Shit...here we go

elwood

1. fisher and longmuir are 2 different sorts of players. Fisher is a pack mark whereas longmuir is more a leading medium forward (clape/pierce mould). I think we can have both. Longmuir is a very good mark actually and if utilised properly could be a very good option up forward.
2. Waite down forward is reasonable atm as he is good at ground level and can provide some defensive pressure - I wouldnt have him as a permanant forward though, rather have him interchanging up the wing/midfield with setanta.
3. De luca - never seems to be under any pressure from posters on this board. For the most part he offers nothing for the opportunities he is presented. Pretty sure he averages less than 10 touches/game, definitely under 5 marks and bugger all hit outs. 13 goals from 27 games (contrast that to fisher 34 goals from 31 games with significantly less ground time) - which isnt good enough for a 22yo (23 next month), 202 cm forward/ruckman. What is his role in the team exactly? What does he offer that is unique to the forward line? Apparently he takes a good pack mark, but as a third/fourth forward option you would expect someone of his size to do well in that area (most 3rd/4th defenders would be giving away a LOT of size to de luca) - and frankly he doesnt do it that well. So why doesnt he seem to be under any pressure from posters?

btw, not having a go at yourself or deluca - just getting sick of reading criticism of the same players who seem to be scapegoats everytime we lose - whereas others dont seem to be under any pressure at all.

DeLuca has been extremely disappointing this year also. I agree for his size and ability, he just doesn't demand the ball enough or attack it enough. He must start doing more.

I think our list is three to four players short of being able to give a good account of themselves in finals...we lack depth in several areas and need a couple more years of development work with some of our kids...when the centreline reads Russell Stevens Walker and you have Hartlett and Sentanta in some of the key spots and his bro Aisake dominating the twos then we will be nearly ready..

The three to four players you ask.....these would be the types

J Longmuir..handy ruckman who can also play forward out of the goalsquare when Fev is having a bad day
Matt Maguire..anyone who can play on J Brown and do well is welcome, I think he is a CHB of the future and having a good CHB is vital..
Brent Moloney..bash crash midfielder with pace who kicks goals..we dont have one..the good teams do...
Mal Michael...disgruntled key defender who can play on the gorillas...needs a new challenge.

I am dreaming I know but you have to have some goals and set some targets but until we have some extra players of the calibre of those above we wont be a threat. The good teams always add good experienced players to their lineups to complete the puzzle....

For all the hype de luca received last year he was extremely disappointing as well if u judge him purely on groundtime and stats. He only won the best first year player award because walker was the only other 1st year player of note - everyone else was pretty much recycled.

4thChicky..re: Fair argument about Deluca...looks good when he does something but doesnt do enough over four quarters.
Big Blokes do take longer to develop and we dont have anyone pushing for his spot other than Chris Bryan and I think Bryan is viewed more as a ruckman than a specialist forward pocket like Deluca.
I think we need to persist with him but look at getting some more competition for his spot so he hs to work a bit harder rather than just be a automatic becuase we have such a small team in terms of height.

I'm all for giving Chris Bryan a game and putting some pressure on several of our bigger players...I think if Sentanta was on the senior list then Archie may have spent some time in the twos to get him to earn the spot...

Elwood - but what is de luca's spot? - tall marking forward? or back up ruckman? - he does neither well atm and in terms of personel I'd have fisher ahead of him as forward (when fit) and prendergast as the backup (offers more flexibility around the ground). I dont think de luca is a potential forward pocket - I'd rather have 2 smalls (davies/betts) or a small/medium (betts/longmuir) who can show something definitive rather than a bit every few games.

In terms of height in the team, I'd be prepared to give bryan a few goes in place of deluca to see if he can shoiw anything. Its not always necessary for a player to earn his spot if there are specific needs that a team has to address. On the flipside, a player shouldnt rely solely on competition from below for his spot - lack of performance should be enough to warrant selection in the 2's

?

4thChicky...Deluca's spot....for me he has done his best work forward and is a fair mark and decent kick when playing well...as a ruckman he hasnt impressed and isnt physical enough at this stage...probably a poor mans Brendon Lade who also does his best work near the goals
I agree his size and perceived list problems in terms of height shouldnt get him a game but i view him still very much in the learning phase and its hard to figure whats best for him..a full game in the twos rucking and resting near the goals or senior games where he might learn quicker or be found out as well..my view is he would dominate reserve games but learn little.

Davies and Longmuir dont grab me and I'm not sold on either one yet..Fisher I would have straight back in the team and is a very talented one grab mark but isnt a ruckman. I think Fisher is at his best when being picked up by the 3rd or 4th tall defender....
Prenda isnt a ruckman either although I think he is a horses for courses player who you can assign jobs to including playing on ruckman like Adam Goodes but not all the time.

