1 minute ago, Cranky Franky said:

The Brains Trust have got this badly wrong.  From the highlights of Frosts time at GWS he is a natural defender so put him back there.  Plus we are desperately in need of another Tall in the backline - someone to take on the 195-200 cm forwards. Lobb was virtually marking at will during the game, lucky for us his kicking was off. 

Agree re Rory Lobb CF. Just looked him up and he's 205cm and we did look massively undersized there.

Just now, stuie said:

Stats.... Seriously, you're not understanding the whole concept of "roles" mate.

I also notice in your stats you're not mentioning the marks, inside 50s and 1%ers. But I digress, his role in the forward line is one taht isn't defined by stats, which I know is hard to understand if you're not at the games. Were you there Saturday? Did you watch him in the last quarter? Did you see how well the forward line worked with that mix?

Dead set mate, you think I am just looking at the stats sheet and forming an opinion. I see what I see, and the stats back it up.

You keep crapping on about his "presence", when he didn't even stick a single tackle in the whole game. But, but, he "got out the way for Hogan and Watts". I think we set our sights for that "role" a little bit higher.

Worth pointing out Pedo stuck 4 tackles, and I remember one goal in the first quarter directly came from the pressure Pedo applied when the ball hit the deck.

And I will stress again, I am not saying drop him or he won't make it as a forward, I am just saying I am yet to be convinced.

1 minute ago, Forest Demon said:

Dead set mate, you think I am just looking at the stats sheet and forming an opinion. I see what I see, and the stats back it up.

You keep crapping on about his "presence", when he didn't even stick a single tackle in the whole game. But, but, he "got out the way for Hogan and Watts". I think we set our sights for that "role" a little bit higher.

Worth pointing out Pedo stuck 4 tackles, and I remember one goal in the first quarter directly came from the pressure Pedo applied when the ball hit the deck.

And I will stress again, I am not saying drop him or he won't make it as a forward, I am just saying I am yet to be convinced.

Summed up my position perfectly. 

5 minutes ago, Akum said:

My concern is that the only reason that both Frost & Pedersen are picked is that neither of them can do the job by themselves. And if we pick them both, we miss out on another runner (e.g. Stretch) when we need the extra foot speed.

I think you are pretty close to the mark there.  Frost in my mind is still a bit of an unknown quantity, but I suspect that he will become a defender / back up ruck if anything at all.  Doesn't seem to have the smarts to be a part of a forward team, knowing when to keep out and when to jump in. Needs to tackle if his speed is to be used as a 'defensive forward'.  

I wouldnt give up on him yet, but he needs to decide where he is going and be told where he is needed.

At the moment I think Pedo is a more useful swing man - can ruck, though not perticularly well but provides a contest, can grab a forward Mark and can kick a goal, and can fill in pretty well as a tall defender.

Vey much doubt if there is room for both, at this stage, particularly with JW starting to provide a genuine tall option up forward. 

CP5 hopefully will provide that hard running defensive / attacking option of half forward, who "plays tall than his height".

Once Weideman and Petracca come into the team then he will play back or as a 2nd ruck option rotating more off the bench.

At the moment both he and Pedersen are being used to plug a deficiency...

11 minutes ago, Forest Demon said:

Dead set mate, you think I am just looking at the stats sheet and forming an opinion. I see what I see, and the stats back it up.

You keep crapping on about his "presence", when he didn't even stick a single tackle in the whole game. But, but, he "got out the way for Hogan and Watts". I think we set our sights for that "role" a little bit higher.

Worth pointing out Pedo stuck 4 tackles, and I remember one goal in the first quarter directly came from the pressure Pedo applied when the ball hit the deck.

And I will stress again, I am not saying drop him or he won't make it as a forward, I am just saying I am yet to be convinced.

All you keep doing is quoting stats, were you at the game Saturday?

Again, to me it's about the forward line as a package, and after what I've seen so far this year i think the forward line unit could work really well.

And now you're trying to talk up Pedo? The best thing he did all game for the forward line was head down the other end of the ground. 21 points down, then we won.

And yes, we have set our sights higher, but Weideman isn't quite ready yet.

 

9 minutes ago, stuie said:

All you keep doing is quoting stats, were you at the game Saturday?

Again, to me it's about the forward line as a package, and after what I've seen so far this year i think the forward line unit could work really well.

And now you're trying to talk up Pedo? The best thing he did all game for the forward line was head down the other end of the ground. 21 points down, then we won.

And yes, we have set our sights higher, but Weideman isn't quite ready yet.

 

I was there, and Frost didn't look part of the package to me.

If all we are using him for is speed, I'd rather have Stretch who can play elsewhere. 

I think the forward line worked well but only once it was opened up, and Frost had nothing to do with much of it either before or after, and certainly wasn't much involved in our scoring.

