Paul Bower does have long arms.

_________________
STURDYISM!!

There's two great debates going on here. Can I add my two cents worth?

1. Backs - I agree with Spornstar and add this. Reach advantage comes from: 1. height, 2. closing leg speed, and 3. height of delivery of ball. The backs can therefore be tall and/or fast. See Lake for leg speed for example. The third factor is about pressure on the deliverer, hence the involvement of the midfield in forcing a pass over the heads rather than bullets to the forward, as Brown got earlier in the year (I remember our win against magpies last year whe we forced them to kick dicky, lollipop passes into the arc and we could spoil everytime). So to say we need 195+cm defenders is not right. That's like in the simplistic 80's when we had money and no other restrictions: we needed a ruckman and got Madden.
2. Forwards - I agree with Cazzeman. Hendo and Setanta are doing brilliantly in not needing to be the ego-driven, "I'm the CHF", pass it to me type, and instead are bringing it to ground after a long ball into the 25m. We are the number no.1 for goals inside that margin. After all the misses last weekend from set shots or from on-the-run from 50m etc. I see that method as being effective, reliable, and very hard to beat.

And you know what they say about a guy with long arms.....

_________________
And so while others miserably pledge themselves to the pursuit of ambition and brief power, I will be stretched out in the shade, singing.

they can touch their toes

_________________
If you allow the Government to change the Laws in an emergency
They will create an Emergency to change the Laws

Their nose is also long?

_________________
That’s not a political statement — it’s a harsh reality, and we must act,” she said. “He is a clear and present danger to the things that keep us strong and free. I support impeachment.”

their hands get lonely?

_________________
This type of slight is alien in the more cultured part of the world - Walsh. Its up there with mad dogs, Englishmen and the midday sun!

I agree with your point 1, but if you think this is an 80's like debate, I'm not seeing it, and from my side, I think you're missing the point.

On point 1, the discussion is more about a gap analysis. Nothing more, nothing less.

I'm not doubting our backmen at all, and as mentioned I agree with your points on reach but you missed one other option and that's the one that sometime's hurts us: backmen standing next to a very tall forward, body on body and our backmen have no hope in punching the ball away, when they can only reach just above their opponent's elbow height. It happens.

It's a gap, not the end of the world.

We're saying 'if' we had a mobile backman like Bower and Jamo, who could reach the highest marking point of say a ruckman at 200 cm+ then we'd have everything we need on our list to combat all comers. Given that we don't have a SOS for example, we have to look at other tactics to deploy and the 3 points you make regarding reach, which is where we have excelled.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

As I said mate, if you can find us the new Fletcher and somehow keep him out of the hands of the nasty new teams I'm all for it If a player is just as quick, as agile and can play on smalls and talls, with everything else being equal then I agree, the taller player for me, but I think that there is a tipping point whereby after a certain height that becomes less likely. I honestly don't think a 195cm plus defender is a must to be honest. Closing speed and the ability to read the play is more important to me than a few cm's here or there. That is the ability to close down a forward once they have split on you and the ability to help out and create a 2 on 1.

When you say we need a taller bloke to assist Jammo and Bower, what do you mean exactly?. A bloke who plays third tall or takes a key post?

Flexibility of match ups. There's no harm in acquiring a promising tall kid and developing, bringing him in for select games/teams.

It would definitely help in critical games like the Lions where we could man a bloke with height and pace on Brown, and have Bower chop him out.

As Bondi said, it's not a huge issue but it is definitely a gap. We're not the only side with this issue either.

_________________
29 different attributes,
And only 7 that you like;
20 ways to see the world,
Or 20 ways to start a fight.

I totally agree it isn't a huge issue

How many teams do you think we have this issue against though?

Well when the ruckmen drift forward that's where we are exposed. Sure we can man them up with our ruck, but that doesn't happen.

Freo when Sandilands goes forward every team has this issue.
Lions have Merret, Cats have Scarlett, Crows have Rutten who have the strength to push him off balance or off the 'hot' spot..

Lions = Brown the monster
Freo = Pavlich
Geelong = Hawkins & Ottens
Saints = Kosi (but only when he's in hot form) & Gardiner (till he retires)
Hawks = Buddy & Roghy
NM = Petrie Hale McIntosh
Crows = Tippett

That's just off the top of my head...I'll wait to see the named teams this weeken and find a few more.
Whilst some are at the end of their careers, there's always younger, faster and taller next generation players who have yet to taste AFL footy, but when hey do, they will be the new thorn for defenders.

The abovementioned really stretch us and other teams when their mids kick the ball to their advantage. Hence why we have to have a defensive minded midfield to curb the opportunity presenting itself.