The past GF winning teams have always had a good squad of ruckman and depth...Primus, Lade, Brogan and Ackland gave Port depth and some fire power up forward...equally Brisbane had the finals specialist Keating, McDonald(when fit), Charman and Mclaren... I think we need similar ...maybe French, Bryan, Deluca, Sentanta.......could be similar...thats why I am keen on seeing Sentanta get promoted and every taller player having to work that bit harder including Deluca...

elwood - regarding deluca and his best work being a forward - he would tower over most defenders that he is on (on average 10cm) yet barely kicks a goal every 2 games (aside from 3 goals recently I cant recall him kicking more than 1 in a game) and averages around 3-4marks/game. In that regard he is way underperforming and should be dropped to the 2's - if not to learn, but to find some consistent form. Given our deficiencies atm, I'd rather prendergast run backup ruckman (as he did previously in 2002, and part of 2003) and bring in another onballer for the hard ball gets (bentick/blackwell). Even if we were to bring in another tall (bryan being the only option atm), I dont think we would lose that much in a straight swap between the 2 players so its worth a shot.

Davies/longmuir - not fully sold on either of these 2 as well. Having said that though I think davies offers more to the team (tackles, possessions, goals, marks) than de luca per unit of game time. Obviously I cant say that with longmuir having only played 2 games for the club, but he has shown me enough when he was at freo and is more capable of kicking 2's and 3's every few weeks and creating the occassional goals (as is davies) than deluca - and at the end of the day, that is what you want your forwards for - to kick/create goals

fisher - definitely forward only and not ruck

Aren't we forgetting the Essendon* game. We've won game this year, and De Luca (along with Whitnall) were key players in helping us get over the line.

I know he's been inconsistent. And I agree the forward set up hasn't looked like it's working properly (doesn't seem to work when all 3 are down there at the same time). But De Luca's contributions have been comparable to those of Lance so far (and not far behind Fevola's).

It's a bit ironic isn't it that we couldn't say that any of our taller/key forwards, i.e. Fevola, Lance and Deluca have started the year in any real form yet we've still managed to crack the ton 3 times out of 5 games and would have done so in the Fremantle game had it not been for inaccuracy.

Re Deluca, he's been quiet the last few weeks but I wouldn't drop him at this stage, especially now with the prospect of Fev being rubbed out. I thought that he played well against Essendon* and Collingwood but didn't do all that much in the other games.

I don't think that being moved into defence at times in certain games has helped his cause. He gives us something up forward but then again he's hardly a goal-kicking machine and isn't really a proficient ruckman despite his size. We certainly need a few more goals from Archie. Interesting to read though that he only managed 8 goals in 22 games last season, and didn't kick more than one goal in any game until round 3 this season.

_________________
Formerly Blues-Back2003.

Here is a 22 year old 202cm mobile Ruckman/Forward who has played around 25 games - yeah these sort of players grow on trees. So lets drop him now.

We are building for the future - players like Deluca take time to develop - probably wont see the best of him till 70 games + .

Some of you guys are hysterical - now is the perfect time to play these sort of players - as well as the likes of Simpson, Bentick etc. the experience they will gain will stand them (and us) in good stead.

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

Winston Churchill

agro - u might have missed this line



If people didnt go on bagging certain 'favourite' players (favourites used only because these guys are all that seem to be mentioned), then I wouldnt feel the need to post criticisms of other players to balance the view (just as I did with trade Fev when all the trade lance threads were about )

Also, for the most part there have been no calls to drop de luca at all costs. Its been fairly objective discussion as to his role in the team, what he actually offers and whether or not we can bring in someone who might offer a bit more (bryan).

Deluca has 2 roles in the team - as a third 'tall' forward and as a relief ruckman. His height shouldnt be an issue provided he is able to fulfill those roles adequately. Your welcome to disagree (and if you do so, feel free to post reasons) however - deluca has not performed effectively as a forward - marks (a tall target), goals (goal kicking forward), tackles (defensive pressure); nor as a ruckman (hitouts) if u go by any of the normal parameters. Particularly if u take into account the amount of time he spends on the park (relative to other 'bench' players that receive a fair bit of criticism - ie davies now, prendergast/wiggins last year). In that respect I think its valid to discuss whether or not bryan might offer more (and that could only be done as a straight swap) or whether we might be better off going down a different path (ie having another forward target and using prender as the relief ruckman as per 2002).

I agree that most young players dont start hitting their peak until they have played 50-70 odd games of AFL footy, however I have one very big problem with this statement. Why is it widely accepted that posters can talk (used lightly as it is more bashing than constructive comments) about dropping/cutting other carlton listed players such as sporn, wiggins, DAVIES (highlighted as he is the current 'target' atm), prendergast despite them all having shown a lot more glimpses than deluca? Why has deluca been spared judgement so to speak?

