I reckon he could be better value than NicNat!

Not as flashy but just as entertaining!

So, are the naysayers still strying to convince yourselves that Stef would be better for us playing down back? On Saturday night, he played the 2nd tall forward option very well, he presented, took contested marks, and kicked 2 goals. To think that when we are playing the "real" stuff, he will be 3rd in line as far as opposition defenders go, he will fast become a valuable member of our forward line.

I've said it before, but I just hope that Watts, Clark, Stef and LJ spend the next 18 months or so getting to know each others every move. If they can build that trust, expectation and belief in each other individually and as a forward unit, it will be a beautiful thing. Being a big forward line with plenty of marking options (including Howe, Green, Petterd, etc), we can't afford to have players not playing as a unit. It's why our backline have been so good for the past 4 or 5 years, they are a group and have those qulaities I listed above.

I have been critical as to whether Stef can play an 80% forward role but there were some good signs this week. He ran to the right spots (something he has not doen well previously) and actually held some good grabs (something he has not done well previously). A good step in the right direction.

I have been critical as to whether Stef can play an 80% forward role but there were some good signs this week. He ran to the right spots (something he has not doen well previously) and actually held some good grabs (something he has not done well previously). A good step in the right direction.

I'm a fan and the biggest plus was that he gets involved in the play.

When it lands on him he can actually grab it which is also a big plus, but he mis-judged the flight a number of times in some fairly comical ways.

Considering we spent big on Mitch Clark. What is the position for Stef going forward? On saturday he looked lost or got in the way most of the time.

Stef could be a real weapon. I like him as a player but how should Neeld use him constructively??

backline on the resting ruckman

Considering we spent big on Mitch Clark. What is the position for Stef going forward? On saturday he looked lost or got in the way most of the time.

Stef could be a real weapon. I like him as a player but how should Neeld use him constructively??

Forward pocket or CHF, changing 2nd ruck seems a good Idea.

Fullback, Frawley CHB, Garland rebounding instead of having to play a KP, Rivers out, Clark and Watts backing up Jamar in the ruck.

Showed last season that he thrives on responsibility. Put him on the ball.

Forward pocket or CHF, changing 2nd ruck seems a good Idea.

Does CHF really exist anymore? Jeremy Howe, Clark & Stef all in the forward line looked very crowded to me.

If they do all go forward they will need to work together a lot more efficiently.

He needs to play in the backline or be traded at the end of the year. He is an OK player but doesn't really fit into our team so I would put either he or Jamar on the trade table to see what you can get. You have to give something to get something and you also need to buy low and sell high. He is worth as much now as he ever will be (Jamar probably already on the down slope) so I would see if we can get a running half back or skilled midfielder for him.

he and howe - who flew for everything, spoiling his teammates a lot of the time - looked like the only players capable of clunking a mark. clark's timing was horrible. martin's field-kicking was pretty respectable too, and he's a solid shot for goal.

i wouldn't trade him at all. think he's got the makings of a very, very good player.

Does CHF really exist anymore? Jeremy Howe, Clark & Stef all in the forward line looked very crowded to me.

If they do all go forward they will need to work together a lot more efficiently.

It's Rnd 1 WYL, with all new coaches, who have brought all new gamestyles and training ways. And we've pushed a very hard broom thru the place. Not to mention the emotional conflicts that need settling.

IMO this will take anywhere up to 10 weeks to get a grip across all the players, re the gamestyle and new playing partners/coaches.

It is a fascinating scenario. He has such a great athletic physique. Could he play a Jim Stynes "swingman" role? Between CHB & CHF?

Dr G. What you say has merit if he cannot find a positive slot.

It's Rnd 1 WYL, with all new coaches, who have brought all new gamestyles and training ways. And we've pushed a very hard broom thru the place. Not to mention the emotional conflicts that need settling.

IMO this will take anywhere up to 10 weeks to get a grip across all the players, re the gamestyle and new playing partners/coaches.

yep i know. But i still doubt a forward line can play all 3 down there whatever the gameplan. Happy to be proved wrong.

He's a basketballer, who came very late to footy. Nothing more to say.

Ed: oh yeah, he was good for super coach teams in 2011. FFS

Ed2: the only basketballer of note is Pendulbury who was equally good/great at both basketball and footy. The rest, including Tippet and Martin, are basketballers.

