Two issues regarding the structure of the 18 players on the field have been playing on my mind recently. I would be interested to hear the thoughts of my learned TC colleagues.

Issue 1

This was brought to my attention after listening to an interview with Ken Hinkley, Geelong assistant coach (bieng widely touted as a potential senior coach). When discussing the Geelong forward line, he mentioned that Geelong were not being sucked into the 3 talls philosophy in their forward line. That is, they only play 2 talls, supported by Chapman/Varcoe/Johnson/Stokes/ etc.

Clearly that's a pretty amazing support crew for Mooney and Hawkins/Lonergan, but the philosophy is interesting, especially in modern football when zoning and the need for frontal pressure make it imperative that your forward line is potent at ground level, and also able to hold the ball in.

Where is Carlton at with regard to this? I feel that our best performance up forward this year was in Round 1 against Richmond. We had Fevola and Cloke as key forwards, supported by Betts, Garlett, Robinson and Houlihan, with Wiggins an in between type. Lots of ground skill there, and plenty of 'frontal pressure'.

Since then, that balance seems to have changed. We've been often playing 3 of Fevola, Cloke/Fisher, O'hAilpin, Kreuzer, and Waite, sometimes with Wiggins. Are we too top heavy? Is it because our second tall is not good enough and so we play a third to hedge our bets?

Issue 2

This was mentioned by Bondi in a thread last week. Since Ratten was appointed, our backline has generally consisted of 4 talls -Jamison, Thornton, Bower and Waite/Austin/O'hAilpin. Those guys have often been asked to play on mids or smalls - Jamison has played on Medhurst, 3 of them had a go on LeCras last week. We've seen Thornton play on smalls as well.

Are we top heavy down back? If we consider point 1 above, the question becomes even more important.

For example, when we play Geelong - Jamison takes Hawkins, Bower (say) takes Mooney, leaving Austin and Thornton on Chapman and Johnson. Not ideal I wouldn't have thought.

Same with Hawthorn. Franklin and Roughhead are taken by 2 talls, leaving Williams to a third (not an ideal match up in itself)...the 4th tall takes who...Dew? Osborne?

I know you need to have the right personnel to play in certain positions, and we may not have them just yet, but it seems to me that we may be one tall too many down back, and one tall too many up forward.

_________________
Mens sana in corpore sano.

Bring back the laurel wreath logo!!!

Totally agree with number 2) Too many talls down back for starters...

_________________
Due to recent budget cuts and the rising cost of electricity, gas, and oil....... the Light at the End of the Tunnel has been turned off. We apologize for the inconvenience.

I think against Geelong, I wouldn't have a problem with either Bower or Thornton taking on Johnson. Johnson is elite. Can run. Knows where to run (knows his team mates' strengths) and does go for the big mark (successfully most times).

The fact that Jamison, Bower and Thornton are fixed features in our backline they shouldn't be dropped. The conundrum is that we need to put some games into Austin as he is earmarked as our future CHB.

Too many talls in defense with 4 imo, although, against some teams we can do that. Need to think about that one.

However, Thornton has manned Williams in the past few years, and although he's done an OK job, I have seen Williams turn on a sixpence and leaving the taller less nimble Thornton in his wake.

So ideally, whilst I am a fan of having a height advantage over their opponent in the backline, I think there's a limit as to how much taller the defender is over his opponent. The defender must be able to counter the strengths of the opponent after the height/ reach (for marking) advantage has been accounted for.

Round 1 team forwardline functioned well with an inform Wiggins, Garlett, Robbo and Houlihan supplenting the 2 talls. Got to remember that our midfield contribution on the scoreboard had a lot to do with that win. Furthermore, Vloke was a target, but he wasn't the super forward we may like to refer him as in that game.

I think if you have 2 power tall forwards and 2 really strong KP backmen, we can build a team around them but they must be class players and they must be picked on form. So 2 and 2 is the start of great things to come. WE have yet to settle on a CHF and I believe Bower will only get stronger with another preseason under his belt to become a bonafide strong KP defender.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

On the backline, while it's true we have 4 players over 190 back there, Bower and Jamison are our defensive talls responsible for a key forward, and both are quick and agile enough to be able to play on a diverse range of forwards, with their weakness being against the true power / body forwards.

Thornton is more of a flanker these days, though able to stop good marking forwards on a good day.

Austin is the odd man out at times, but he needs the games, he gives us flexibility in backline matchups, and he will go forward as needed. I've also been impressed with his bodywork in contested marking situations- maybe the best talent we have in body-on-body contests. In addition, he brings good long kicking, and I've seen him run the ball out with composure in the Bullants. Looks a dominant CHB in the making.

Yes, when all 4 are down back, we can be a bit top heavy, but the weakness of the backline isn't so much that we can't cope with small forwards (still an issue, especially with Scotland, Carrazzo and Johnson out, though the last 2 are iffy down back), but that we lack a quality quick rebounder. Armfield has a big ? over him in my book, Robinson is too slow and Joseph is too valuable as a midfield tagger at the moment. Yarran might enjoy this role over the next couple of years. Anderson needs some opportunities soon.