I was wondering when this thread would appear. 

IMO the reason why Frost is playing forward is because the FD has identified that he doesn't cut it as a KPD. He can't read the play well enough and is too unreliable by foot inside d50.

Is he a good defensive forward though? The signs are definitely there. The spoil and subsequent goal in the goal square on Saturday show this. But we do need to  see more of this from him to warrant a full time position up forward. Only giving him time will tell.

Here's one out of left field though. It may not work but is worth a try. He is fast and built like a brick shithouse so why not try him as a bullocking mid dishing off to more accomplished users of the ball?

19 minutes ago, DeeMfc said:

I was wondering when this thread would appear. 

IMO the reason why Frost is playing forward is because the FD has identified that he doesn't cut it as a KPD. He can't read the play well enough and is too unreliable by foot inside d50.

Is he a good defensive forward though? The signs are definitely there. The spoil and subsequent goal in the goal square on Saturday show this. But we do need to  see more of this from him to warrant a full time position up forward. Only giving him time will tell.

Here's one out of left field though. It may not work but is worth a try. He is fast and built like a brick shithouse so why not try him as a bullocking mid dishing off to more accomplished users of the ball?

That is a fair leap to be making. I think it's more a reflection of their belief in his versatility rather than ruling him out as a KPD. There is plenty of evidence in this package of his abilities to play in defence.

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/video/2014-10-16/sam-frost-highlights

Simply put, his major weapon is his size combined with his speed. Something which we are yet to see being put to full use. 

2 minutes ago, P-man said:

That is a fair leap to be making. I think it's more a reflection of their belief in his versatility rather than ruling him out as a KPD. There is plenty of evidence in this package of his abilities to play in defence.

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/video/2014-10-16/sam-frost-highlights

Simply put, his major weapon is his size combined with his speed. Something which we are yet to see being put to full use. 

Fair points that could also be used in my take too.

I just think he is better at being a part of the creation of play than the reading of it.

Edited March 29, 20169 yr by DeeMfc
Autocorrect

7 minutes ago, DeeMfc said:

Fair points that could also be used in my take too.

I just think he is better at being a part of the creation of play than the reading of it.

There could be some truth to that but reading the play, knowing when to leave your man etc can be developed over time. Look at Rance. He wasn't always the intercepting beast that he is now. Far from it.

1 hour ago, Forest Demon said:

Dead set mate, you think I am just looking at the stats sheet and forming an opinion. I see what I see, and the stats back it up.

You keep crapping on about his "presence", when he didn't even stick a single tackle in the whole game. But, but, he "got out the way for Hogan and Watts". I think we set our sights for that "role" a little bit higher.

Worth pointing out Pedo stuck 4 tackles, and I remember one goal in the first quarter directly came from the pressure Pedo applied when the ball hit the deck.

And I will stress again, I am not saying drop him or he won't make it as a forward, I am just saying I am yet to be convinced.

Bang!

i'm yet to be impressed by frost

Both Frost and Pederson are being played as decoy forwards to try and deflect attention from Hogan arent they? And yet teams have figured out all they
need to do is double team Hogan when the long bomb comes in as neither of them are perceived as a threat by opposition defences. We saw it in the Nab Cup, 
and we'll continue to see it unless we change the mix down there slightly. We're not getting enough out of either of them, and therein lies the dilemma, 
Weed is still a while off, Dawes a month away. I feel one of them will go when Dawes returns, he's got plenty of detractors but we know Roos rates him highly, 
and you'd think would  command a bit more respect from the 2nd best defender than these two.

At least Pedo took one strong mark on a nice lead, Frost didn't look like it, except for right on one of the sirens (3/4 time?) when the umpire blew time first.
The only tangible defensive forward acts I saw were his spoil of a GWS defender down Harmes' throat for a goal, and his run down that gave away a free somewhat unjustly.
This seems to be the story of all of his MFC games so far (and yes I've been to all of them in VIC and seen the others on TV). 
I feel he needs to go back and dominate a game at Casey with all of these so called physical attributes and speed that we keep hearing about. Right now, like Oscar McDonald,
you suspect he's in the side on potential based on his size more than his actual output.

54 minutes ago, P-man said:

That is a fair leap to be making. I think it's more a reflection of their belief in his versatility rather than ruling him out as a KPD. There is plenty of evidence in this package of his abilities to play in defence.

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/video/2014-10-16/sam-frost-highlights

Simply put, his major weapon is his size combined with his speed. Something which we are yet to see being put to full use. 

....and with JW now coming good with both those attributes, (and always with far greater disposal skills and understanding of the game) is there room for both in the forward line?

As I think I may have mentioned, could he be groomed like Biclavs as a RR?