Edited April 1, 201213 yr by Mono

It is a fascinating scenario. He has such a great athletic physique. Could he play a Jim Stynes "swingman" role? Between CHB & CHF?

Dr G. What you say has merit if he cannot find a positive slot.

The ONLY option at this point for me is as first ruck.

However, your roaming role might not hurt after the center bounce either. A roving ruckman through the middle. Takes the centre bounce and utilise him afterwards in a roaming role. Ocassionally resting up forward in the goal square to relieve Petterd/Dunn/Jurrah (if he ever makes it back). Seems to have the tank and agility to handle the responsibility here. He runs rings around a lumbering opponent in the middle once the ball hits the ground. Nice agility through traffic in the middle, good hands and delivers the ball quite well in most cases to a player in a better position. And he has a monster leap, as we saw against the Roos in Rnd 8 last year, where he nearly kicked Goldsteins' head off....twice (at least i think it was Goldstein).

Jamar is just TOOOOO SLOOOOOW once the ball comes to ground in the middle (which it does most of the time because>>>) as he is no longer (post injury comeback) able to get high enough off the ground to tap to OUR advantage as much as he was once able to. In many cases he runs through/under the center bounce now, missing the entire contest completely. A HUUUGE advantage to any half decent opposing ruckman, let alone A graders like Cox and Sandilands. Jamar's still servicable sure, but a shadow of his former self (pre-injury).

Had a nice close up look at Clark on the weekend. have seen him on TV a few times in the past with Brissy. Not much to go on i guess but IMO he's without doubt being played in the wrong posi. CHF and 2nd ruck to Martin IMO. His tank and agility are completely wasted at FF. Poor move to try and turn him into something he isn't on Neeld & Co's part me thinks and will only end up frustrating the crap out of him and waste what could be a great talent at CHF (back up ruckman). Particularly given how we murder the delivery i50. Let alone getting it i30 in a decent fashion and on enough occasions lol. Only 1 game i realise and happy to be proven wrong. Time will tell.

Edited April 1, 201213 yr by Rusty Nails

With his tank and our 'bomb it long around the boundary' game plan, he's best suited to a wing, IMO. He can provide a target coming out of the backline and had a pretty good pair of hands.

With his tank and our 'bomb it long around the boundary' game plan, he's best suited to a wing, IMO. He can provide a target coming out of the backline and had a pretty good pair of hands.

Thank god you aren't the coach GT .

Thank god you aren't the coach GT .

Where would you put him, then? Although he's played his best footy in the ruck, Jamar is our primary ruckman so that's not going to be his position. On the weekend one of the many things we struggled to do was get it out of our defensive 50. If he can play on the wing he can provide a target for us coming out of the backline then he could be quite valuable.

I liked Rusty Nails idea of trying Clark at CHF where his tank can be more useful. Maybe Jamar's slowing a little & could be dangerous as big man in the square, changing with Stef who gradually becomes 1st ruck over the next 2 years.

Clark took Brisbane's key defender Maguire and Stef had the 2nd tall (note that if Brisbane wasn't forced to use Merrett forward he would've had a different opponent). Stef made it to a heap of marking contests but can't take a contested mark. He's a far better option than say Paul Johnson was who just didn't even make the contest. If he can learn to clunk a decent percentage then he'll be a very effective player. Right now he doesn't judge the flight too well.

Stef Martin is not in the best 22.

Not up to AFL standard and if Neeld is fair dinkum, not up to his standards either.

In a supposed 'super' draft in November, trade for a 3rd or 4th rounder.

Martin is coming along well but we don't need him at the moment. We needed Martin when Jamar went down.

We should trade Martin to GWS next year.

Martin is coming along well but we don't need him at the moment. We needed Martin when Jamar went down.

We should trade Martin to GWS next year.

Please do not post again until you are sober .

Stef Martin is not in the best 22.

Not up to AFL standard and if Neeld is fair dinkum, not up to his standards either.

In a supposed 'super' draft in November, trade for a 3rd or 4th rounder.

Please go and buy some coffee for yourself and Disco .Have plenty of water ,some Panadol and a good sleep .You will feel better when the drugs wear off next Thursday.