| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Tyke
Joined: 30 May 2005
Location: M31
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
Cloke won't be dropped and nor should he be. One of the most important and dangerous players in the team.
It's pretty easy. If Reid is ready to go and we don't want to ruin the forward and ruck mix, chuck him at CHB. He's an All Australian CHB and imo when fit, the most talented defender we have. |
|
|
|
 |
Skids 
Quitting drinking will be one of the best choices you make in your life.
Joined: 11 Sep 2007
Location: Joined 3/6/02 . Member #175
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| simon tonna wrote: | i wouldn't mind seeing the current Collingwood team minus T Cloke
and replaced with B Reid. Travs a champion and a favourite of mine.
but even the formidable need to sit, watch and absorb from a different
perspective, it may clear he's head from built up frustrations on the field
[or where ever else]and freshen him up with a hunger and desire that
comes after a lay off.
for what seems a long while now we have been a team that has had the
luxury of knowing that if in doubt for the forward entry "i can just bomb
it into a leading Cloke because he's a great contested mark" at the end
of a strong lead. but so is White and so is Reid and both kick accurately
for goal.
the structure wouldn't change just an attitude going forward with the ball
would. |
If he's fit Cloke would be one of the first picked every week. I think he's going ok, in fact, I think he will explode on Friday night and bag half a dozen. Works his arse off, persistence will pay 
_________________
Don't count the days, make the days count. |
|
|
|
|
Johnno75
Joined: 07 Oct 2010
Location: Wantirna
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I can't believe those calling for Cloke to be dropped, just hope none of those people get Bucks anywhere near a hypnotist. Most important player in terms of our spine. As others have said is working hard and his fortunes will turn.
_________________
Human behavioural studies suggest people who use a lot of swear words tend to be more honest & trustworthy. |
|
|
|
|
jackcass
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| themonk wrote: | | Dave The Man wrote: | | I posted that we should play 2 rucks a week or so ago |
Will 2 rucks be required when Reid is back? the assumption is that White will rotate with Grundy or Witts. |
Was wondering the same but think White's mobility and speed offset carrying 2x ruckmen as well as 3x talls. People were concerned we'd be top heavy and slow playing both Grundy and Witts in the same side but there isn't much evidence to support that over the last couple of games. And you always have the option of subbing a tall off for a runner (assuming no injury during the game). |
|
|
|
|
Mossi 
Joined: 20 May 2002
Location: Vittorio Veneto TV Italy
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| jackcass wrote: | | themonk wrote: | | Dave The Man wrote: | | I posted that we should play 2 rucks a week or so ago |
Will 2 rucks be required when Reid is back? the assumption is that White will rotate with Grundy or Witts. |
Was wondering the same but think White's mobility and speed offset carrying 2x ruckmen as well as 3x talls. People were concerned we'd be top heavy and slow playing both Grundy and Witts in the same side but there isn't much evidence to support that over the last couple of games. And you always have the option of subbing a tall off for a runner (assuming no injury during the game). |
When Reid gets back I was wondering what option would be the best when facing sides like the Hawks and Port. We may need the extra runner and we will have to play Grundy or Witts for the 4 quarters. One aspect of the game both Grundy and Witts bring is tackling pressure around stoppages but when the ball gets out they are a liability as their man can run off them (Freo game). |
|
|
|
|
MagpieBat
Joined: 27 Nov 2010
Location: Brooding in a cave... somewhere... maybe...
|
| Post subject: | |
|
If Cloke were to be dropped, then the results we have got out of White would vanish faster than water in the Sahara desert, because the best defender (who goes to Cloke) would now go to White. Even if Reid were to come back, he'd struggle with the best defender without Cloke there.
The question is not whether or not Cloke should be dropped, it's how do we get Cloke to snap out of this funk he is in?
As for the original question, I'd say it's pretty much our only option now. White's ruckwork, both at Sydney and with us, has been uninspiring, to say the least. Therefore, we will get better results out of Grundy and Witts, even with the risk of burning both kids out simultaneously, than we would with one of them and White to relieve.
That means Reid swings back into defence.
_________________
I am vengeance. I am the night. I am MagpieBat. |
|
|
|
|
Member 7167
"What Good Fortune For Governments That The People Do Not Think" - Adolf Hitler.
Joined: 18 Dec 2008
Location: The Collibran Hideout
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| simon tonna wrote: | | is Cloke untouchable when it comes to team structure? |
Yes - there is more to Cloke than just kicking goals but I must admit I would like to see a few more goals under his name each game.
I guarantee that if he missed a few games you would be welcoming g=his return. This is a complex sport and his impact on the game is just as complex.
If you don't agree just think what our current team would do to the premiership side of 1990. Out great 1990 team would not know what hit them and they would not be able to use bruise football as they simply would not have the tank or the speed. |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Tannin wrote: | I agree. Playing a single ruckman and getting a Leigh Brown type to fill in is a viable tactic, but it only makes sense when you have:
(a) A very high quality ruckman who can run out the whole game with ~ 80% gametime - e.g., a Sandilands, a Jolly in his prime.
