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 Sat May 18, 2024 1:45 am

All times are UTC + 10 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 188 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 10  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2024 4:34 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko

Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:03 am
Posts: 23030
Location: Bondi Beach
Mickstar wrote:
bondiblue wrote:
Mickstar wrote:
bondiblue wrote:
GreatEx wrote:
Yeah, well said BV. I expect a bit of over-criticism on TC in the name of reasoned debate, but I found it surprising how many times I've read or heard something in the mainstream media pointing out that we've been getting beaten in the clearances as though it's a major cause for concern, and not asking why that may be. If we can switch between turnover and stoppage mode, and be elite at both, there's no stopping us. It'd be great if we could flip the switch with an identical 23. It's a shame that Pitto doesn't have the tools to be in such a 23, but maybe someone else will be. It's exciting to see where this goes, and great that we're banking enough wins early that we can afford the occasional tactical misstep along the way.


Can we win a GF without Pitto? The answer is yes.
Can we win a GF if TDK is subbed out injured without Pittonet? I think we can...might...should.

Who knows.

I love the versatility of the squad. I love the never say die attitude. I love the way they're playing for each other.
There's 20 more rounds to go. Fk we've only just started. There will be 2 rucks, there wont.
I don't think Pitto makes that much difference to our speed TBH. Its not like TDK is making us a faster side than Pitto.

But I tell you what, I reckon the sum of Pitto and TDK imo would be better because TDK would increase our productivity and marking power in the forward line more than our current situation.

IMO, we need one more threat done there in the forwardline, for now; till Vossy works out the small forwards mix, of 4, and that's with Motlop out.

They opposition know its Charlie and Harry and a bunch of midgets. Kennedy isn't it for me. Kemp mightn't be. Martin is, sorta. I don't think we need 4 midgets. So TDK mixing it with Pitto is for me the go every now and then: against gorillas, and against teams with 2 rucks....and in a Prelim or GF.

There's more to this season than what we've seen thus far.

I know I don't want to be playing against Fremantle in a GF without Pitto, but I'll leave that to Vossy and co in 29 weeks time.

Go Blues.


Harry has gone in for a few centre bounces . Makes me nervous . What do you think Bondi ?




Thanks for the question Mickstar.

The whole argument keeps doing the rounds in my head, and know the argument for the affirmative, but I can't help but come to the conclusion its a case of Russian Roulette playing TDK as No 1 ruck with Harry as the chop out.

The Harry in the ruck debate is a weird debate for me.
I can understand the argument of some posters in favour of Harry in the ruck, but I think there is too much exaggeration in the move's benefits to take serious and be dogmatic. Firstly, look at Pittos stats as first ruck last year, and he's not as crap as some suggest. He's a decent No 1 ruck who gives his contested bulls in the midfield more ball than TDK. Its where the engine room is and where the play starts. We've lost that with TDK. His tap work needs work and he's feeding the opposition mids moreso than ours.

My bottom line is the ruck position provides more opportunity for injury that KPF.
KPF is the hardest position on the ground to play. We have 2 of the best KPFs in the AFL and have longed to play them in tandem. Why would you rob your forward line that weapon just to give a chop out to a position where injury is more likely to happen to your biggest asset?

One day Harry or Charlie will kick a goal in the ruck when Harry is rucking, but thus, after 4 games, they haven't.

Maybe its nice to see Harry having a trot around the ground playing ruck like Daniher does. But he does that anyway without having to be one of the 2 bulls going at each other in the ruck.

The argument for Harry rucking is that its only 5 minutes here and there. Its still the friggin ruck. You can't be half pregnant. OH&S does'nt accept the argument that the environment was "only a liitle bit dangerous" after someone has died. Its negligent.

Bottom line is Harry is a much better KPD than Daniher and there lies the reason to send Daniher into the ruck.

I can bring up a lot of negatives of TDK as the first ruck, but don't want to belittle one of our own developing players. After all, if posters want to see his shortfalls, the eye test on his opponents and reference to the important stats will tell you all you need to know about his shortfalls.

I know TDK is growing in confidence and stature, and getting better at the ruck craft, but he will not be Gawn's size or have Gawn's (or other bigger rucks') power for another couple years. His break out year is not this year, just like it wasn't for the last 2 years posters who scoff at 2 rucks have hoped for. TDK's time will come.

And the argument we are quicker and take more marks around the ground with TDK as No 1 ruck is fanciful. Really? How is that so?

So if we avoid Pitto in best 23, we take out TDK as the 3rd Forward marking position to give us more speed and mobility in the ruck. Yeah? Have a look at the kms and additional speed in that move. And we replace TDK with Kennedy as the 3rd marking tall...I think TDK is quicker than Kennedy. Kennedy doesn't give us an extra runner as some claim, and neither of the 4 midgets are not a 3rd marking option in the forward line when SOS ad Martin are not playing...and Martin can't give TDK a chop out in the ruck like Kennedy can't....so we rob Harry, one of our twin towers in the forward line to give TDK a chop out.