If its a height thing, than I'm pretty sure we could draft 38 202cm+ guys to put on the list - perhaps then we would all be happy Or perhaps I'm getting sick of reading comments about downhill skiiers, people running around with smashed in faces, the trade value of fat people running wide, players on the bench who cant get kicks, small forwards that cant kick straight and what not. Perhaps a bit of variety once in a while is good - if not to just for a change but to highlight the hyprocrisy of some people

No problem - bring me the heads of the 38 x 202cm+ players we could have drafted, instead of Deluca at 70+.

Lets elevate Batson and Aisake - to play instead of Deluca.

Look Bryan strikes me as a likely type but hasn't exactly set the world on fire (but I certainly hope he does at some stage). He has bulked up considerably over his 2004 playing weight - let him grow into it and get comfortable playing with that first.

Deluca offers the opportunity of dragging an effective tall defender away from Fevola and Whitnall - however we have not been playing or delivering the ball effectively into the forward line for this strategy to work.

I am also not saying dont bring in Prendergast - but correct me if I am wrong he has been unavailable through injury for the past 2 weeks or so. However having said that I am in favour of using "Teddy" Prendergast in a rucking role to give Barney a rest towards the end of each quarter - it means that Deluca can stay in the forward line to keep the opposing defences stretched. Deluca can also ruck in the forward line meaning Teddy and Barney can stay a kick behind play as well.

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

Winston Churchill

Agro - I never mentioned the 202+cm guys could play footy - pretty sure there are 38 202+cm 17-18yo's in australia that we could convince to sign up for the draft for the prospect of a guaranteed 50k/yr salary.

bateson/aisake arent options atm because they arent up to it - nor is setanta due to constraints of the rookie list. The concept of bringing in a player just to have a look isnt a new one - plenty of clubs do it and we have done it before (the yso called outh policy near the end of a season for clubs near the bottom is a prime example). Sometimes its not necessary for a player to be in red hot form in the ressies. In terms of bryan, I'd bring him in for a few matches just to see if he can show something. If he can show any 'glimpse' whilst showing improvement over the year (in training, ressies or seniors) then I'd keep him. If not, I'd delist and redraft another guy irrespective of having to pay his salary or not.

The issue atm is that deluca doesnt really do the job of effectively dragging a tall defender away (or any defender for that matter). That is why they all seem to be up against 2-3 defenders in any marking contest (not saying its purely deluca's fault but he is the weakest of the 3 talls atm). Compounded with that is that deluca isnt a goal scorer. Irrespective of how the ball is delivered, I think it should be easy enough to have whitnall leading up pocket, deluca up the right and Fev down the middle (as an example to try to reduce packs).

Prendergast is injured atm - but that wasnt the point of my post (point was deluca was also 'carried' all of last year by supporters where others were crucified). In terms of prendergast he NEEDS game time to improve - would love to have pagan play him on field for the entire game - to run purely between the 2 50 meter arcs and to provide ruck relief (ie 120mins/game). Until that happens I doubt we will see the best of prender.

Thoughts on team structure - I obviously have quite different thoughts on how the game. In a fully fitside, I dont think we should carry deluca (which we did last year) - as stated earlier my forward line would be...

HF - Fisher, Whitnall, Setanta/Waite interchanging
FF - T. Longmuir, Fev, Betts

I'd like to see us run that 6 man forward line for an entire game (yes I know that doesnt happen these days). Davies could probably come in at the expense of longmuir provided he did what was required. The way I see the forward structure is 3 talls (Fev, Whitnall, fisher) that provide marking targets and 3 ground level players (waite/setanta, davies/longmuir, betts) that would provide the main defensive presence (ie gang tackle anything that moves inside the forward 50 that isnt navy blue).

If that forward structure was in place, de luca could only ever be a bench player - and unless he provides good ruck relief (prendergast ahead imho) then I'd rather carry a junior in and under player (bentick/blackwell) as this would improve our long term team prospects more than having a weak backup ruckman (think they would be better off playing 1st ruck in the ressies)

I agree with Chicky on Bryan....what is this fascination we have with trying to cheat with undersized bit part players in the ruck.....Prenda is not a ruckman and would be slaughtered by Everitt..
I have just got over the Trent Hotton/Andrew Merrington era and now some want to go back with Prenda as backup ruck....NOT ON.

Chris Bryan was recruited as a ruckman and if there is any rucking backup to be done then he should be doing it...lets show some imagination at the selection tabel and try something different and include Bryan..we could send out a team that could actually be called tallish....wouldnt that be different...imagine that a Carlton team with TALL players...how radical a TALL Blues lineup where an opposing coach had to find some TALLS to match up on ours.......

For what it's worth, we ain't gonna win the flag so we've gotta find out who can and who can't and I'd bring in Bryan as a ruckmen.
We can't expect Barney to ruck with the minimal support he's currently getting all year.
I personally couldn't care less about Bryan's Ants form as any indicator. I just want to try them all out.
Setanta should be on the list as well.

_________________
This might sound extreme in the context of alleged sexual assault, drunken violence and a drug trafficking charge...