Colin Garland

[daisycutter 28,709]

I think if Warnock were in the best 22 ahead of Rivers, then you might then get your wish structure-wise. Garland slips into Rivers' 3rd tall spot, Warnock and Frawley are the 2 "genuine KPD", and Rivers is 3rd tall depth. When one of Warnock or Frawley goes down, Garlands fills in the key post and Rivers takes over Garland's place... Is that the type of setup you are envisioning DC?

Sort of, but not Warnock. Garland improved and Warnock didn't, in fact dropped off in form, got sent to Casey and couldn't get back in even though he played ok at Casey. However I think Warnock's days are passed unless he reinvents himself.

I just see Col as a place-sitter until we develop one of our draft picks or we get lucky and draft a ready-made KPB close to our window (long shot)

Not saying either of these things will happen, just my preferred outcome

[e25 5]

Different era, different game.

[Doggo 32]

I think Chipper is better suited CHB, and Garland to playing deep on lead-up forwards. But they are both flexible enough to rotate when needed.

Bottom line, as the poll suggests, there are many who believe Col is a KPD, but some who don't. I don't reckon either side can/will mount an argument compelling enough to make the other side change opinions.

Let's just settle on him being a fu(Ken great defender, tall/KP or otherwise and an invaluable part of the team!

Yep

[dee-luded 2,958]

I think if Warnock were in the best 22 ahead of Rivers, then you might then get your wish structure-wise. Garland slips into Rivers' 3rd tall spot, Warnock and Frawley are the 2 "genuine KPD", and Rivers is 3rd tall depth. When one of Warnock or Frawley goes down, Garlands fills in the key post and Rivers takes over Garland's place... Is that the type of setup you are envisioning DC?

Just on Warnock. He really has slipped quite a lot from people's minds. After two top 5 B&F finishes, he goes from being one of the first picked in '08 and '09, to a fringe player in '10 and looking towards '11. I personally don't have Warnock in my best 22, but this is mainly because i believe that Garland really is a genuine key position (tall) defender, best suited to that role. Warnock IMO is actually really unlucky we have a player of the quality of Garland filling that 2nd key position defender role.

Garland is effectively keeping Warnock out of the side; not because Warnock isn't good enough IMO, but because Garland is simply better. Warnock's not a bad player; he's strong, a good size, very fast and absolutely dominates VFL level, and is solid at AFL level. I'd go as far as to say that if Warnock were at say, Carlton or Hawthorn, he'd be their #1 defender. But Garland just seems to shade him in all areas as a FB/CHB.

I think thats close Doggo, but Warnocks the poor mans kpd, of what I think we're trying to envisage. In my mind Warnock & Frawley are vying for the same Full Back Position. I think Warnock is not suited to the half back line,,, & IMO Frawley is a better Full Back than he is @ H/B. He can play high, but he's better deep.

IMO I'd like to have that other CHB come through, & have Warnock to bring in from the VFL, if our full back was out. *** I truly don't think we could win a flag with both Rivers & Warnock in the same side... Not enough disposal skills or attacking precision.

[Doggo 32]

Sort of, but not Warnock. Garland improved and Warnock didn't, in fact dropped off in form, got sent to Casey and couldn't get back in even though he played ok at Casey. However I think Warnock's days are passed unless he reinvents himself.

I just see Col as a place-sitter until we develop one of our draft picks or we get lucky and draft a ready-made KPB close to our window (long shot)

Not saying either of these things will happen, just my preferred outcome.

I get ya, was just using Warnock as an example of a genuine key defender in your definition.

I'm hopeful that Warnock can return to his best form next year, though i tend to agree with your sentiment.

He was playing more than just "ok" football at Casey and was really unlucky to not get back in. He finished 3rd in the Casey b&f despite playing 13 games for MFC. Late in the year he was in red hot form at Casey, getting a couple of really emphatic match-winning BOGs, but was kept out of the side by Garland. He's a handy player, is Warnock...

[dee-luded 2,958]

I get ya, was just using Warnock as an example of a genuine key defender in your definition.

I'm hopeful that Warnock can return to his best form next year, though i tend to agree with your sentiment.

He was playing more than just "ok" football at Casey and was really unlucky to not get back in. He finished 3rd in the Casey b&f despite playing 13 games for MFC. Late in the year he was in red hot form at Casey, getting a couple of really emphatic match-winning BOGs, but was kept out of the side by Garland. He's a handy player, is Warnock...

It wouldn't surprise me, to see Garland start to play as a CHB more regularly, but IMO temporarily for a season, as I can see Warnock struggling going forward, & I can't see any of the New Kids being ready next year... But I could Imagine one of the tall kids playing back in 2012.

To me Warnocks make or break next season, 2011...

[Doggo 32]

*** I truly don't think we could win a flag with both Rivers & Warnock in the same side... Not enough disposal skills or attacking precision.

Agree with this.

Here's something to ponder...

Would you prefer the current setup of Garland/Frawley as the FB/CHB with Rivers the 3rd tall?

or

Is Warnock/Frawley with Garland the 3rd tall (and Rivers out) preferable?