I'm not saying no ruck time for TDK. I'm saying share the ruck duties with Pitto to wear down opponents for TDK to jump over them later in quarters, till TDK is strong enough to be the Colossus Gawn is, and leave Harry as our forward line weapon.

I like the idea of keeping rucks fresh, full of bounce and showing strength throughout a game. A tiring ruck is not a good ruck, especially when he's still developing his body and craft.

Did I mention our contested possessions have gone south since TDK has been our first ruck? ie we've lost a strength of ours ince TDK has been No 1 ruck whilst POitto is out injured or returning to the field through the VFL?

Oh yeah, but we've increased our number of goals from turnover. Does anyone really believe the increase in goals from turnover can be attributed to TDK and Harry in the ruck? Please don't.

Furthermore, the net gain we've had from an increase in goals from turnover and a decrease of goals from contest is how many? We need both. Robbing Peter to play Paul is not adding another layer. Both avenues for goal are possible from our maturing team.

Pitto in the ruck, whilst TDK is developing gives us more than the naysayers suggest. If Pitto isn't fit, don't play him; and we haven't. But if Pitto is fit as he showed last week in the VFL, then he should be our No 1 ruck.

This year, for me, should not be a development year for TDK in the ruck, by playing him as first ruck.

This year we should be playing our best team and improving on the platform we created last year to end up top 4 and win a Flag. Development for TDK happens with or without Pitto because TDK is not the finished product this year. In fact, if you have a good look at TDK in the ruck, he has cost us goals from dropped marks in the defensive half ... just look at the replay.

Have you considered that maybe he's fatigued from playing 80% ToG as the No 1 ruck may have something to do with that? Maybe he isn't fully developed to play full time No 1 ruck without being fatigued. And Pitto is chastised because he isnt taking enough marks in defense, TDK hasn't fixed that as some want to believe.

Leave Harry as the roaming CHF and let him continue to build synergy with the other half of the twin towers, Charlie. I don't mind Harry rucking in the forwardline, or him choosing to go into the ruck to mix things up, but he should not be our go to ruckman when TDK is totally exhausted 25 minutes into the quarter, when he probably should have been given the chop out 15 minutes into the quarter, by another ruckman, because he needs a chop out for more than 20% game time imo..

Harry is our most dangerous forward. All 203cms of him. Remember Charlie, also a Coleman medallist, is 194cm (you can see from that the advantage Harry has over KPD opponents), will also need to have times to get out of the goal square to drag his opponent out and get a kick further up the ground .... knowing a fresh Harry is in the goal square as a marking target.

Finally, imagine in a cut throat final, ie Elimination, Prelim or Grand Final, and we go in with TDK as our sole ruck. The opposition ruck might be anyone of Gawn, Grundy, English, Marshall, Darcy, Witts, Nankervis, Preuss, Cox, who monster TDK. Now if you were coach in this cut throat final would you ask your ruck to do everything in your power to take out/ injure the only ruck Carlton has, the skinny TDK? Absolutely, because there's no tomorrow, and without TDK in the ruck, Harry would have to go in the ruck, and that leaves Charlie to be double and triple teamed, and when Harry is tired its Kennedy, who will be detroyed by those monsters, or Cripps, who is our contested bull, and has enough of a workload as it is.

Now if you were opposition coach in a cut throat final and Harry was in the ruck, would you ask your ruckman to injure/ take out Harry? Absolutely. Harry would cower away from that sort of aggression and lose all confidence, let alone a limb.

Its a matter of balance, and insurance, no matter what you think about insurance, because insurance plays a huge role in the selection of a team. Why do you think Voss wants players to be able to play multiple roles? Well, the ruck is not a position you can just throw anyone in. Grigg days are gone ever since the Tigers midfield group lost their dominance over the competition.

I bet anyone, if Pitto and TDK are fit and firing, and we are playing in a cut throat Final, Vossy and the MC wouldn't dare play TDK as the sole ruckman in the squad of 23, and I bet Vossy would prefer to have Harry and Charlie as his marking KPFs rather than running around as battering rams in the ruck, because we need to kick goals, and whether you like it or not, we haven't got too many avenues to goal (except when we play NM or Weagles).

Get fair dinkum and Play rucks in ruck and KPFs as KPFs.

There you go Mickstar. That's what I think about Harry in the ruck. It should not be a permanent thing, not even for 5 minutes each quarter.


Bejeezus , thats a faaarking lot of work gone into that answer Bondi and all respect to you . I got that gut feeling also we are better with two than one . I like Pitto and TDK working in tandem myself . How the hell you fit them all in and who misses out i have no idea . But the guts of what you say makes sense . They will work it out , we will get there . This business about Voss being a good motivator but shit on tactics is bullshit . I reckon he is far more canny than he is given credit for .


