Which tall defender should play forward?

[deehughman 10]

Warnock, Frawley, Garland or Rivers.

Petterd Out. To tall in defence. Who should go forward?

Try Rivers. Then Garland who may be the best option. Leave Chip alone.

[ucanchoose 1,816]

None of the above. Rivers should get the boot. Three others are our core defence for the next 4+ years. They need games and YEARS together. Leave them the bloody hell alone!!!!!!!

It annoys me, trying to take out of the backline to make a forward line. How about waiting a using the players that are injured when they come back?

[heartbeatstrue 57]

I think Garland may go alright up forward.

Another option is Paul Johnson. I've never forgotten the time he busted his heart out chasing someone (who was it?) and won the free. Great determination and spirit. Plus he's huge.

[DeeSpencer 26,094]

None of those 4 are strong marking talls. They would be no more effective than Martin, Green or Bate. We'll just have to wait until Petterd and Jurrah come back, and keep giving Watts time.

Jamar should continue resting forward.

I'm not a PJ fan but he really does have a big chance to revive his career very soon.

[do it 4 robbie 1]

Would love to see Garland given a crack. Wasn't he recruited as a forward ?

Edited May 2, 2010 by do it 4 robbie

[Felix 92]

If you had to choose one I would like to see Garland up forward 191cm, 6cm on Petterd. Otherwise I would have Watts in there for the remainder of the season.

[MadAsHell 4,217]

I'd go with Rivers, reads the play well and is a good mark. He'd at least create a contest which we saw was seriously lacking on saturday. If Rivers didn't work I'd look to Garland and if one of those can establish themselves in there I'd then look at giving Watts a run along side them, wouldn't bring him in as our focal forward.

[Real Demon 232]

I don't see Garland or Rivers as being suitable to be honest.

If we were to say we were going to persist with one there over the other, then it would have to be Garland, but I can't see that happening.

We appear to have a problem here.........they both appear to play the same style of game in the backline, and with Warnock and Frawley pencilled in each week for the key positions, we don't need 2 3rd tall defenders out there.

I like both of them........tough call for the coach what to do here, but barring injury, someone is going to be put out here.

[Daz's Dee's 113]

Simple Watts has too play what did we recruit him for? Key forward I thought what better way for him too learn the game and see if he is any good they said last year they want afl game time into him! Well here is a chance too see what his got. I get the feeling he is not coming along like they expected though!

Edited May 2, 2010 by Daz's Dee's

[Jerry Lundergard 420]

I think Garland may go alright up forward.

Another option is Paul Johnson. I've never forgotten the time he busted his heart out chasing someone (who was it?) and won the free. Great determination and spirit. Plus he's huge.

The Sherminator.

[e25 5]

None of the above. Rivers should get the boot. Three others are our core defence for the next 4+ years. They need games and YEARS together. Leave them the bloody hell alone!!!!!!!

It annoys me, trying to take out of the backline to make a forward line. How about waiting a using the players that are injured when they come back?

Completely agree.

[sylvinator 96]

I don't think any of our defenders who play forward.

Our future forward line will come from:

Watts, Jurrah, Bate, Pettard, Green, Sylvia, Wona, Bennel, Maric, Tapscott, (and perhaps Martin)

Clearly we have plenty of guys who are forwards. Most of them are pure potential at this stage, but there is a bucket load of talent in that list.

But my point is, we have enough options up forward that we do not want to be taking away from our backline which will be the core of our 2012 premiership!

[Seinfeld 40]

None of the above inspire as forwards.

Watts must play...all pre season... the mantra from the Club was to get game time into players and for them to learn to play together...If Watts is not selected this week then there is something drastically wrong with him.....

I don't want to hear this crap about him still growing etc...Look at Morton...he's been growing as well and is if fact lighter than Watts yet they played him and kept playing him....

[MadAsHell 4,217]

None of the above inspire as forwards.

Watts must play...all pre season... the mantra from the Club was to get game time into players and for them to learn to play together...If Watts is not selected this week then there is something drastically wrong with him.....