If Warnock and Rivers aren't ideal in the same side together, then the above are basically our only two setup options when picking from a full list.

Which do you guys prefer?

I prefer the current setup, but that's because i rate Garland as a genuine tall back. If i didn't, i'd have Warnock in the side ahead of Rivers, with Garland 3rd tall.

[dee-luded 2,958]

Agree with this.

Here's something to ponder...

Would you prefer the current setup of Garland/Frawley as the FB/CHB with Rivers the 3rd tall?

or

Is Warnock/Frawley with Garland the 3rd tall (and Rivers out) preferable?

If Warnock and Rivers aren't ideal in the same side together, then the above are basically our only two setup options when picking from a full list.

Which do you guys prefer?

I prefer the current setup, but that's because i rate Garland as a genuine tall back. If i didn't, i'd have Warnock in the side ahead of Rivers, with Garland 3rd tall.

Frawley is our best defender, & he's just starting. The rest are not quite rights except Garland. But, they are competative at the level we are currently playing at.

Once we start to improve further their shortcomings will become more obvious.

So I'd prefer Frawley deep with Rivers @ chb & Garland on the flank as his great below his knees for smaller players. But this illustrates our shallowness in our tall defenders.

[Doggo 32]

Frawley is our best defender, & he's just starting. The rest are not quite rights except Garland. But, they are competative at the level we are currently playing at.

Once we start to improve further their shortcomings will become more obvious.

So I'd prefer Frawley deep with Rivers @ chb & Garland on the flank as his great below his knees for smaller players. But this illustrates our shallowness in our tall defenders.

Hmmm....

So you rate Rivers as better suited to a Key Position Defender role, ahead of Garland, because Garland is better below the knees? If we made the Poll "Is Rivers a KPD?" surely he'd get even less votes than Garland, right?

If Garland, who IMO has played most of his career as a KPD, isn't best suited to that role, (as yourself, daisycutter and others have insinuated), then isn't he too some sort of NQR (for want of a better term)? An undersized key tall back?

(I'm putting words in your mouth here) but all of a sudden we've gone from having a pretty good, well-settled backline which has improved rapidly in terms of score against and losing margins since 08, to basically Frawley as our only non-NQR?

Obviously everyone wants the PERFECT backline, but i believe we already have an accomplished, solid back 6. While there will be some minor changes here and there over the next few years, the core is strong and established. And the Garland/Frawley tall duo is it's centrepiece IMO.

Good night.

[dee-luded 2,958]

Hmmm....

So you rate Rivers as better suited to a Key Position Defender role, ahead of Garland, because Garland is better below the knees? If we made the Poll "Is Rivers a KPD?" surely he'd get even less votes than Garland, right?

If Garland, who IMO has played most of his career as a KPD, isn't best suited to that role, (as yourself, daisycutter and others have insinuated), then isn't he too some sort of NQR (for want of a better term)? An undersized key tall back?

(I'm putting words in your mouth here) but all of a sudden we've gone from having a pretty good, well-settled backline which has improved rapidly in terms of score against and losing margins since 08, to basically Frawley as our only non-NQR?

Obviously everyone wants the PERFECT backline, but i believe we already have an accomplished, solid back 6. While there will be some minor changes here and there over the next few years, the core is strong and established. And the Garland/Frawley tall duo is it's centrepiece IMO.

Good night.

Top teams ease off a little intensity when they play lower teams. Our back half has performed well these last few years under Wellman, but as we become a more formidable side, then other top sides will apply more intencity against us.

So, re your Garland comment, I don't think he's undersized, regarding his height so much, as his weight/strength. So I do not class him as NQR, & I don't class him as a Key Position Defender, but rather, in todays vernacular, a tall defender...

So I think we have 2 premiership tall defenders in Frawls & Garl's. With a couple more needed.

Good Night.

Edited December 20, 2010 by dee-luded

[Nasher 33,187]

Obviously everyone wants the PERFECT backline, but i believe we already have an accomplished, solid back 6. While there will be some minor changes here and there over the next few years, the core is strong and established. And the Garland/Frawley tall duo is it's centrepiece IMO.

Doggo, I'm of the opinion that you don't post enough these days. I agree with everything you have said.

[rpfc 27,657]

Doggo, I'm of the opinion that you don't post enough these days. I agree with everything you have said.

Completely agree.

Been off my game slightly last few days but Doggo has just pinned down dee-luded (sorry man) and it was grand.

Well argued.

[Red Sox 2]

Versatile Key Defender. Gun.

Yes, I already said it but all the words I read afterward take me back to my original thought. Pretty simple I would have thought.

[daisycutter 28,709]

Completely agree.

Been off my game slightly last few days but Doggo has just pinned down dee-luded (sorry man) and it was grand.

Well argued.

Well as long as the boys club is happy

Let us all know when you have finished the back slaps

[rpfc 27,657]

Well as long as the boys club is happy

Let us all know when you have finished the back slaps

Huh?

Stick to the topic and your argument.

[ox_5 163]

Well as long as the boys club is happy

Let us all know when you have finished the back slaps

Are you kidding me?

Must be tough to have your opinion disagreed with and to see a well thought out response put forward which is backed up by others.