Honestly Mickstar that shit just sits there in my head in logical order. You asked so I had the time to respond, with more than one reason, and test for fallacies....such as the crap said about Voss.

Here's how I'd do it. Pitto in the ruck for 15 minutes full pelt, smash crash into opposition ruck and any mid in the way with a cork here and there, feed the mids contested ball, and the rest of the quarter for TDK to do same but jump higher than Pitto and his opponent ever thought possible. That is TDKs weapon in the ruck.

CHF is Harry
FF is TDK..................there's the basic structure.

If players further up the ground look for Charlie and can't kelp targeting him., there's no reason why Charlie can't run around as the 3rd tall. Not only is he a KPD, he is athletic and mobile and can lead. He can also kick from 50 out too.

Carlton is a far more fitter team this year than last year. Russell has been building the boys up for years to get them in this condition. Pitto can provide a mismatch at FF to mix things up and unsettle opposition structures, for a minute or two, then go to rest on the bench. We are not losing a man. We are giving a Viking a rest from all thge damage he's inflicted on those who'd want to do the same to our players.

Have a look at our running profile. Holland, Hollands, Cottrell, Acres and Cerra are running approx 15 kms per game. Those 5 blokes alone have the running capacity of 7 players. Once we add Walsh, he gives us another 15 kms which is the equivalent of Kennedy and Carroll combined, so even if we drop both of them it wont stuff up rotations for us if Walsh replaces them both. So I dont get that we are one man down argument when Pitto is resting. He's resting because we can afford to rest him.

I actually like having a Utility in the 23, like SOS, and imo, Kemp is that player. His game has improved so much in the last 2 years, he can return to backline releasing Williams or Boyd if needed, or add to midfield mix, (as a running player) or play forward as the 3rd marking forward if needed.

We can fit them in and adapt our game plan around the personnel. We are not the Carlton of old. Circa 2024, we are fit for contest and will be still running in the last with Pitto or not.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2024 4:54 pm 
Online
Geoff Southby
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 7:40 pm
Posts: 5990
You sadistic barsted Bondi . Fancy sending Pitto out to inflict a few "cookies ". I must be a sadistic basted myself coz i used to revel in " Big Nick " inflict this tactic on countless opponents . Trust me Bondi , " Big Nick " was the master of the lifted knee at exactly the right moment . Shit he was a brutal footballer .

_________________
All my dangerous friends


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2024 5:02 pm 
Offline
Ken Hunter
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2013 2:16 pm
Posts: 12436
Location: Sydney
Obviously I cannot prove that Pitto is detrimental to the turnover game because he hasn't been selected yet so yes, it's an opinion. That's all any of us have at this point. But if we have a bunch of mobile blokes running 15km a game, that tells me we have a lot of people presenting options for fast transition. A lot of our best play this year has come from our defensive half playmakers Gov, Saad, Boyd and Williams taking on the corridor and the fast switch. How much does a big bloke bashing and crashing a path help in those situations? To me that seems more helpful when moving the ball up a wing, which to be fair, will be where a lot of the ball will still be played. I guess we shall see but, if you are adamant you're right then you first have to tell us who you're dropping for Pitto so we can better assess the trade-off :P

Also I'm typing on a phone so I concede the word count war pre-emptively!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2024 5:23 pm 
Offline
Rod Ashman

Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:22 am
Posts: 2505
I wonder if they might bring in Binns this week?
And possibly Cincotta either if Williams needs a rest or as the sub?
Is Marchbank right to come back in? Even if so, Voss might not drop Kemp - apart from dragging the ball in, I think he was pretty good against Freo. However, maybe Marchbank could replace E Hollands, effectively to play the Jack Martin role?

Out: E Hollands, Fogarty
In: Walsh, Owies (Cincotta: sub)

Wildcards: Binns in for O Hollands, Marchbank


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2024 5:57 pm 
Offline
Craig Bradley

Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 4:04 pm
Posts: 6464
Location: Bendigo
Vossy says Hollands’ scans were “reasonably clear”.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Reasonably…

_________________
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter" - Winston Churchill.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2024 6:11 pm 
Offline
Wayne Johnston
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:35 am
Posts: 8026
Location: Melbourne
bondiblue wrote:
Mickstar wrote:
bondiblue wrote:
GreatEx wrote:
Yeah, well said BV. I expect a bit of over-criticism on TC in the name of reasoned debate, but I found it surprising how many times I've read or heard something in the mainstream media pointing out that we've been getting beaten in the clearances as though it's a major cause for concern, and not asking why that may be. If we can switch between turnover and stoppage mode, and be elite at both, there's no stopping us. It'd be great if we could flip the switch with an identical 23. It's a shame that Pitto doesn't have the tools to be in such a 23, but maybe someone else will be. It's exciting to see where this goes, and great that we're banking enough wins early that we can afford the occasional tactical misstep along the way.