Walker is really the best option running off half back - he could revolutionise our playing style.

Don't have much to contribute Siegfired,

but can I just say: best thread I have seen on TC for a while! Exactly the sort of debate and ideas I like to see thrown around. Makes me want to come back to the site!

Don't know whether or not we are too tall down back. But I do like the theory which was doing the rounds that Austin may end up as a CHF. That may fix some of the structural issues you identify.

Getting Walker back will help our backline structure, he's the run and carry type player that we're missing at the moment. When he returns we may sacrifice a tall to slot him in down back. It's a shame that Johnson hasn't lived up to expectations, and that his defensive efforts aren't stronger, we need someone who provides drive from the back half with precise disposal but they can't be a liability defensively.

Our forward line is missing a second dangerous marking forward to complement Fev, Fisher is a great mark for his size but he doesn't demand the second best defender as the likes of Roughead and Bradshaw do. The second target need not be a tall if they possess strength and pace on the lead.

_________________
"One of my favorite philosophical tenets is that people will agree with you only if they already agree with you. You do not change people's minds." - Frank Zappa

Can't wait for the new forum 'TalkingStructures' to begin - the first thread on whether there is or there isn't a forum (or indeed a structure) should be beaut!

Missing TalkingPlayers I must say...but

Whilst we're seen in this thread to be playing too tall, at the same time I don't think we're actually tall enough for that 1-2 players to actually be seen as 'key defenders'. We have 4 mid height players who have various ability to play tall / small, and different ability to play on the lead or on strong opponents. I thought Setanta was going to make that but clearly the MC think otherwise.

Waite, Jamison, Thornton, Bower and Austin are all 192-194cm and not really able to play on the big fellas. That being said in individual encounters one of them tends to match up OK - Jamison on Riewoldt for one. but we havent had a good brown match-up and Thornton will be asked to do that again this weekend. Am really impressed with Austin's 2009 and he's already taking on lots of different opponents. Equally Bower is a ripper is in my top 3 most important players now that Waite is injured.

Equally we've struggled with the smaller defenders and made good with what we've had. it was only last year that Carrots played back, and Joseph has done so well he's been promoted to midfield!

Id say if we can make this work its a competitive strength. If we can get the match-ups right and get Bower and Austin on the smaller opponents we can exploit that. I doubt our defence has been a reason for any loss this year - the main weaknesses remain our forward set-up for mine. Add some of our mids not being up to scratch and that's the area of focus.

In 2010 if Waite plays permanent forward because Austin and Bower have had such good 2009's, then we'll be in a much better position.

Great post and some good responses...concur with Molly on his sentiments and with what Bondi had to say. On the Geelong scenario: Thornton is the guy to play on Johnson, simply because Johnno is definitely one forward who you can play 5 metres in front of...Thornton's style. Go toe to toe with him and he'll push you off the ball...Thornton also not bad at forcing the forward to lead wide. Jamo's out of touch and would need to take Hawkins (the 3rd forward) or a small. Bower for Mooney is a given.

As for structure - well 4 talls is too top heavy down back...and your loose man across half back should be a small who has the guts and ability to go up and punch, which is why Joey Anderson should be in the side. Johnson can't do the spoiling bit yet unfortunately or doesn't want to. We're so reliant on Simpson to push back from his wing and provide some class disposal that relieves the pressure on the backline and clears the ball successfully from defensive 50.. If we don't do that we turn the ball over, are out of position and opposition goal ensues.

Long-term, Mark Austin is a CHF, however he may never be used purely as such.

Agreed one of the most informed discussions that I have read here in the long time.

Gives myself a bit of clarity on what I have been thinking about the team lately. Namely the bellwether of the side seems to be Kade Simpson. When he plays well (gets the footy) the teams wins. Conversely when he puts in poor performance the team does. It does seem that his run is very important to the team but does highlight the deficiency of the run out the back 6. I know that it is not as simple as one player but I feel that his importance to the structure is under-rated.

So if Austin is the future CHF (which I think he is) and Fevola can stay focused at FF (which hopefully he can for the next 3-4 years), where does that leave Waite? The Richo-esque wingman?

I'm really pleased you brought that up Molsey. I was having a discussion with my accountant yesterday (!) about the same thing, he was suggesting none of our key backs were big enough. I mentioned to him that I had looked into this prevoiusly, and did so again last night. This is what I found...listed below our our key backs (with heights), and current and recent past key backmen that are Premiership players or All Australians or good key backmen.