(b) A genuine use for the fill-in ruckman while he is not rucking. Doesn't matter whether he is a forward, a utility, or whatever, but he must be a player who you would pick just to fill that other role even if he didn't ruck at all. Otherwise you might as well play a second true ruckman.
(c) No loss of structure when the second ruck leaves his normal position to have a run on the ball. Imagine, for example, that we went in with Grundy as #1 ruck and used Jack Frost as the #2. That is just asking for the opposition key forward to boot a couple while he has a mismatch.
(d) The willingness to take a risk of injury to your one and only genuine ruck early in a vital game. Last year when Hudson went down early in the game against Carlton, we were screwed, we were virtual certainties to be defeated by an inferior club, and we would have been had it not been for the heroics of one Q. Lynch, who stepped up and played the game of his life to get us over the line. Magnificent efforts like that are very, very rare. Nine times out of ten, we'd have been up that famous creek.
Finally, by playing a single ruckman, that player does not get a chance to develop his game and learn how to do anything other than ruck. Then, when we do play two rucks, we get nothing much out of the non-rucking one 'coz he doesn't know how to play forward or drop back a kick behind and work with the defenders to save a goal.
Yes. Keep on playing Witts and Grundy together all year (now and again giving one a rest as needed) and watch them learning how to be just as dangerous resting up forward as they are on the ball.
PS: White has blossomed as a permanent forward. Keep him there! Let him concentrate on that role, and only use him in the ruck to cover contingencies.
PPS: Witts and Grundy and are both good contributors at bounces after the ball hits the deck. Let's encourage that part of their games too. From time to time, we should encourage them to both contest the clearance, e.g., Witts taking the tap and Grundy contesting at ground level with his strength and bulk. There is a lot of merit in the old-fashioned notion of a genuine ruckman playing as ruck-rover. Not all the time, of course, but now and again to create the mismatch and crunch a few opposition smalls. Some other sides do this these days, with marked success. |
all good points that I agree with. There is another point that young talls who start in KP tend to have longer and more effective careers than young ruckmen. I read something in the last couple of days, don't recall where or I'd post a link.
Compare the careers of blokes like Paul Salmon, Peter Moore, Simon Madden even Sam Newman who all started as a tall forward changing ruck before eventually moving into the ruck on a full time basis with the ones who started as Rucks at a young age. Kruezer, Fraser, even Monkey was burned out and buggered years before he should have been.
Playing them both spreads the load more between the on ball and the forward.
Regarding the Grundy playing as a ruck rover, people who've been watching would have noticed Witts palm a couple to Grundy over the last few weeks at forward line stoppages.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
Stupied
Joined: 14 Mar 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| MagpieBat wrote: | If Cloke were to be dropped, then the results we have got out of White would vanish faster than water in the Sahara desert, because the best defender (who goes to Cloke) would now go to White. Even if Reid were to come back, he'd struggle with the best defender without Cloke there.
The question is not whether or not Cloke should be dropped, it's how do we get Cloke to snap out of this funk he is in?
As for the original question, I'd say it's pretty much our only option now. White's ruckwork, both at Sydney and with us, has been uninspiring, to say the least. Therefore, we will get better results out of Grundy and Witts, even with the risk of burning both kids out simultaneously, than we would with one of them and White to relieve.
That means Reid swings back into defence. |
Honestly, I'd prefer to have Jesses average ruck work with a single ruck and a more dangerous forward line.
If it were up to me when Reid returned, I'd alternate Grundy and Witts in the seniors weekly, and on the week they play twos play them as forwards to develop that part of their game. Let Hudson take the beating in the ruck at VFL level and try and prolong the careers of both boys. |
|
|
|
|
Tannin 
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| stui magpie wrote: | | Regarding the Grundy playing as a ruck rover, people who've been watching would have noticed Witts palm a couple to Grundy over the last few weeks at forward line stoppages. |
Yes indeedy lordy! I reckon they should change the rules so that goals resulting from this combination should count as 9 points.
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| MagpieBat wrote: | | The question is not whether or not Cloke should be dropped, it's how do we get Cloke to snap out of this funk he is in? |
Give him a run in the ruck?
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
warburton lad
Joined: 26 Aug 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I'd like to see Cloke and Reid both play out of the square, working hard up the ground at different angles.
Which superstar would the defenders go to?
Cloke is at his best when he works up the ground and works his defenders over.
Have Elliot go with Cloke and Freeman, when fit, go with Reid and they can feed off any crumbs and dismember opposition defences...
_________________
Firm in the belief that number 17 flag is only months away... |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Tannin wrote: | [quote="MagpieBat"]The question is not whether or not Cloke should be dropped, it's how do we get Cloke to snap out of this funk he is in?[/quote]
Give him a run in the ruck? |
Who is whether or not Cloke should be dropped it's how do we get Cloke to snap out of this funk he is in? |
|
|
|
|
MagpieBat
Joined: 27 Nov 2010
Location: Brooding in a cave... somewhere... maybe...
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Tannin wrote: | | MagpieBat wrote: | | The question is not whether or not Cloke should be dropped, it's how do we get Cloke to snap out of this funk he is in? |
Give him a run in the ruck? |
G'day Wallsy!
How's the French countryside? |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