Can we win a GF without Pitto? The answer is yes.
Can we win a GF if TDK is subbed out injured without Pittonet? I think we can...might...should.

Who knows.

I love the versatility of the squad. I love the never say die attitude. I love the way they're playing for each other.
There's 20 more rounds to go. Fk we've only just started. There will be 2 rucks, there wont.
I don't think Pitto makes that much difference to our speed TBH. Its not like TDK is making us a faster side than Pitto.

But I tell you what, I reckon the sum of Pitto and TDK imo would be better because TDK would increase our productivity and marking power in the forward line more than our current situation.

IMO, we need one more threat done there in the forwardline, for now; till Vossy works out the small forwards mix, of 4, and that's with Motlop out.

They opposition know its Charlie and Harry and a bunch of midgets. Kennedy isn't it for me. Kemp mightn't be. Martin is, sorta. I don't think we need 4 midgets. So TDK mixing it with Pitto is for me the go every now and then: against gorillas, and against teams with 2 rucks....and in a Prelim or GF.

There's more to this season than what we've seen thus far.

I know I don't want to be playing against Fremantle in a GF without Pitto, but I'll leave that to Vossy and co in 29 weeks time.

Go Blues.


Harry has gone in for a few centre bounces . Makes me nervous . What do you think Bondi ?




Thanks for the question Mickstar.

The whole argument keeps doing the rounds in my head, and know the argument for the affirmative, but I can't help but come to the conclusion its a case of Russian Roulette playing TDK as No 1 ruck with Harry as the chop out.

The Harry in the ruck debate is a weird debate for me.
I can understand the argument of some posters in favour of Harry in the ruck, but I think there is too much exaggeration in the move's benefits to take serious and be dogmatic. Firstly, look at Pittos stats as first ruck last year, and he's not as crap as some suggest. He's a decent No 1 ruck who gives his contested bulls in the midfield more ball than TDK. Its where the engine room is and where the play starts. We've lost that with TDK. His tap work needs work and he's feeding the opposition mids moreso than ours.

My bottom line is the ruck position provides more opportunity for injury that KPF.
KPF is the hardest position on the ground to play. We have 2 of the best KPFs in the AFL and have longed to play them in tandem. Why would you rob your forward line that weapon just to give a chop out to a position where injury is more likely to happen to your biggest asset?

One day Harry or Charlie will kick a goal in the ruck when Harry is rucking, but thus, after 4 games, they haven't.

Maybe its nice to see Harry having a trot around the ground playing ruck like Daniher does. But he does that anyway without having to be one of the 2 bulls going at each other in the ruck.

The argument for Harry rucking is that its only 5 minutes here and there. Its still the friggin ruck. You can't be half pregnant. OH&S does'nt accept the argument that the environment was "only a liitle bit dangerous" after someone has died. Its negligent.

Bottom line is Harry is a much better KPD than Daniher and there lies the reason to send Daniher into the ruck.

I can bring up a lot of negatives of TDK as the first ruck, but don't want to belittle one of our own developing players. After all, if posters want to see his shortfalls, the eye test on his opponents and reference to the important stats will tell you all you need to know about his shortfalls.

I know TDK is growing in confidence and stature, and getting better at the ruck craft, but he will not be Gawn's size or have Gawn's (or other bigger rucks') power for another couple years. His break out year is not this year, just like it wasn't for the last 2 years posters who scoff at 2 rucks have hoped for. TDK's time will come.

And the argument we are quicker and take more marks around the ground with TDK as No 1 ruck is fanciful. Really? How is that so?

So if we avoid Pitto in best 23, we take out TDK as the 3rd Forward marking position to give us more speed and mobility in the ruck. Yeah? Have a look at the kms and additional speed in that move. And we replace TDK with Kennedy as the 3rd marking tall...I think TDK is quicker than Kennedy. Kennedy doesn't give us an extra runner as some claim, and neither of the 4 midgets are not a 3rd marking option in the forward line when SOS ad Martin are not playing...and Martin can't give TDK a chop out in the ruck like Kennedy can't....so we rob Harry, one of our twin towers in the forward line to give TDK a chop out.

I'm not saying no ruck time for TDK. I'm saying share the ruck duties with Pitto to wear down opponents for TDK to jump over them later in quarters, till TDK is strong enough to be the Colossus Gawn is, and leave Harry as our forward line weapon.

I like the idea of keeping rucks fresh, full of bounce and showing strength throughout a game. A tiring ruck is not a good ruck, especially when he's still developing his body and craft.