I don't want to hear this crap about him still growing etc...Look at Morton...he's been growing as well and is if fact lighter than Watts yet they played him and kept playing him....

Don't get me wrong I think they should be playing Watts also as they do need to get game time into him. However he shouldn't come in as our focal point in the forward line as he isn't the physical size to take pack marks and create contests (yet). That's why I think Rivers should go forward just for now and Watts can play a half forwad/pocket role. By 2012 onwards, that's when there'll be no excuses for Watts not to be creating those contests and play as a FF.

[two sheds jackson 3]

Simple Watts has too play what did we recruit him for? Key forward I thought what better way for him too learn the game and see if he is any good they said last year they want afl game time into him! Well here is a chance too see what his got. I get the feeling he is not coming along like they expected though!

Watts is coming along according to plan but I won't debate that point with you here, theres plenty of other threads about it. The thing is, even if Watts was to magically come in next week and average five goals for the rest of the year, we'd still ideally like another bonafide tall. I dont really know if using anyone from our backline is the answer, though. Breaking it down:

Rivers: A worthwhile venture, but irrelavent to this debate IMO. Even if we put Rivers forward and he turns out to be a success, then that just means we've found another good medium-sized half forward flanker for the next few years. That would be nice, but would do nothing to solve our present structural problem.

Warnock: Is vital to our defensive structure and I doubt he'd even be a good forward.

Frawley: See Warnock.

Garland: This is the one that gets talked about the most. A future Watts/Garland/Jurrah combination is a tantilising prospect. On the other hand, he's completely untried up forward and a definite proven commodity down back, and we need to be able to rotate defensive match-ups when things arent working out, which the Garland/Frawley/Warnock combo allows for. We'd be robbing Peter to pay Paul.

I think our best bet is to try to uncover a second tall in the next year or two from the talls on our list, guys like Martin, PJ, Gawn, Fitzpatrick etc. If we can't, we'll have to try to trade for one. We're on a very good wicket with a future backline combo of Frawley/Warnock/Garland, and we shouldn't screw around with it just to fix our tall forward problem.

Edited May 2, 2010 by two sheds jackson

[heartbeatstrue 57]

The Sherminator.

thanks!

[Damo 3,407]

Cale Morton

[heartbeatstrue 57]

Cale Morton

I think he's another week away, at least. Hopefully Bail & McKenzie are fit & raring to go.

[Lil_red_fire_engine 11,262]

I think Garland may go alright up forward.

Another option is Paul Johnson. I've never forgotten the time he busted his heart out chasing someone (who was it?) and won the free. Great determination and spirit. Plus he's huge.

1 highlight in how many years and how does this make him a forward. He is not up to it. A surplus of defenders does not make them a forward. Leave Warnock, Frawley and Garland alone. Rivers to Casey.

[deehughman 10]

we need a defensive tall forward. why not try rivers?

what would lake to do Watts or PJ or Miller. Rivers is a smart footy player. He may drag a good tall defender away from the play or put him in an position he does not want to be.

I think we have only two options. Dunn out of the square or one of our tall defenders.

The player must be able to damage them with skill and lock the ball in.

[The Big Ticket 94]

None of them will be moved forward. Leave them be.

FWIW, I think Rivers should be thrown up for trade while he's still got some value.

[Keyser Söze 0]

Cale Morton

Exactly right, but until then..?

I say give Hughes a game purely for perseverance.

It'd be like that movie, "Rudy".

[deehughman 10]

it must be an option to throw one forward or they all cant play.

none should be offered for trade. depth is a strength

[demons33 0]

try bartram up forward, the kid can kick now..

maybe even throw miller back into the backline see how he goes, with a tagging role on a key forward.

[Deano74 156]

Warnock, Frawley, Garland or Rivers.

Petterd Out. To tall in defence. Who should go forward?

Try Rivers. Then Garland who may be the best option. Leave Chip alone.

None, they are all natural defenders and should remain. but if had to choose, Garland