Talking Carlton Index Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington CFC Home CFC Membership CFC Shop CFC Fixture Blueseum
It is currently Tue Jul 08, 2025 7:16 am

All times are UTC + 10 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3423 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82 ... 172  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Our best 22?
PostPosted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 5:01 pm 
Offline
Geoff Southby

Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 1:29 pm
Posts: 5913
Location: Melbourne
Hornet wrote:
Apart from the 10-12 auto selections, I have no idea what out best 22 is.

TBH, it ain't a bad thing... competition is good


It's a GREAT thing.

Best 22 is a fun exercise but it's pretty pointless IMO because there'll never be a time when you're able to pick your best 22 anyway. Unless you're freakishly lucky, expect to have half a dozen good players unavailable at any time.

A good test is if we can pick our 'best' 22' and then add an extra player onto every single line: B, HB, C, HF, F... plus the rucks... who'd be good enough to be 'best 22'.

A couple of years ago, we couldn't even in all honesty pick a full back 6 in a 'best 22'... more like, best of a bad bunch.

We're getting there.

I think you're right: a good way to look at it is we've got the big 10-12 (or whatever) and then 20 others who can (hopefully) learn to play a role and play it so well, the players outside that core group of A graders are almost interchangeable.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Our best 22?
PostPosted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 5:09 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 4:36 pm
Posts: 1289
Location: here
JohnM wrote:
Hornet wrote:
Apart from the 10-12 auto selections, I have no idea what out best 22 is.

TBH, it ain't a bad thing... competition is good


It's a GREAT thing.

Best 22 is a fun exercise but it's pretty pointless IMO because there'll never be a time when you're able to pick your best 22 anyway. Unless you're freakishly lucky, expect to have half a dozen good players unavailable at any time.

A good test is if we can pick our 'best' 22' and then add an extra player onto every single line: B, HB, C, HF, F... plus the rucks... who'd be good enough to be 'best 22'.

A couple of years ago, we couldn't even in all honesty pick a full back 6 in a 'best 22'... more like, best of a bad bunch.

We're getting there.

I think you're right: a good way to look at it is we've got the big 10-12 (or whatever) and then 20 others who can (hopefully) learn to play a role and play it so well, the players outside that core group of A graders are almost interchangeable.


Exactly.

Then there is there are other attributes that some players bring to the group in terms of balance.

Duigan is borderline first pick but he brings stability.
Garlett brings pace and firepower and is also border line.

A great coach will have field day with this list.

Can't wait to see how this group develops this season.

_________________
They coud'nt.....could they?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Our best 22?
PostPosted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 7:35 pm 
Offline
Wayne Johnston

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:36 am
Posts: 8189
I also would have Casboult as a certainty (and ahead of Rowe).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Our best 22?
PostPosted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 9:21 pm 
Offline
Craig Bradley
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 3:20 pm
Posts: 6923
I reckon there's five spots left for round 1.

I think Ellard and Armfield are battling it out for one spot. I reckon Ellard is the smokey to be in our first round side.

Then you have Warnock vs. Hampson. Whilst Waite's out, I think Hampson takes it for now. If Hampson and to a lesser extent, White show a bit up forward, I see no reason to bring Waite back at all.

The other one, long term, is probably Robinson vs. Lucas. Think Lucas will get game time whilst Scotland is out, but should, all things considered, surpass Robbo this season. Whilst Robbo is incredibly courageous, and gives us a lot of things that our side lack, he's still ultimately, a very limited player, in terms of his decision making and kicking skills.

The other two are match up based. In the past few years where we'd have seen an extra runner under Ratten, we may see an extra tall get a gig. Watson/Rowe/Duigan/McCarthy. All things considered for round one, I'd probably take Duigan, but would take Watson more often than not over the course of the year. The second spot I'd like to see used predominately as a rotating rookie/scrub with something to prove spot. Where they suit it physically, let them be the sub. If something sticks, great.

_________________
BLUES 2010: PAV AND JUDD = FLAGS. DOING IT FOR THE LOVE OF DICK PRATT.

HAVE YOU SIGNED UP FOR TALKINGCARLTON SUPERCOACH 2009 YET?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Our best 22?
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:56 am 
Offline
Bob Chitty

Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 8:08 pm
Posts: 813
Springsteen wrote:
B: Touhy Jamison Laidler
HB: Duigan Henderson Yarran
C: Robinson Carazzo Simpson
HF: Walker Waite Gibbs
F: Betts Casboult Garlett
Foll: Kruezer Judd Murphy
Int: Mclean Bell Armfield Hampson

mix of pace , height and skill down back,strong in the guts , 3 marking options up forward with good crumbers and creative gibbs and some pace on bench and spare ruckman. when do finals start?



other than waite thats about it i still think, maybe warnock for hampson. lucas for bell


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Our best 22?
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 10:13 am 
Offline
Stephen Silvagni
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 9:27 am
Posts: 28528
Location: Free Beer!!
The Rhino wrote:
I reckon there's five spots left for round 1.

