King Kepler, To respond, I was just expressing that you've got to make the best of what you got, play to your strengths in the forward line, rather than bemoan the reality of not having Tom Lynch or Jeremy Cameron. Its not exclusively on topic, but from what I can gather in this thread, in terms of list management, we are where we are because the relevant Bond misses have been Adams, Lever, McGovern and McGovern - of which, the latter two could have been potential tall forward solutions, although the most advanced of the brothers is generally regarded highly as an intercept marking defender.
The game vs North Melbourne that I mentioned was to show under what circumstances the fastest scoring run on of goals occurred. (Historically its equal 3rd highest number of goals ever scored by Fremantle in a quarter, but its higher in terms of goals scored per minute). It was to show it was possible to score prolifically with a smaller forward line. The Derby was mentioned just to give an easily remembered comparison of what its like to to put on a big score in a short amount of time . In the Derby just over a year ago where we scored the same 9:2 in a quarter, we had the same set up of Clarke/Taberner/Pavlich/Mayne that we had on the weekend against Carlton. So obviously the current problems are not largely related to personnel up forward.
So what I'm saying is, why can't we find a different way to other teams. It won't appease the people who say the trend to success is for key forwards to be closer to 200cm tall rather than 192cm but why can't our most dangerous players in the forward line at the end of the year be built around Walters, Ballantyne, Crozier, Bennell, Yarran, Mayne rather than continually pining for the 7 foot marking colossus who might take a couple of contested marks in a game like a Daniher. Great in the air, hopeless on the ground. Tall players aren't the only players who can take contested marks. Fyfe would be our No1.
The necessities of the game dictates that a team is going to have a tall in the forward line who has to be a competent 2nd ruckman - so he has to be one of the tall targets - and I just don't think our team can structure up with another 2 key position players up forward - not when one of those is Pav.
That is to say, teams are now set up for rebound and scoring out of defensive 50 (we're currently one of the worst at this transition) so that the handful of contested marks you might take inside the forward 50 from having tall players, won't compensate you for the amount of ground ball that you lose inside the forward 50 because you're too slow and can't lock the ball in.
I understand we're we are at - that Pav is still our best key position forward. I'd rather Pav played somewhere else now so we can see what happens in the vacuum. Whether its Taberner (whose current selection on form is generous), or A.Pearce (who is actually agile enough to create a contest when the ball hits the ground and to play alongside Pav is in the forward line but seems to be earmarked as a key defender), or eventually Apeness (who can also play ruck) - I'd rather see which players, tall and small, will take on the extra responsibility now, than continue as we are and have to start again from scratch next year. Also, it might change some the psychology of players always looking to kick it to Pav because he's been captain for so long - even when he might be leading up to drag his defender out and create space for others.
