IMHO i think it wouldnt harm us to much, because we have players who can kick the ball from outside the 50 (Fev, Chambers, Campo, Stevens, Scotland, French, Houlihan, Lappin and maybe even Lance).
Go BLUESS
| TalkingCarlton http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/ |
|
| Flooding...will it work against us http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=210 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | Elwood Blues1 [ Wed Mar 02, 2005 3:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Flooding...will it work against us |
I expect Eade to go the flood and choke up the backline so Fev and Lance have no space to lead into. You then get Fevola and Whitnall getting the ball bombed at them which isnt going to work especially with Whitnall probably going to be manned up by the taller Rawlings and with Darcy dropping back... It appears the only way to beat the flood is by winning it of the middle and moving it quickly....might be hard with Darcy and West sure to get their fair share of the footy and our best extrator in Kouta out injured...interested in others views on what tactics we should adopt.... |
|
| Author: | molsey [ Wed Mar 02, 2005 3:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Is Rawlings playing back again? I thought he was a permanent forward at the Doggies? |
|
| Author: | magic [ Wed Mar 02, 2005 3:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Tough one, isnt it. We have never had such a good forward line for opositions to have to flood. But if they flood, Pagan will do the Padock & if their defenders dont follow their men up the ground, im sure fev wont mind having shots from 50+. |
|
| Author: | Kaptain Kouta [ Wed Mar 02, 2005 3:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Well, on the plus side, we now have some up and coming crumbers, and some in-and-under types (Carazzo, Bentick, Betts, and others), and far more discipline when getting front and square at the fall of the ball, so the chances of keeping it forward are better. |
|
| Author: | Zippy [ Wed Mar 02, 2005 3:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
molsey from what I've seen Rawlings has played in the backline for the last 2 weeks. |
|
| Author: | CarltonClem [ Wed Mar 02, 2005 3:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Wizard Cup rules mean that this is dangerous. If we can get a mark at CHF or flank, then if the Dogs flood, then the player who marks at 50, will handball to someone like Chambers or Camporeale, both of whom are capable of drilling one from 50. Bannister has shown he can do it as well. Fev we know kicks better from further out. You can play Whitnall as a FF but use him to pull players out of the contest, they will double and triple team him but that leaves our other players unmarked. There are strategies to counter act the flood - but Elwood, you are right, they could try the flood and if they do, we had better be careful on the fast break, they will play a small forward line of Johnson and someone else leading in different directions on the rebound. |
|
| Author: | molsey [ Wed Mar 02, 2005 3:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I remember a wiz cup game against the Bears / Lions where the instruction was to deliver to Fevola at 60m. They tried it a few times. Wed get possession outside the 50 and then a quick runup and FIRE by Fev. It didnt work... but it might now? |
|
| Author: | CarltonClem [ Wed Mar 02, 2005 3:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Another option would be to try Bryan, apparently he roosts the ball a fair way as well. |
|
| Author: | Heavs [ Wed Mar 02, 2005 4:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
CarltonClem wrote: Another option would be to try Bryan, apparently he roosts the ball a fair way as well.
He's got to get the bloody thing first! |
|
| Author: | Sedat [ Wed Mar 02, 2005 5:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
For those of you that listened to Cornflakes' pathetic assertion that Friday's game was ruined by flooding, I can tell you that there was very little flooding that actually took place. Maybe 5 mins worth late in the 1st and 3rd quarters to stop St Kilda's run-on but that was about it, and even that was mostly midfielders running back to assist the defence and no designated spare men in defence. This whole smokescreen was devised by Cornflakes to mask the fact that he had a shithouse night in the box. I would only expect there to be selective flooding again this week. |
|
| Author: | molsey [ Wed Mar 02, 2005 5:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Id trust Sedat over Cornflakes any day. Is the idea that the Doggies get an extra man back, not to clog, but just to run it out when they get the ball? They have some fine runners and if we had that many I'd support the strategy too. ps I now live in the west of Melbourne and thus need to be nice to Doggies fans. I live in between 2 and then there are 2 across the road, so they surround me! |
|
| Author: | dannyboy [ Wed Mar 02, 2005 5:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
from what i saw of the doggies game Cornflakes would accuse us of flooding when Whits runs back. the dgooies run, we run, it'll be an interesting game. they look bigger than us so it will be hard and furious. |
|
| Author: | Ponkstar [ Wed Mar 02, 2005 9:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I think Rocket will do whatever he thinks is best to stop Fev and Whits. For mine, it will not be the flood but an extra tall down back to fill the holes that Fev likes to run into, and to make Whits work extra hard for his marks. For me, watching Fev run around up the grouon was a real revelation because for all his many talents I had no idea his footpassing was so top class. He really drilled a couple to Whitnall last weekend, and did a beauty to a sprinting Lappo the week before. If we had Fevola passing to Fevola on the lead we would do very well indeed..... |
|
| Author: | CarltonClem [ Wed Mar 02, 2005 10:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
From the 1979 GF: "Fevola kicks it towards the pocket, Fevola's running faster than the ball" With apologies to Wayne Harmes. |
|
| Author: | Beantown [ Thu Mar 03, 2005 6:21 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
It will be interesting thats for sure. Eade was the one who came first with the flooding concept whilst assisting Pagan at North. He knew he'd be coaching against him oneday and devised the flood to counter Pagans paddock. Was quite nice to have one of your assistants plotting against you. |
|
| Author: | TruBlueBrad [ Thu Mar 03, 2005 8:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'd be pleased to see Darcy playing in the hole trying to stop Whitnall and Fev. He's killed us going forward in the past so any move that sees him back and not forward is good for us. I think flooding has been worked out and it won't be an issue anyway. Thomas is just trying to take attention off the fact his team lost. |
|
| Author: | BluesRockMyWorld [ Thu Mar 03, 2005 8:20 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
How about short sharp passes as the method of attack into the forward line - that should make the 'extra men' back for the doggies more accountable? Alternate this with the paddock style and watch the crumbing skills of Houla, lappo and betts, walker et al carve em up.... |
|
| Author: | SOV30 [ Thu Mar 03, 2005 10:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
IMHO i think it wouldnt harm us to much, because we have players who can kick the ball from outside the 50 (Fev, Chambers, Campo, Stevens, Scotland, French, Houlihan, Lappin and maybe even Lance). Go BLUESS
|
|
| Author: | thegezman [ Thu Mar 03, 2005 10:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
the added bonus of kicking a goal from outside fifty (nad beating any flood) is that we get nine points for em, so a flood could actually work against them. |
|
| Author: | Chips [ Thu Mar 03, 2005 5:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Denis doesn't seem to be too worried about the 'flood'...This is quite a good article... http://afl.com.au/default.asp?pg=news&spg=display&articleid=188355 |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC + 10 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|