[daisycutter 28,709]

Are you kidding me?

Must be tough to have your opinion disagreed with and to see a well thought out response put forward which is backed up by others.

Thats not what I was referring to Ox, but I can't be bothered to explain myself as it will just be misinterpreted

Put it down to my bad mood this morning (which is another story)

[ox_5 163]

Thats not what I was referring to Ox, but I can't be bothered to explain myself as it will just be misinterpreted

Put it down to my bad mood this morning (which is another story)

This time of year does that to most, take it easy

[ox_5 163]

I actually see a bit of a younger Matthew Scarlett in Col. Use of the body is superb and creates run off of more lumbering opponents.

[dee-luded 2,958]

Completely agree.

Been off my game slightly last few days but Doggo has just pinned down dee-luded (sorry man) and it was grand.

Well argued.

I don't understand this tone of comment. I'm not trying to win anything, just trying to explain my thoughts. So why is there this win & lose mentality, rather than a sharing of thoughts & understanding. Of being happy with a situation or being concerned by something.

For me its not about winning a debate, nor pressuring someone to change to my way of mind. but just to try to reach an understanding of both points of veiw.

I think this theread was a good discussion, there is no win or lose in that, just different thoughts. Your comments & ways of thinking make me feel a little saddened to cheapen what was a good discussion.

It was nice to be able to share thoughts & talk without this school yard rhetoric of an adversarial nature.

Anyway, I wish you all a merry christmas.

[rpfc 27,657]

I don't understand this tone of comment. I'm not trying to win anything, just trying to explain my thoughts. So why is there this win & lose mentality, rather than a sharing of thoughts & understanding. Of being happy with a situation or being concerned by something.

For me its not about winning a debate, nor pressuring someone to change to my way of mind. but just to try to reach an understanding of both points of veiw.

I think this theread was a good discussion, there is no win or lose in that, just different thoughts. Your comments & ways of thinking make me feel a little saddened to cheapen what was a good discussion.

It was nice to be able to share thoughts & talk without this school yard rhetoric of an adversarial nature.

Anyway, I wish you all a merry christmas.

Well, we can always go outside and fight?

Heh. You're absolutley right. There are no right or wrong answers but there is an absolute truth that I think we can all agree on:

That Colin Garland is strong enough, tall enough, and good enough to play as a key position back and that is what he has played in the past and will play in the foreseeable future.

And if you can't agree to that statement then you are wrong.

[Doggo 32]

Doggo, I'm of the opinion that you don't post enough these days. I agree with everything you have said.

Cheers. Glad others agree with me, i suppose.

Unfortunately, it seems the more i post on DL, the less attention i tend give to my everyday life... It's just too involved!

I'll be posting more regularly once the footy is back on, no doubt. Otherwise, i tend to do my best work in the wee hours of the morn, when insomnia strikes.

[dee-luded 2,958]

Well, we can always go outside and fight?

Heh. You're absolutley right. There are no right or wrong answers but there is an absolute truth that I think we can all agree on:

That Colin Garland is strong enough, tall enough, and good enough to play as a key position back and that is what he has played in the past and will play in the foreseeable future.

And if you can't agree to that statement then you are wrong.

Well I think thats what we been discussing, & I still think of him currently as a 3rd tall type. Thats my wish. Anything can happen.

[BAMF 3,812]

Well, we can always go outside and fight?

Heh. You're absolutley right. There are no right or wrong answers but there is an absolute truth that I think we can all agree on:

That Colin Garland is strong enough, tall enough, and good enough to play as a key position back and that is what he has played in the past and will play in the foreseeable future.

And if you can't agree to that statement then you are wrong.

Mate. You started this topic.

You asked the question. What were you expecting from this?

If you think that it is the absolute truth that Colin Garland is a KPD, then why did you start this topic?

For general debate? Because it looks like you have waited until someone (deeluded) disagree's with you and then jumped all over their opinion. In fact it seems that you have actually taken great pleasure that deeluded has disagreed and that Doggo has 'pinned him down'

As I have already stated. I agree that he is a KPB. But the fact that no one can disagree with the group think around here any more is a real shame.

[jayceebee31 692]

Mate. You started this topic.

You asked the question. What were you expecting from this?

If you think that it is the absolute truth that Colin Garland is a KPD, then why did you start this topic?

For general debate? Because it looks like you have waited until someone (deeluded) disagree's with you and then jumped all over their opinion. In fact it seems that you have actually taken great pleasure that deeluded has disagreed and that Doggo has 'pinned him down'

As I have already stated. I agree that he is a KPB. But the fact that no one can disagree with the group think around here any more is a real shame.

Extremely well stated-just a question though.You state that IYO that Col is a KPB.Does this mean you think he is best suited as a half back flanker or a back pocket or more universal than that such as or wherever needed on the backline. I still think for the team sake he would make a sensational winger- great defensive whilst strong attacking style. Whilst everybody on Demonland disagrees with me-I will stick to my opinion as Bails will pick him to play there this year on occassions and I'll have the last laugh even at HT's expense.

Edited December 29, 2010 by jayceebee31