Did I mention our contested possessions have gone south since TDK has been our first ruck? ie we've lost a strength of ours ince TDK has been No 1 ruck whilst POitto is out injured or returning to the field through the VFL?

Oh yeah, but we've increased our number of goals from turnover. Does anyone really believe the increase in goals from turnover can be attributed to TDK and Harry in the ruck? Please don't.

Furthermore, the net gain we've had from an increase in goals from turnover and a decrease of goals from contest is how many? We need both. Robbing Peter to play Paul is not adding another layer. Both avenues for goal are possible from our maturing team.

Pitto in the ruck, whilst TDK is developing gives us more than the naysayers suggest. If Pitto isn't fit, don't play him; and we haven't. But if Pitto is fit as he showed last week in the VFL, then he should be our No 1 ruck.

This year, for me, should not be a development year for TDK in the ruck, by playing him as first ruck.

This year we should be playing our best team and improving on the platform we created last year to end up top 4 and win a Flag. Development for TDK happens with or without Pitto because TDK is not the finished product this year. In fact, if you have a good look at TDK in the ruck, he has cost us goals from dropped marks in the defensive half ... just look at the replay.

Have you considered that maybe he's fatigued from playing 80% ToG as the No 1 ruck may have something to do with that? Maybe he isn't fully developed to play full time No 1 ruck without being fatigued. And Pitto is chastised because he isnt taking enough marks in defense, TDK hasn't fixed that as some want to believe.

Leave Harry as the roaming CHF and let him continue to build synergy with the other half of the twin towers, Charlie. I don't mind Harry rucking in the forwardline, or him choosing to go into the ruck to mix things up, but he should not be our go to ruckman when TDK is totally exhausted 25 minutes into the quarter, when he probably should have been given the chop out 15 minutes into the quarter, by another ruckman, because he needs a chop out for more than 20% game time imo..

Harry is our most dangerous forward. All 203cms of him. Remember Charlie, also a Coleman medallist, is 194cm (you can see from that the advantage Harry has over KPD opponents), will also need to have times to get out of the goal square to drag his opponent out and get a kick further up the ground .... knowing a fresh Harry is in the goal square as a marking target.

Finally, imagine in a cut throat final, ie Elimination, Prelim or Grand Final, and we go in with TDK as our sole ruck. The opposition ruck might be anyone of Gawn, Grundy, English, Marshall, Darcy, Witts, Nankervis, Preuss, Cox, who monster TDK. Now if you were coach in this cut throat final would you ask your ruck to do everything in your power to take out/ injure the only ruck Carlton has, the skinny TDK? Absolutely, because there's no tomorrow, and without TDK in the ruck, Harry would have to go in the ruck, and that leaves Charlie to be double and triple teamed, and when Harry is tired its Kennedy, who will be detroyed by those monsters, or Cripps, who is our contested bull, and has enough of a workload as it is.

Now if you were opposition coach in a cut throat final and Harry was in the ruck, would you ask your ruckman to injure/ take out Harry? Absolutely. Harry would cower away from that sort of aggression and lose all confidence, let alone a limb.

Its a matter of balance, and insurance, no matter what you think about insurance, because insurance plays a huge role in the selection of a team. Why do you think Voss wants players to be able to play multiple roles? Well, the ruck is not a position you can just throw anyone in. Grigg days are gone ever since the Tigers midfield group lost their dominance over the competition.

I bet anyone, if Pitto and TDK are fit and firing, and we are playing in a cut throat Final, Vossy and the MC wouldn't dare play TDK as the sole ruckman in the squad of 23, and I bet Vossy would prefer to have Harry and Charlie as his marking KPFs rather than running around as battering rams in the ruck, because we need to kick goals, and whether you like it or not, we haven't got too many avenues to goal (except when we play NM or Weagles).

Get fair dinkum and Play rucks in ruck and KPFs as KPFs.

There you go Mickstar. That's what I think about Harry in the ruck. It should not be a permanent thing, not even for 5 minutes each quarter.


Bro….

How much time do you have on your hands?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

_________________
:lol: :-D :) :? :( :x :evil:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2024 6:16 pm 
Offline
Robert Walls

Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 1:40 pm
Posts: 3310
I don't think Marchbank or E. Hollands are automatic best 22 in the sense that if they pass their fitness tests they're straight back in. I'd rather give them another week to recover and do the following:

Newman - Weitering - Saad
Boyd - McGovern - Williams
Acres - Cripps - O.Hollands
Walsh - Curnow - Cottrell
Owies - McKay - Fantasia
DeKoning - Cerra - Hewitt

Kennedy - Kemp - Cowan - Carroll

sub: Durdin

I'm picking Cowan so that we can swing Kemp forward to play as the third tall on occasion, or to provide a bit of extra cover down back. Adelaide tend to play three talls and a couple of dangerous in-between players up forward, and a little extra cover might be nice.
Kennedy and Carroll play as mids, making us less predictable on the inside, and allowing Cripps to spend time forward as the third tall.
Walsh and Cottrell rotate through half-forward and the wing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2024 6:26 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko

Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:03 am
Posts: 23030
Location: Bondi Beach
GreatEx wrote:
Obviously I cannot prove that Pitto is detrimental to the turnover game because he hasn't been selected yet so yes, it's an opinion. That's all any of us have at this point.

