwd. i dont think kosi or wilkes can go back so roo possibly the best option. worth a try. not necessary next week given blues only have waite to worry about as a tall fwd and simkpin should get a go on him.
but maybe against the eagles we could try it. roo should be able to cover the q stick.

[cripper35]

Agree with Roo to CHB. He is no longer a match winning forward, in fact he is no longer able to gather the ball below his knees. The opposition always clear the ball away from him. He also saps the confidence of the team when he misses a gettable goal.
Roo has played at CHB before. He dominated in a game back in 2003 when put at CHB against Hawthorn at the MCG. I also believe it will prolong his career in the game.

[matrix]

i see where APS is coming from
watched an older game a few weeks ago and saw a young roo roaming around there and forgot all about him starting out down there
but im with richter
i dont think putting him down there will actually help win those games.

gwilt has to come in for mine
match fit or not
the knee is obviously ok and its just game day fitness at the top level he is missing
maybe he has to get that back in the 1's. i dont know
maybe someone needs to be elevated?
just cant see putting roo back there is going to benefit us at CHF
stanley would have to take that spot and id actually rather see him ruck now big boy is out

either way
its going to be a long 4 or 5 weeks

[borderbarry]

And Kosi played CHB mostly the year he was awarded the "Rising Star Award".
But playing him at C HB is defeating the purpose as he is needed in the ruck.

[QuestionOfAccuracy]

I thought Roo played well on the weekend. Marked well, and kicked for goal well (except for that one at the end of the 3rd qtr).

Secondly, Carlton doesn't really have dominant tall forwards. I'm presuming they will bring Waite back for Monday night's game, but he isn't worth changing your whole forward structure in order to try and nullify. Aside from Waite, Carlton's small forwards will be the real problem. On top of this, West Coast don't have a massive forward line currently either - Kennedy out. Jack Darling was their main tall option yesterday and he was pretty quiet. Lynch drifted forward at times but he's hardly Travis Cloke.

[Con Gorozidis]

hate to drag/rehash this topic up.
But we could probably do with Tson Goldsack down back this year with Zac gone.
If that flog-pot Lyon had taken him for Ball wed all be feeling a little better now.

[wasaintsfan]

Maybe do the old switch-a-roo on goddard(maybe rotate gilbert aswell) and riewoldt, have dal playing off the half back flank. push jones to one of the small defenders rotate milne/steven through the forward/midfield

Would still leave a strong forward line, strengthen up our back line and ball movement from the back line.. still have the likes of hayes armitage joey steven/milne running through the midfield. so it would still be our good ball readers/winners/runners around the ball..

drop fisher and replace with maybe newnes??? even ray could be a handy player to bring in... seems to be up on form... would add alot of run to the middle and very strong overhead also loves to bob up for a goal from time to time

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

I thought Roo played well on the weekend. Marked well, and kicked for goal well (except for that one at the end of the 3rd qtr).

Secondly, Carlton doesn't really have dominant tall forwards. I'm presuming they will bring Waite back for Monday night's game, but he isn't worth changing your whole forward structure in order to try and nullify. Aside from Waite, Carlton's small forwards will be the real problem. On top of this, West Coast don't have a massive forward line currently either - Kennedy out. Jack Darling was their main tall option yesterday and he was pretty quiet. Lynch drifted forward at times but he's hardly Travis Cloke.

He did play well. That's not the reason for my suggesting it. I just think we have 4 good tall options up forward and not enough down back and not enough marking strength down back anymore, and out of the 4 Roo is the only one I see as being of value to our backline and likely to significantly strengthen it.

And it's not so much about him playing one on one with anyone back there, but just being in the area, even playing loose, as Goddard, Fisher and Gilbert have done so much in recent years. With his height and ability to read the ball and mark, or get a hand to it, he would be like a big road block to any team going forward against us. He could save us a LOT of goals and I think we have enough options up forward for it to be a win overall (which is what's most important) to move him back there. He's very good up forward now, but isn't dominating, but he could dominate down back and it's widely accepted that if you have a very strong backline you're a much better chance of winning games of footy, especially when you've also got a good midfield (which we do).

As much as I didn't like seeing our negative style under Ross and don't want us to go back to that extreme, I'd rather we have slightly lower scoring games than we are now, than higher scoring ones where we get done by 6 goals, with the likes of Franklin and Rioli running riot against our backline.

I suggested this move last week. Does anyone think Buddy and Cyril would have had 18 scoring shots between them if Roo had been in the hole in front of them on the weekend, picking off lots of Hawthorn's kicks forward?

Roo kicked 3 goals up forward, but Wilkes kicked 3 in just over half a game the week before and looked really good (I know he only kicked one for Sandy this week, but he was reportedly "out of sorts", according to squizzy, who sees him every week and I'm not surprised, after the mind f*** of being subbed off, when on fire, the week before and then being named in the team this week only to be dumped from it), so I don't think we would have lost that much up forward, based on what I saw from Wilkes the week before. We would obviously lose Roo's lead-up marking, but if he wasn't there, Stanley, Kosi, Milera and Wilkes (and maybe Goddard in spells- instead of going back as much) would just have to do more of that, to pick up the slack.

If Roo was playing loose down back it would also make it easier for him to drift deep forward unmanned (especially when we're doing a hard press into our forward line and most of our backline are in our forward half) where he would be very dangerous.

If we've written off this year then there isn't as much point in doing something like this, though, but if that is the case, it's probably the time to remove the likes of Dean Polo and bring in a couple more of the younger ones.