club29 wrote:
Siegfried wrote:
Austin must play.
I understand the match committee's focus on run, but we have been caught out a few times by opposition's tall forwards - Collingwood and Adelaide especially.
Kennedy, Lynch and Darling means we need to have 3 talls down back. One of Cox and Natanui makes it imperitive. And it's not just purely because of match ups. It's also insurance in case Thornton is getting beaten, or Henderson is down and Thornton needs to go forward, or whatever...we need the extra tall as insurance against a team with so many of them.
We chinned adelaide with run. We missed loads of shots and they got a sniff and their big guys almost got them over the line but our extra run got us the win in the end.
Collingwood got us because whoever got Watson become the target and he wasnt ready. The smallest man on the ground got us that night. Blair
Start picking guys for insurance and you rob us of our own strength - midfield dominance. They should be worried about us. They should be dropping talls so they have the numbers to match it with our onball fleet and numerous onball options and rotations.
We will strangle them and slowly grind them down before running all over them.
You can still do that by having a Tall (insurance) as a SUB, and 3 rotating mids on the I/C bench.
I like your thinking club. I think you're on the money.
We have gone one less tall for more run in the backline.
Maybe the Eagles are different, and need something different, but it has worked for us so far this year.
Maybe its because our backmen in Laidler, Duigan, Russell and Gibbs (all around 190cm) are actually amazing players.
I reckon we need 3 tall backmen. Just a hunch...to cover their 4 talls.