James Frawley a forward?

[Fat Tony 4,533]

Love the idea of Frawley having the occasional run on the ball to break up a game.

There was a thread on it last year, but i think E25 was opposed to it got a few of his alias's to shout down anyone that disagreed with him and ruined it.

I would trial Frawley as a full time midfielder in the preseason. Big, fast and strong mids are vital in the centre bounces and Frawley is our most Judd-like player. Our midfield is one of the weakest in the comp and if it doesn't work, what have we lost?

I would also prefer to see Martin used as a KPD when not relieving in the ruck. He looks more natural in the backline and Clarke, Watts, Howe, Green, Jurrah, Petterd, Sylvia etc gives us enough targets up forward.

However, if the back six includes Garland and Frawley I would prefer both to be used as KPD. We get a lot of extra run in this set up.

[Swampfox 190]

I think Frawley will develop into the best KP defender in the competition

Neeld will build our back 6 around him

[DeeSpencer 23,483]

I would trial Frawley as a full time midfielder in the preseason. Big, fast and strong mids are vital in the centre bounces and Frawley is our most Judd-like player. Our midfield is one of the weakest in the comp and if it doesn't work, what have we lost?

I would also prefer to see Martin used as a KPD when not relieving in the ruck. He looks more natural in the backline and Clarke, Watts, Howe, Green, Jurrah, Petterd, Sylvia etc gives us enough targets up forward.

However, if the back six includes Garland and Frawley I would prefer both to be used as KPD. We get a lot of extra run in this set up.

Hmmm lets see. Well the first thing we'll lose is our AA FB from the backline, after that we'll probably lose Frawley to injury as his body isn't set up to play midfield, oh and after that we'll probably lose clearances when you are trying to get a 193cm guy to bash around with guys who've been doing clearances for years.

Martin resting as KPD is not the worst idea, but how many other players rest down there, and why. I'd say none because Martin doesn't have the precise skills or defensive know how. He'd be replacing Frawley, Rivers or Garland anyway and they have a reasonable amount of run for key defenders.

[Fat Tony 4,533]

Hmmm lets see. Well the first thing we'll lose is our AA FB from the backline, after that we'll probably lose Frawley to injury as his body isn't set up to play midfield, oh and after that we'll probably lose clearances when you are trying to get a 193cm guy to bash around with guys who've been doing clearances for years.

Martin resting as KPD is not the worst idea, but how many other players rest down there, and why. I'd say none because Martin doesn't have the precise skills or defensive know how. He'd be replacing Frawley, Rivers or Garland anyway and they have a reasonable amount of run for key defenders.

1. I did say trial it in the preseason, so if we lose the clearances in a preseason game it doesn't really matter. (IMO Frawley would be excellent in the clearances, so I disagree.)

2. The chance of injury is similar in the midfield to down back, so I see that as a silly argument. He may need more bench time as a mid.

3. 193cm is not that tall for a midfielder these days. Pendlebury, Kouta, Hird and Judd. All have been/are bigger than average mids and excellent clearance players. Even NIcNat gets a run with Cox in the ruck these day.

4. While we lose our best defender, the hope is that we don't have the ball in the backline as often. The press killed us last year. Having the ball in our forward line means we can impart our own press.

Martin will only play up to 30% of game time in the ruck and needs to play 50% either back or forward. I prefer him back as he is a great athlete but not a great mark. It does mean we lose some run from defence, but our forward line looks better with other options. Clarke can also be used in the ruck if the changeover between Jamar and Clarke does not workout perfectly.

[dee-luded 2,958]

Well, this was raised and dismissed previously but with a new coach and a blank canvas there are no preconceived notions.

This tweet came from James Frawley's twitter-

"Playing forward this year. Prob kick 100!!"

Great idea if Sellar's move to defence is a success. Could free Chip to help up forward!

Then a later tweet-

"Sorry people hacked again by @tom_couch. Wish I could swing forward occasionally though! Ha"

But is it so funny?

Kicking may be a problem? Especially from set shots with awkward conditions. Marking maybe a problem?

Maybe we try him as 2nd or 3rd tall defender instead?

[old55 21,634]

Martin will only play up to 30% of game time in the ruck and needs to play 50% either back or forward. I prefer him back as he is a great athlete but not a great mark. It does mean we lose some run from defence, but our forward line looks better with other options. Clarke can also be used in the ruck if the changeover between Jamar and Clarke does not workout perfectly.

I think Martin could make it as a KPD, he's showed promise earlier in his career but he's become more valuable in the ruck with the acquisition of other backmen. He could end up back there if we have a spate of injuries. So I understand where you are coming from with Martin back.

But in practice this deosn't work - we need a stable back 6 and KPDs spend virtually 100% of the time on the field - they don't rotate to the bench so whose place is Martin taking when he plays his 50% back?

[Pennant St Dee 11,481]

Moving an AA defender to the forward line...even I'm not that silly

David Neitz but I will add that I don't agree with Chip being moved he is the next star defender of the AFL when Scarlett retires

[Lutz 76]

I think Frawley will develop into the best KP defender in the competition

Neeld will build our back 6 around him

What do you mean "will"?

He already is, and it already is.

[rjay 24,046]

Moving an AA defender to the forward line...even I'm not that silly

As silly as moving the full back of the century to full forward.

[daisycutter 28,684]

As silly as moving the full back of the century to full forward.

Wasn't Neitz an AA CHB? or is my memory that bad?

[monoccular 16,394]

Moving an AA defender to the forward line...even I'm not that silly

Is that an oblique reference to what the club did, out of necessity mind you when Ox went down again, with David Neitz?