But if we have a bunch of mobile blokes running 15km a game, that tells me we have a lot of people presenting options for fast transition. A lot of our best play this year has come from our defensive half playmakers Gov, Saad, Boyd and Williams taking on the corridor and the fast switch.

How much does a big bloke bashing and crashing a path help in those situations?

That's the point. The rucks haven't had much to do with the turnover goals we are kicking this year.

But it seems to me that some people are attributing that to TDK. Im saying there's no proof Pitto or TDK have any involvement with that pattern of goal kicking, this year or last.

History, with Pitto, tells me its the bashing and crashing he gives for contested ball to be played on our mids' terms.

Pitto and TDK does, can and will happen for the team. I'm not dismissing the thought. That's all.


To me that seems more helpful when moving the ball up a wing, which to be fair, will be where a lot of the ball will still be played. I guess we shall see but, if you are adamant you're right then you first have to tell us who you're dropping for Pitto so we can better assess the trade-off :P

I'm not adamant, I just cant see any reasoning or proof its anything but that running fills and creates space, offers support and more at the contest. It allows us to play our way. Our running power is another of our weapons.

Also I'm typing on a phone so I concede the word count war pre-emptively

Mine was a bit of light reading for Mickstar,


_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2024 6:26 pm 
Offline
Ken Hunter
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2013 2:16 pm
Posts: 12436
Location: Sydney
I agree re: CM and EH. Looking at your team, and with respect to bondi's points about ROB, I think this is the week to give Pitto a run (or at least a lumber :P), so I'd have him instead of Cowan and keep everything else as you put it.

Edit: @bluechampion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2024 6:34 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko

Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:03 am
Posts: 23030
Location: Bondi Beach
bluechampion wrote:
I don't think Marchbank or E. Hollands are automatic best 22 in the sense that if they pass their fitness tests they're straight back in. I'd rather give them another week to recover and do the following:

Newman - Weitering - Saad
Boyd - McGovern - Williams
Acres - Cripps - O.Hollands
Walsh - Curnow - Cottrell
Owies - McKay - Fantasia
DeKoning - Cerra - Hewitt

Kennedy - Kemp - Cowan - Carroll

sub: Durdin

I'm picking Cowan so that we can swing Kemp forward to play as the third tall on occasion, or to provide a bit of extra cover down back. Adelaide tend to play three talls and a couple of dangerous in-between players up forward, and a little extra cover might be nice.
Kennedy and Carroll play as mids, making us less predictable on the inside, and allowing Cripps to spend time forward as the third tall.
Walsh and Cottrell rotate through half-forward and the wing.


I don't think Marchbank's return this week is a given either.
He's coming back from concussion, hurt his back. Got on the wrong side of umpiring calls last game.
With the exception of one bad mistake, Kemp had his best game for us imo.

As for Elijah, we have Martin Cuningham Docherty Fogarty, Motlop all unavailable this week, so we are tight on his type. Can be covered.

Cowan wasnt that good in the VFL. Hasnt been all year. Was expecting him the break into team this year after his opportunity in the first half of 2023.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2024 6:35 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko

Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:03 am
Posts: 23030
Location: Bondi Beach
As if on cue from Carlton website interview with Tom DeKoning:

Quote:
With Harry McKay giving more of a chop out at the centre bounce, De Koning has spent increased time solely as a ruck, with the likes of Matthew Kennedy and Patrick Cripps - which was so effective in the last quarter against Fremantle - also giving a helping hand.

However, De Koning said the Blues would continue to keep all options open over the course of 2024, and all were happy to play the role that the coaches best saw fit to ensure team success.

“Every week is different. Different things can come into play like opposition and injuries . . . which force people into different roles. [One ruck] is not a thing we’re necessarily going to stick with, but it’s what we’re doing at the moment.

“What we do know is we just want people to play their role, we trust the next person to come in and do that. Whether I’m playing ruck or forward, I make sure I know my role and do everything to get it done for the team.”


https://www.carltonfc.com.au/news/1526695/laidback-de-koning-loving-life-at-carlton

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2024 8:32 pm 
Offline
Wayne Johnston
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:35 am
Posts: 8026
Location: Melbourne
kingkerna wrote:
Pitto in please.