Our guys:

Austin 193
Bower 192
Jamison 193
Thornton 192
Waite 194
O'hAilpin 199

Other current key backmen:

Bock 193
Rutten 192
Prestigiacomo 193
Fletcher 198
McPharlin 193
Tarrant 193
Scarlett 192
Harley 193
Mackie 192
Croad 190
Gillham 192
C Brown 190
Firrito 190
Hansen 197
Carlile 192
C Cornes 192
Hudghton 191
S Fisher 192
C Bolton 190
Barry 184
Hunter 190
Glass 192
Lake 195
Morris 190

Recent past:

Leppitsch 191
M Michael 190
Clement 190
Silvagni 194

Most of those are 190 - 193cm, same height as our guys. Seems our backs are tall enough, the question is whether they will be good enough.



Completely agree. If Austin (or Bower) can hold CHB on a permanent basis, it will free Waite to play permanent CHF. Or...Kreuzer plays permanent CHF (I still think this is a distinct possibility in the next 1-3 years, if Warnock and Hampson/Jacobs can hold the ruck) with Waite playing as a wingman/swingman, a la Richo.

Either of these options will add a much needed second key tall, making our forward line far more potent.

_________________
Mens sana in corpore sano.

Bring back the laurel wreath logo!!!

When you have talent like Steve Johnson and Paul Chapman on the flanks plus forward line cameos from G Ablett you eliminate the need for the 3rd tall.

With regards Geelongs backline...they work as a unit....they double and triple team players and always have the extra man at the contest punching the ball away. Hardly ever do they get isolated one on one and when they do thats when they usually get exposed for height fby a Reiwoldt, Kossie, Buddy etc...but that happens rarely.

We however often leave it to one man and you sometimes see a player like Thornton abusing his teammates for not helping out and going the spoil.
Its the opposite though with a player like Steve Johnson.....always is one on one or even by himself......rarely do you see him with more than one opponent and when one on one he is almost impossible to beat in those situations.

Two talls is fine down forward but you need quality support to make it work......maybe Yarran will be our verison of Johnson down the track.

Our defense isnt helped by the loss of Walker who is a fine spoiler and Jamisons dodgy shoulder/s...he should be rested and his injuries fixed properly...

_________________
"When you have the attitude of a champion, you see adversity as your
training partner."
- Conor Gillen

I know Pagan tried this at times, but how about Simpson off a half back flank? He has pace, is hard at it, brave, and can kick 50 meters on the run...can he give us the rebound we need? He's stronger and more mature as a player now. I guess the questionis whether he is defensive enough.

_________________
Mens sana in corpore sano.

Bring back the laurel wreath logo!!!

agree entirely. once ratts has got games into blokes and has sifted throught the list i hope we can settle for talls down the spine, one ruck in 18, another on the bench and the rest ruck rovers types.

Geez Siegfried,

those height stats make you realise exactly why fletcher was so important for so long at Essendon*. In terms of height he is an absolute standout on that list.

Were training Hartlett up in the Magoos to be a tall defender...

_________________
Due to recent budget cuts and the rising cost of electricity, gas, and oil....... the Light at the End of the Tunnel has been turned off. We apologize for the inconvenience.

The key player is Walker IMHO....gives us some more size/strength to play on the mid sized fowards who can mark the ball and get it on the ground...i dont think posters understand how much of a loss he has been. His allround capabilities missing coupled with the loss of Jarrod Waite reduce our options. Shaun Grigg is another taller flanker type who can play down back and give us some run and carry as well as minding a man....he has been missed as he was developing very well

Simpson/Armfield etc as your back flankers are undersized..........on selected opponents would be ok but you wouldnt want a player like Arrnfield winding up on Chapman or Didak for example by default... we had enough trouble finding a man for Lecras....Walker or Grigg both fit and form would have been ideal....

_________________
"When you have the attitude of a champion, you see adversity as your
training partner."
- Conor Gillen

Surprised me too Molly. But it does show that our guys are big enough. Sure, if you can find a 197cm Lachie Hansen, great. But hey, we got Gibbs.

But when you think of the best of the last decade, with the exception of Fletcher, none of the rest were taller than those we currently have.

_________________
Mens sana in corpore sano.

Bring back the laurel wreath logo!!!

Great post!

I have been on about this for over 12 months. Our structure is too tall and slow down back and we do not have the right set up up forward. The good sides play a more mobile defence and generally too talls up forward. In most cases the worst that happens is the ball hits the ground and their crumbers kick goals.

Defence should be 2 or 3 max. of Austin, Thornton, Bower, Jamison. I would personally have 2 of them with runners in Walker (who can play tall or small) Scotland, Browne, Anderson, Armfield, Grigg, Joseph.

Forward line should be Kruezer inside 50 with Fevola as a leading FF. Have around them Yarran, Garlett, Betts, Ellard, Robbo, Houlihan and some of the onballers.

Warnock, Hammer to change off the bench and dropping back in defence to help out and block the hole along with one of the midfield roatation.

I agree Austin could a CHF but not for a while.

When Waite comes back he can play wing and drop back loose in defence or push forward depending upon momentum of the game.

_________________
#NewBlues beginning 25th August 2015

It's not height, it's size, strength and smarts. Those attributes often come with age. I can see Bower and Austin gaining enough of the above attributes to be able to handle the big boys.