As I said, it's a gap which has cost us more pre 2010 than it has in 2010. Nevertheless, as we aim for perfection and a premiership team, we have to look at all possible weaknesses. No harm in that is there? No good pretending it isn't and will not be a problem, because come GF day, there is no tomorrow to patch things up.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

I think you are missing Jimmae's point if you are including the 192cm Scarlett or 191cm Rutten there Bondi

If they are the benchmarks than it just comes down to whether you rate Jammo and Bower as defenders. Personally I do and injury aside I think that they will only get better

Yazzamatazz - In the injuries thread has posted that he heard the ins are Waite and Bower.

Can anyone concur that?

No, I mentioned those guys because what they (in particular) lose on reach they make up for strength; ability to move the opponent from the 'hot' spot....where the ball is likely to land. So if we don't have reach to match the opponent, we need strength. Now pace is another issue to consider.

I'm sure you're missining the point. The points raised about gaps in our arsenal has nothing to do with rating Jamo and Bower as defenders. I have said over and over I rate them.
What we are pointing out is gaps, or the achilles heal of Jamo and Bower if you like. Everyone has weaknesses. All we're doing is pointing out theirs in some situations.

Eg. If Yarran played CHF and lets say TRT of the Swans was playing on him and our mids were just lobbing it high to CHF on the head of TRT, how do you think Yarran would go on TRT on a dry day? Now what about on a wet day? See same 2 players but there is glaring weakness for one or the other depending on the weather regardless of how much faster or how much taller one is over the other. It's a case of horses for courses and what we do if the course (match up) is a disadvantage to us; such as reach.

Now put Jamo up against Sandilands on a dry day, one out.
The mids bomb it high and above Sandilands' head.
Who uis likely to win the ball and how?

Answer is obviously Sandilands will more than likely take the mark over Jamo because of height, weight and reach advantages.
That doesn't imply that Jamo isn't a very good FB, but there's a mismatch. Capich?
That's a weakness Jamo may be confronted with...and has in the past.
Would you put someone taller who had more opportunity to spoil Sandilands if you had him on the list (say SOS) or leave Jamo on him?
If you chose to leave Jamo on him knowing he;d likely lose the one on one marking contest, why would you do it.

IMO Jamo's strength is spoiling the lead. He has great closing speed for fast leading FF's: something Austin struggles with.

Now if there was a strong contested mark playing FF who doesn't lead so much would you consider using the taller and stronger Austin on him instead of Jamo?

Not saying they are weak defenders...just pointing out the SWOT which I'm sure the MC and coach have already considered and have a counter strategy in mind.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

Capich

You've got me Bondi I can't argue with that logic

Lets just hope we don't come up against players who can both lead and take a catch...there could be all sorts of confusion as to who plays on them.

There is such a specimen on our list..well with a bit of coaching, development, moulding,,,,in a couple of years.... we may have a couple of them in our arsenal: Hammer (I've mentioned, but no guarantee), Kreuzer is THE specimen of the future (I mean he is a 200cm ruck rover after all), Setanta has the height, strength and mobility (maybe lacking the smarts and defensive skillset and time needed, at 26yo, to get it right...or maybe he's got it), then there's Hendersen and Donalson (who could be developed to be da man), and finally Austin moreso than Waite because of the ability (to put on the necessary weight/ strength) which is warranted for the position and the gaps we need to fill.

Sure Waite is a wild card, but I've seen Waite at the peak of his powers be brushed aside with ease by Jonny Brown.

Like I said, it's a gap and most teams have. I've seen us lose games because of this gap, but this gap (thank god) is becoming less of an issue for us as we build strengths in other areas on the park.

Still, I'd like us to make the effort to develop the bloke who can fill this gap over the next decade whilst we have plenty of biog boys, a youthful squad and the space for a real project player; I'm hoping it's one of Hampson, Donaldson, Henderson (prefer him at CHF over the next decade, along with Casboult at FF) and maybe Austin (or maybe not), or maybe we recruit the type (if available, and if we're lucky.

It has been an issue for the last decade, and I'm not sure if it is going to cost us a flag despite the fact it has cost us a game in the past. Therein lies the answer to the question of need; the gap has cost us a game, so why couldn't it cost us a flag?

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

As I said mate you've got me. The logic is undeniable

I especially like the idea of Kreuzer and Hammer as backmen

Probably just lucky more of those big forwards haven't got hold of us this season. Rutten would be handy to take care of Fev and Hall it has to be said.

Also take your point Bondi. Reminds me of a very painful day getting sun burned in the Western Stand when Justin Madden ended up in the back pocket against Salmon toward the end of the first quarter in the 93 GF. It was indeed hard to stop him and he embarassed Madden still. So, yes, I take your point about developing talls as potential backmen. Last year Hammo looked great up forward occasionally esp when he made a 50m bomb on a tight angel (I think against the cats?). Who would you put on him? Probably someone slightly shorter and pray like hell the ball doesn't get down there easily. It's a gap, but luckily a small one to my mind