No thanks


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

_________________
:lol: :-D :) :? :( :x :evil:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 10, 2024 10:29 am 
Offline
Wayne Johnston
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:35 am
Posts: 8026
Location: Melbourne
Absolutely baffled that people still want to bring Pittonet in. I really thought we had moved past this with TDKs form. He js finally showing that he is ready to be one of the best ruckman in the league playing no1 ruck and you want to move him out of that position to accomodate Pittonet?

Pitto offers very little outside the ruck contest, so he has to play predominantly ruck and then has to be benched when TDK has a run in the ruck, taking away one of our rotations for the midfield. This also forces TDK to play predominantly forward, leaving us with 3 key forwards, 2 at ruckman size, which is not a good balance for the modern game. TDK is a ruckman. He needs to play 70-80% ruck

If Pitto plays 20-30% ruck, what do you do with him for the rest of the game? He is useless forward and would completely kill our F50 pressure. He is a good solid back up for TDK but shouldn’t be near our best 22


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

_________________
:lol: :-D :) :? :( :x :evil:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 10, 2024 2:16 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko

Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:03 am
Posts: 23030
Location: Bondi Beach
jake_h03 wrote:
Absolutely baffled that people still want to bring Pittonet in. I really thought we had moved past this with TDKs form. He js finally showing that he is ready to be one of the best ruckman in the league playing no1 ruck and you want to move him out of that position to accomodate Pittonet?

Pitto offers very little outside the ruck contest, so he has to play predominantly ruck and then has to be benched when TDK has a run in the ruck, taking away one of our rotations for the midfield. This also forces TDK to play predominantly forward, leaving us with 3 key forwards, 2 at ruckman size, which is not a good balance for the modern game. TDK is a ruckman. He needs to play 70-80% ruck

If Pitto plays 20-30% ruck, what do you do with him for the rest of the game? He is useless forward and would completely kill our F50 pressure. He is a good solid back up for TDK but shouldn’t be near our best 22


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro



You see jake, I went to a lot of effort to give a logical reason for Pittonet in my response to Mickstar, and its obvious you didn't read it and I understand that if it was too long, but if you did, you might be able to understand that I am trying to find the proof for assumptions, like yours, but instead you give us emotive language, not facts, just to make a point that you don't not want Pitto as a ruckman....comments like "useless", "completely kill", "shouldnt be near our best 22".

I'm just trying to give reasons, lots of them, why Vossy has picked Pitto as our No 1 ruck during our most successful run of wins in the last 2 decades (only 6 games ago), and why there's a likelihood of Pitto being selected again this year, and most likely in Finals, and get use to that possibility, rather than writing him off and calling him names like "useless". Don't worry mate, all fit players on our current list have a use, and an important role to play this year.

Have you played at a high level? VFL? AFL? You can't be useless if you're one of the best tap ruck men to advantage. In fact, you can't be No 1 ruck in a team that won 11 of 13 games, including 2 Finals if you're useless. You get the exaggeration and emotive language. Explain why, how, when.

Now lets discuss this logically. I'm preparing you for the day Pitto is back in the ruck....this year, and trying to give you reasons to stop calling any of our players "useless".

Does your comment " TDK is ready to become the one of the best ruck men in the league" mean he is one of the best ruckmen in the league, or gunna be one of the best ruckmen in the league, but not there yet?

Round 0 McInerney beat TDK in the ruck and TDK shone against Daniher. We were good enough to get the win, but only just. 2 marks
Round 1 Nankervis smashed TDK for 3/4's till he went off and we nearly lost that game. 4 marks.
Round 2 Xerri beat TDK in the ruck against each other and on the ground, but TDK did OK. Only took 1 mark.
Round 3 Jackson beat TDK and TDK took 2 marks, and dropped 2 marks in defence resulting in Port games. Only won that game in last minute.

You see jake, I don't like all this exaggeration about TDK. He is doing fine, he's improving, but there's a lot he's not doing right because he's still developing. You're making out that this year is TDK's break out year, and that can only happen if a 2nd ruck, in this case Pitto, does not disturb/ disrupt his development. I think that is such an exaggeration, and nothing to suggest he's in peak form or not.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 10, 2024 2:21 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko

Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:03 am
Posts: 23030
Location: Bondi Beach
jake_h03 wrote:
Absolutely baffled that people still want to bring Pittonet in. I really thought we had moved past this with TDKs form. He js finally showing that he is ready to be one of the best ruckman in the league playing no1 ruck and you want to move him out of that position to accomodate Pittonet?

