TOPIC: forwards

larkin forwards 1 year 1 week ago #1

We've got the 2nd worst forward line in the country. Some very good players but as a unit they are duds. Some say its the coach or game plan or maybe the players themselves – but it is THE problem that has to be sorted before we go anywhere. Sure we miss Tabs and Hoges but I reckon we need another player or two in that unit to make it really work. Its not height we need but skilled craftsmen who can can pressure and kick goals.
Login to reply,

zorro forwards 1 year 1 week ago #2

Don’t you think “sure we miss Tabs and Hoges” is just a wee bit disingenuous larkin?

It’s an example of the old “that’s a reason but it’s no excuse” goobledegook. Or that question they always ask in Philosophy 1.0: How many things do you cut off a dog before it isn’t a dog anymore?
Login to reply,

larkin forwards 1 year 1 week ago #3

Na we need a better spread of goal kickers.
Login to reply,

Richo forwards 1 year 1 week ago #4

Our most effective forward this year has been Lobb. But he spends most of his time in the ruck. Tabs looks good when he is on the park but his goal kicking is a big problem. Hogan cant get on the park. Our best small forward is now a midfielder. Cam Mac can kick but doesn't get it enough. I don't know where I'm going with this except to say ....Yep we have problems
Login to reply,
purple kit, expat, Corporal Agarn, themagoos, R.Lyon said You Beaut

Raglan Matt forwards 1 year 1 week ago #5

Raglan Matt
Easy solutios, Richo, is where you should be going, play Darcy & Sandi in the ruck and Lobb forward. 1 problem solved.

Back off Tabs heavy running training workload, and have him practice goal kicking a lot more. 2nd problem solved.

Back off Hogan's heavy running training workload, and have him practice goal kicking a lot more. 3rd problem solved.

Tell Switkowski his job is to kick goals, not set new tackling records. 4th problem solved.

Tell the forward line to set up as a forward line, leading at the footy, this will create space for Cammac to run, a la Clive. 5th problem solved.

It's not like we are trying to bring peace to the Middle East, or sort the Irish Troubles.
Login to reply,
slammen, Patient Docker said You Beaut

shane forwards 1 year 1 week ago #6

We had a crap forward line with Hogan and Taberner in it too. The problem is the smooth transfer of the ball from one part of the ground to another.

We kick it into the forward line and then set up instead of having the forward line set up for the ball to arrive into.
Login to reply,
docbert, Bizkit, Raglan Matt, Gerovich said You Beaut

Sox forwards 1 year 1 week ago #7

When our forward line had ONE of Tabs or Hoges in it we were a top 8 side beating top for sides on their own decks, Shane.
I’m not going to pretend we were scoring anything like an AFL side should, but the results and the availability of our forwards lines up spookily closely.
Login to reply,

shane forwards 1 year 1 week ago #8

True. That one time it happened was great.

But, they were both outscored by Brandon Matera that day so make of that what you will.
Login to reply,
Raglan Matt said You Beaut

Matebe forwards 1 year 1 week ago #9

Its won and lost in the midfield so who cares about a forward line.
Login to reply,

The_Yeti forwards 1 year 1 week ago #10


Scoring 2 goals 19 points from a greater number of forward 50 entries in the last Derby might suggest that forwards are kind of important as well
Egurls Suck!
Login to reply,

Matebe forwards 1 year 1 week ago #11

What does 2.19 matter when you’re not defined by your results?
Login to reply,
hypen, Corporal Agarn, R.Lyon said You Beaut

pollyanna forwards 1 year 1 week ago #12

With the Annihilation Derby I would easily say that the inside 50 stat is wonky - from where I was sitting, effective inside 50s were about 2 for every 21, or 2 effective and 19 ineffective/pointless. Which is about right - if you're outside and bomb a ball that dribbles out on the full, those guys at Champion Data still count it as an inside 50.

There is absolutely nothing about that game that any Fremantle supporter could point to that was even remotely worth noting.
Login to reply,
fourthump, The_Yeti, Raglan Matt, Corporal Agarn, Suker, R.Lyon said You Beaut

hypen forwards 1 year 1 week ago #13

Now who's stinking up the joint, Matebe!
Login to reply,
The_Yeti, shane, Corporal Agarn said You Beaut

Sox forwards 1 year 1 week ago #14

As I see it, we have one of the best small forwards in the comp (Walters) and another very good (I’m not going to say “elite” because no one should, ever) small in Matera. We’ve got some good pressure forwards that will kick more goals when the team is playing better (Switta, Crowden, would it be cheeky of me to say Banfield?) then a raft of talls that have some talent, have shown glimpses, but haven’t quite put it together in Hogan, McCarthy, Taberner, Cox, Lobbe and, another cheeky one, Kersten.
Now, we can argue all day about why those 5 (6?) haven’t come good (injuries, ruck duties, midfield delivery...) but I think the base assessment is there.
Add to that some goal-kicking mids (Fyfe, Mundy, Hills big and small) and there’s some firepower there.
So here’s the real question:
Do we have a forward structure problem (stop pushing the forwards so far up the ground, lead at the ball etc.) or,
Do we have a midfield problem (honour the McCarthy lead, stop bombing long, get some space around the contest so the whole team doesn’t have to run in to support etc.) or,
Do we have both?

I think we have a midfield problem. As a result, I find it hard to tell if we have a forward structure problem.

I think, this year, the coaching panel drilled the team to go attacking at the centre bounce, to either score directly or trust the backmen to stop the opposition doing the same (and looking at the back six, and the midfield grunt, that seems sensible). With the new positioning rules I think this is a solid attacking game plan.
Once the ball is in play, if you gain possession back of the centre, the plan is to go careful with the first kick (don’t try to be too clever, just get forward 20-30 metres), then go attacking with the next possession. Run hard to support, quick overlap running and handball work to get to the back of the opposition zone, then when you hit their mid-back wall, bomb it long to get over the back of the zone, and back in the talls to win the important contests.
I reckon that was the grand plan. Ross’ “new attacking style” for 2019. Theoretically, you get some exciting run through the middle, you get some big marks up forward and everyone is happy.
The team starts the year and is slowly starting to click into that plan, link up right, the team starts to get confidence in the plan. Hill and Langdon are exciting on the wings, Fyfe and Mundy are bulls in the middle, the forwards rack up some marks, and the backline stand tall.
Then the injuries hit. We can cover Pearce, and we can cover one of Tabs, Hogan or Lobbe going down - but not two, and certainly not three.
Suddenly we’re workig the ball to that long kick forward and at that point the plan falls down, and the opposition cuts us up on the rebound.
So, the coaches try to adjust. They tell the players, once you’ve overlapped through the middle, you should have some numbers to create time, you use that to lower the eyes, give the kids time to get forward. It takes the team weeks to adjust, and when they do, it still doesn’t work - too much pressure through midfield to nail that kick, too many tired 20 year olds running around that can’t get forward quick enough.
This weekend we got some talls back, tried to go long again. It kinda works, but when the ball hits the deck we’re stuffed because Darcy and Sandi aren’t as quick as Tabs and Hoges, they can’t stop the rebound.
None of this would be a problem if we had a different system bringing the ball through the middle.

Gameplan doesn’t work without talls. Need talls back AND new gameplan. Probably all RL’s fault.
Login to reply,
rogerrocks said You Beaut