I think Ellard and Armfield are battling it out for one spot. I reckon Ellard is the smokey to be in our first round side.

Then you have Warnock vs. Hampson. Whilst Waite's out, I think Hampson takes it for now. If Hampson and to a lesser extent, White show a bit up forward, I see no reason to bring Waite back at all.

The other one, long term, is probably Robinson vs. Lucas. Think Lucas will get game time whilst Scotland is out, but should, all things considered, surpass Robbo this season. Whilst Robbo is incredibly courageous, and gives us a lot of things that our side lack, he's still ultimately, a very limited player, in terms of his decision making and kicking skills.

The other two are match up based. In the past few years where we'd have seen an extra runner under Ratten, we may see an extra tall get a gig. Watson/Rowe/Duigan/McCarthy. All things considered for round one, I'd probably take Duigan, but would take Watson more often than not over the course of the year. The second spot I'd like to see used predominately as a rotating rookie/scrub with something to prove spot. Where they suit it physically, let them be the sub. If something sticks, great.


Well said.

Malthouse likes giving an opportunity to a scrub who'll throw his body around to prove himself. Think Blair at Collingwood.

I'm hoping Malthouse/Wiley can iron out the rough spots on Robbo. If it doesn't work he'll end up seeing plenty of time with the Bullants.

_________________
"The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent." Qui-Gon Jinn 15-05-2005

"there’s more chance of me becoming the full forward for the [Western Bulldogs] than there is of any change in the Labor Party." Julia Gillard 18-05-2010


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Our best 22?
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 10:35 am 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:00 pm
Posts: 24655
Location: Kaloyasena
Armfield so far ahead of David Ellard - he is faster, stronger and has more X factor. Armfield is easily in our best 22. Ellard might not be far away from a spot but he is fighting someone else for it, not Armfield.

_________________
"Hence you will not say that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks"?

Winston Churchill


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Our best 22?
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 10:37 am 
Offline
Rod Ashman
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:30 pm
Posts: 2897
Based on merely Nab Cup so far... and there's just options galore. I still think the weakness is no Waite at FF. Casboult looks handy at CHF. Not convinced with Rowe at FF. Actually liked what I saw from Simon White, and at present he deserves a spot in the side, maybe even up forward.

Round 1:

B: Laidlaw, Jamo, Tuohy
HB: Yarran, Henderson, Duigan
C: Simpson, Gibbs, Armfield
HF: Walker, Casboult, Robinson
F: Betts, White, Garlett
Foll: Kreuzer, Judd, Murphy
Bench: McLean, Carrazzo, Hampson/Warnock
Sub: Bell

PFS: Ellard, Joseph, Lucas, Rowe


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Our best 22?
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 11:04 am 
Offline
Wayne Johnston

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:36 am
Posts: 8189
teknodeejay wrote:
Round 1:

B: Laidlaw, Jamo, Tuohy


:grin:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Our best 22?
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 3:26 pm 
Offline
formerly cj69

Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 9:52 am
Posts: 7893
Round One from:

B: Tuohy Jamison Laidler
HB: Yarran Henderson Armfield/Lucas

C: Simpson Carrazzo Gibbs
Foll: Warnock Judd Murphy

HF: Walker Casboult Garlett
F: Betts Kruezer White

Int: McLean Ellard Robinson Bell

I dont think Waite will be fit and White looked good as third tall option.
Garlett can hopefully maintain form showed on weekend
2 of 3 ruckman a toss up. If a wet night may go with one and Rowe?
Can't split Armfield or Lucas.
Duigan looks a yard too slow for me.

The other bonus is that we aren't having to throw our kids in at the deep end. Talents like Watson, McCarthy, Graham, Menzel, Bootsma, Buckley, Dale, Mitchell, Davies may sneak in for a few games here and there but will get a full year of senior VFL footy under Webster and will be better for it.

_________________
#NewBlues beginning 25th August 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Our best 22?
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 5:53 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 10:07 pm
Posts: 1984
ThePsychologist wrote:
Round One from:

B: Tuohy Jamison Laidler
HB: Yarran Henderson Armfield/Lucas

C: Simpson Carrazzo Gibbs
Foll: Warnock Judd Murphy

HF: Walker Casboult Garlett
F: Betts Kruezer White

Int: McLean Ellard Robinson Bell


Reckon this is close for Round 1, but I think both Army and Lucas will play (Ellard out) and Hammer will play rather than Warnock.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Our best 22?
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 6:00 pm 
Offline
Rod Ashman

Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 9:27 am
Posts: 2345
Stamos wrote:

Reckon this is close for Round 1, but I think both Army and Lucas will play (Ellard out) and Hammer will play rather than Warnock.