Pitto offers very little outside the ruck contest, so he has to play predominantly ruck and then has to be benched when TDK has a run in the ruck, taking away one of our rotations for the midfield. This also forces TDK to play predominantly forward, leaving us with 3 key forwards, 2 at ruckman size, which is not a good balance for the modern game. TDK is a ruckman. He needs to play 70-80% ruck

If Pitto plays 20-30% ruck, what do you do with him for the rest of the game? He is useless forward and would completely kill our F50 pressure. He is a good solid back up for TDK but shouldn’t be near our best 22


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


I don't know why you are so baffled. There's nothing baffling its just argument for and against 2 rucks, and Pitto TDK COMBO IS OURS TO ARGUE FOR AND AGAINST.

There is a strong argument for 2 rucks and its been going on for a couple years, and the reasons for, are obvious. Its Ok if you don't think Pitto is the one, but I think you are convinced the modern game is with one ruck. I don't think that is correct.

I bet Melbourne wished they had a 2nd ruck in last years Semi Final. A smashed up Gawn, the AA ruckman, couldn't go with (useless?) Pitto in the last 5 minutes of the game when he was really needed. If only Grundy could have been playing ruck and Gawn being a dangerman in the forwardline ...if only.... Problem with them is they had 2 alpha males wanting to be top dog. Their one ruck got smashed up and we won. We have 2 rucks happy for each others success and want team success. We need to be competing in all positions 100 % of the game to beat the top teams. One minute lapse here or there is the difference in the end result.

Modern game? Tell me about it. Are all teams the same and playing the same modern game? I just don't get what this modern game is that you're talking about. This word modern keeps getting thrown around as if its dogma.

What proof do you have that TDK is able to battle on in No 1 ruck spot for 70-80%? You think he's reached that peak of physical fitness to go up against all the big rucks I named above? Tell me who he has dominated? He looks fatigued to me late in quarters, before he gets the chop out because we depend on him to be rucking, like we depend on Harry to be our KPD, like we depend on Cripps to be our contested ball with ground ball, and please no Kennedy in the ruck. Problem is TDK fatigued drops marks, and gets pushed around, and will get injured by the bigger nastier rucks. How long do you think TDK will be rucking like he is week in week out? He's still developing.

I love TDK, and at 25yo this year, he should be getting close to his break out year this year if he's as good as Max Gawn who had his break out year at 25yo. I can't see TDK as being strong enough yet to beat the bigger rucks like Gawn did, and he may never reach the hrights Gawn did, but you expect TDK to beat Gawn, Grundy, OBrien,...see list above? Tell me if you think he will beat them during the year, let alone in Finals? We need to end up Top 4.

I'm not saying to drop TDK from ruck. I'm saying have 2 rucks sharing a load 50-50 because I don't think TDK can cope in the ruck effectively for 70% LET ALONE 80% of game time.

I'm not trying to have a go at you, but I'm calling out anyone to give us something empirical, not emotional, as to why the 2 rucks in our case can't work, when it did last year; our best year in 2 decades.

Do you really think Vossy will play one ruck in Finals?

eg in a Finals game...

TDK vs Dockers Jackson and OReilly,
TDK vs Swans Grundy and McLean.
TDK vs Pies Cox and Cameron.
TDK vs ....and what happens if TDK is taken out/ maimed/ injured? What do we do then?

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 10, 2024 2:43 pm 
Offline
Craig Bradley

Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 4:04 pm
Posts: 6464
Location: Bendigo
:lol:

No comment.

_________________
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter" - Winston Churchill.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 10, 2024 2:49 pm 
Offline
Wayne Johnston

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 11:52 am
Posts: 8953
Location: Nth Fitzroy
I think our loss might come this week. Too many of our small forward /flankers are out. We havent been playing well. Missing a few goals straight out of the middle and missing that over lap play through the middle with short passes.
Could try Kennedy out of the team and Pitt back in. See if that move can fire up our midfield.

Kennedy to sub possible but we would want to make sure we have enough run in the team.

Newman - Weitering - Saad
Boyd - McGovern - Williams
Acres - Cripps - O.Hollands
Walsh - Curnow - Cottrell
Owies - McKay - Fantasia
DeKoning - Cerra - Hewitt

Pitt, Durdin, Carroll/Binns , Kemp

sub: Kennedy


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 10, 2024 3:09 pm 
Offline
Bruce Doull
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 12:06 pm
Posts: 34052
Location: Half back flank
I'm really surprised at the amount of people nervous about this game :?

_________________
#DonTheStash


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 10, 2024 3:15 pm 
Online
Geoff Southby
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 7:40 pm
Posts: 5990
CK95 wrote:
I'm really surprised at the amount of people nervous about this game :?


I"m surprised that your surprised .

_________________
All my dangerous friends


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 10, 2024 3:19 pm 
Online
Geoff Southby
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 7:40 pm
Posts: 5990
PS ................... why is everyone piling it on Bondi when all he wants to do is bring in Pitto to give Tom a bit of a chopout . Pretty basic i reckon .

_________________
All my dangerous friends


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 188 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 10  Next

All times are UTC + 10 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bender and 31 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

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