EDIT: Apologies daisy cutter - hadn't seen your post.

YES is the answer.

Edited January 26, 2012 by monoccular

[daisycutter 28,684]

Is that an oblique reference to what the club did, out of necessity mind you when Ox went down again, with David Neitz?

EDIT: Apologies daisy cutter - hadn't seen your post.

YES is the answer.

mind you i'm not in favour of moving Frawley to anywhere except the backline

just that it has been done before

I think our forward line is starting to look good with a number of maturing options (they just need better supply)

I think our backline has/is ok but lacking in depth and one big gorilla short (some options showing promise though)

My concern is the midfield and I'm looking forward to see how a new coach(es) and game plan can make a difference here

[Sir Why You Little 34,920]

The only time i wish to see Frawely go forward is late in the last Quarter of our next GF appearance when the MFC are already 6 goals up. Let him go forward to kick a goal after having already had a blinder in defence earlier in the match.

He is a defender. If Neeld changes that i would be astounded.

[Range Rover 1,935]

It just wouldn't have been January without a James Frawley to the forward line thread.

[Gippy Dee 48]

It just wouldn't have been January without a James Frawley to the forward line thread.

True, that and a 'Bring back Dean Chiron' thread...

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

Never say never. Best ever CHB one David Neitz to FF Who would have thought?

He could kick straight.

Crap thing is he was a CHF playing FF the whole time.

[Scoop Junior 3,055]

The attacking benefits that Frawley delivers when freed of this limiting role outweigh any loss of lock-down - that's the crux or the argument.

I don't agree with this theory.

Frawley's primary value to us is his ability to beat his opponent.

Yes he is clearly a good attacking defender because he has the pace and strength to take players on. But at the end of the day he's in the side for his defensive ability more so than his attacking rebound.

I don't think the value of a tall defender who consistently performs against the oppositions' best tall forward should be underestimated. It's not easy to find a gun tall defender who can match opponents for strength and speed.

IMO it would be a bigger waste of his talent using Frawley as a rebounding, attacking defender. It's much easier to play the Heath Shaw role than it is to match up on Jack Riewoldt or Jon Brown.

Unless another player steps up as a gun tall defender, I think the loss of lock-down from freeing up Frawley would outweigh his attacking benefits. And just because he plays a defensive role doesn't mean there isn't scope for run and rebound within that role.

[rpfc 27,637]

Look, it's an interesting argument, and maybe AoB should bring a post or two over from the training report thread that points out his argument.

I am of the belief that a Frawley game where he keeps a gorilla to one goal while getting 10 touches himself and no defensive rebounds is better than a 18 touch game with 4 defensive rebounds if we struggle to contain that gorilla forward.

And I realise that the premise is reliant on Sellar being able to contain that gorilla, but that premise has little bedrock beneath it.

Personally, the more pressing issue for me is finding a small defender who can compete well and kick well.

Seems to be either or at the moment...

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

Seems to be either or at the moment...

bennell/bartram i assume?

[rpfc 27,637]

bennell/bartram i assume?

Yes, Jamint Bentram would be perfect.

[old55 21,634]

I don't agree with this theory.

Frawley's primary value to us is his ability to beat his opponent.

Yes he is clearly a good attacking defender because he has the pace and strength to take players on. But at the end of the day he's in the side for his defensive ability more so than his attacking rebound.

I don't think the value of a tall defender who consistently performs against the oppositions' best tall forward should be underestimated. It's not easy to find a gun tall defender who can match opponents for strength and speed.

IMO it would be a bigger waste of his talent using Frawley as a rebounding, attacking defender. It's much easier to play the Heath Shaw role than it is to match up on Jack Riewoldt or Jon Brown.

Unless another player steps up as a gun tall defender, I think the loss of lock-down from freeing up Frawley would outweigh his attacking benefits. And just because he plays a defensive role doesn't mean there isn't scope for run and rebound within that role.

To draw examples from Bob's posting on the training thread you'd play Scarlett, Fisher, Reid and Fletcher on the most dangerous opposition forward for their defensive capabilities rather than using Lonergan, Dawson, Tarrant and Hooker in these roles? I think there's a reason why Sellar came to the club and it's not for depth. Beau Wilkes was picked by St.Kilda for similar reasons. Sellar doesn't have to be "gun tall defender", he just has to be adequate.

[Lutz 76]

Yes, Jamint Bentram would be perfect.

or James Strauss.

[Wadda We Sing 10,685]

Chippa is one of the best key backs going around, and will only get better, we cant put him up forward.... BUT...the thing that bothers me is the way St.Kilda use Goddard up forward.....When it works, it really works.

[pitmaster 3,100]

Moving an AA defender to the forward line...even I'm not that silly

David Neitz?

Apologies: missed the earlier post raising this. However, in this instance not a good idea given our defence is the one established and near complete unit in the team.

Edited January 28, 2012 by pitmaster

[Ivor 7]

Neitz

I'm not sure if the comparison really stacks up. Neita only really played one season in defence that being 1994 (1 goal). He impressed that season playing on Carey. However, in the same year Jakovich played 13 games for 51 goals, Gazza played 24 games for 79 goals and Schwarz played 25 games for 60 goals - an embarrasse des riches.

In other respects I don't think that they are comparable - although I don't doubt that Chip would be flattered at the comparison.

For mine, success at the pointy end of the season starts in the backline with a dominating (both in skill and strength) FB or CHB. Think - Silvagni, Langford, Jakovich (G) or Scarlett - and perhaps, one day, Frawley.