I'd suggest that whichever of Warnock or Hampson starts on Friday will be our ruck-man come round 1 and I feel it will be Warnock.
If Lucas has a fair game on Friday, then he's in also.
Bell will be the one to watch given he only had 10 minutes to show anything on Saturday night.

Ellard just has to do so much to be even given a look in. Can't see him making starting 22, but wouldn't be disappointed should he do so either.

Think we have about 20 starters right now, if we can come through with an injury free list on time.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Our best 22?
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 6:05 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 10:07 pm
Posts: 1984
harker wrote:
I'd suggest that whichever of Warnock or Hampson starts on Friday will be our ruck-man come round 1 and I feel it will be Warnock.


I think Kreuzer rucks with Hammer FF/back up


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Our best 22?
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 6:06 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:00 pm
Posts: 24655
Location: Kaloyasena
harker wrote:
Stamos wrote:

Reckon this is close for Round 1, but I think both Army and Lucas will play (Ellard out) and Hammer will play rather than Warnock.


I'd suggest that whichever of Warnock or Hampson starts on Friday will be our ruck-man come round 1 and I feel it will be Warnock.
If Lucas has a fair game on Friday, then he's in also.
Bell will be the one to watch given he only had 10 minutes to show anything on Saturday night.

Ellard just has to do so much to be even given a look in. Can't see him making starting 22, but wouldn't be disappointed should he do so either.

Think we have about 20 starters right now, if we can come through with an injury free list on time.



Heard a little whisper that Bell might have had his ears pulled back by the coach over a minor issue which is why he came on very late in the game last Saturday Night. :wink:

_________________
"Hence you will not say that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks"?

Winston Churchill


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Our best 22?
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 6:11 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 10:07 pm
Posts: 1984
harker wrote:
If Lucas has a fair game on Friday, then he's in also.


Given MM's comments, I reckon he's a shoe in, at least until Scotland returns.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Our best 22?
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 11:30 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 3:48 pm
Posts: 1392
Would like to see Armfield in defence and Yarran further up the ground but it probably won't happen.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Our best 22?
PostPosted: Sat Mar 16, 2013 12:06 am 
Offline
Craig Bradley
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 3:20 pm
Posts: 6923
Hope that quarter time spray from Malthouse was directed at Walker.

As I hammered to death in the game thread, just flat out refuses to play in front. Yes, poor delivery is one thing, but you're just making it a foregone conclusion when your opponent knows you're going to try and win a car at every high ball inside 50.

Play to the benefit of the team, or don't at all.

_________________
BLUES 2010: PAV AND JUDD = FLAGS. DOING IT FOR THE LOVE OF DICK PRATT.

HAVE YOU SIGNED UP FOR TALKINGCARLTON SUPERCOACH 2009 YET?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Our best 22?
PostPosted: Sat Mar 16, 2013 12:11 am 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 3:48 pm
Posts: 1392
The Rhino wrote:
Hope that quarter time spray from Malthouse was directed at Walker.

As I hammered to death in the game thread, just flat out refuses to play in front. Yes, poor delivery is one thing, but you're just making it a foregone conclusion when your opponent knows you're going to try and win a car at every high ball inside 50.

Play to the benefit of the team, or don't at all.


If you watched the game on TV he had a few words to say to him around the last quarter or so near the bench.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Our best 22?
PostPosted: Sat Mar 16, 2013 9:16 am 
Offline
formerly King Kenny
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 8:35 pm
Posts: 20076
Ok I've seen enough to finalise my Round 1 team:

B: Yarran, Jamo, Laidler
HB: Duigan, Henderson, Tuohy
C: Lucas, McLean, Simmo
HF: Garlett, Rowe, Gibbs
F: Kreuzer, Casboult, Betts

RCK: Warnock, Carrazzo, Murphy

INT: Robbo, Judd, Armfield

SUB: Walker


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Our best 22?
PostPosted: Sat Mar 16, 2013 9:25 am 
Offline
Ken Hunter
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:26 am
Posts: 14741
Location: Comparing orange boners with Hirdy
The Rhino wrote:
Hope that quarter time spray from Malthouse was directed at Walker.

As I hammered to death in the game thread, just flat out refuses to play in front. Yes, poor delivery is one thing, but you're just making it a foregone conclusion when your opponent knows you're going to try and win a car at every high ball inside 50.

Play to the benefit of the team, or don't at all.

He is going to go through an entire career playing like he is in the school yard going for hangers

_________________
Greg Swann wrote:
Essendon* cheated, simple as that


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3423 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82 ... 172  Next

All times are UTC + 10 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 37 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group