 

Frost was completely underwhelming on Saturday, exactly as he was in his games last year. Someone described him as strong - that may be the case, but he has zero physical presence. He was pushed off the ball with ridiculous ease at a couple of kick ins in the first half, and is clearly never going to take a contested mark.

His skills are average at best, and often well below that. He has no game sense and has the uncanny knack of being everywhere except where the football is.

Apparently Frost is capable of being a key defender, but I can't comment on that as I didn't see him play for the Giants. If he can't get a game in defence ahead of Oscar McDonald at present, then that is a real problem for him as he is clearly not a forward or a ruckman.

Yes, he is quick for his size, but that alone will rarely cut it. I would much rather see him learn to play in the VFL then having him do so in the senior side.

We could have Dawes who drops marks, with the ball tumbling along the ground for oppositon backline smalls to op up.

Or, we could have Pederson who plays 5 great games a year, 5 howlers, and the remainder where we can't even remember if he plays. 

Or Frost, whose possession count is about as high as a football journalist's integrity, but he gets to a lot of contests and makes a physical impact that allows Kent, Garlett to crumb ( which happened a few times against GWS). 

Out of those three, it is Pederson for mine,  as limited as he can be. But I reckon we will see Weideman, Hulett or rookie Joel Smith slot in there by season's end. 

12 minutes ago, Maldonboy38 said:

We could have Dawes who drops marks, with the ball tumbling along the ground for oppositon backline smalls to op up.

Or, we could have Pederson who plays 5 great games a year, 5 howlers, and the remainder where we can't even remember if he plays. 

Or Frost, whose possession count is about as high as a football journalist's integrity, but he gets to a lot of contests and makes a physical impact that allows Kent, Garlett to crumb ( which happened a few times against GWS). 

Out of those three, it is Pederson for mine,  as limited as he can be. But I reckon we will see Weideman, Hulett or rookie Joel Smith slot in there by season's end. 

Just need to ask why when Dawes drops marks it goes along the ground to opposition backman to mop up but when Frost makes a physical impact and doesn't mark it allows Kent and Garlett to crumb. Are you suggesting that Dawes drop his marks to opposition advantage ?

In a nutshell, our big man stocks are in need of a top up. No real backup for gawn, Pedersen is 29, Dawes is Dawes, OMac is a long way off and i think Frost is NQR.

Hurley, anyone?

4 hours ago, Cranky Franky said:

The Brains Trust have got this badly wrong.  From the highlights of Frosts time at GWS he is a natural defender so put him back there.  Plus we are desperately in need of another Tall in the backline - someone to take on the 195-200 cm forwards. Lobb was virtually marking at will during the game, lucky for us his kicking was off. 

In the last quarter, as Pedo  was out marked by  Lobb, I wondered why he had gone back and not Frost.

i still can't understand why he can't play SOME role in the ruck. Stynes was able to play all day in the ball, because for much of the time Schwarz did the ruck work on the forward line. From recollection he never contested in the centre of the ground, but was very effective at boundary throwins. If Frost could take some of the workload from Max it would help our cause greatly.

overall, however, with his size and athletecism, I favour giving him a decent run in the team

4 hours ago, P-man said:

That is a fair leap to be making. I think it's more a reflection of their belief in his versatility rather than ruling him out as a KPD. There is plenty of evidence in this package of his abilities to play in defence.

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/video/2014-10-16/sam-frost-highlights

Simply put, his major weapon is his size combined with his speed. Something which we are yet to see being put to full use. 

I agree Pm, It's way too soon to make Frost a whipping boy.

 

IMO the FD will be selecting sides for the games 2 matches ahead.  so at Rnd 1,  they wanted to get games into Omac & Frost.  The forwardline was congested, too tall,  but we can manage for the Essendon game with one change,  bringing in a runner if Omac goes out (likely).   We bring in a runner,  to prepare them for the following game against the Roos.  

We will need options for 2nd ruck IMO against the Roos,  so I think both talls (frost/pedo) will play against the Dons. 

Then, after the Roos game,  we may omit one of the talls?  I think they are currently weighing up between both talls,  which one to take into the upcoming Pies match?

 

Edited March 29, 20169 yr by dee-luded

18 minutes ago, Farmer said:

In the last quarter, as Pedo  was out marked by  Lobb, I wondered why he had gone back and not Frost.

i still can't understand why he can't play SOME role in the ruck. Stynes was able to play all day in the ball, because for much of the time Schwarz did the ruck work on the forward line. From recollection he never contested in the centre of the ground, but was very effective at boundary throwins. If Frost could take some of the workload from Max it would help our cause greatly.

overall, however, with his size and athletecism, I favour giving him a decent run in the team

The fact is that coaches despite the fact they have a lot of knowledge occasionally get it totally wrong.   Eventually the penny will drop & Frost will go back to defence. 

25 minutes ago, Munga said:

In a nutshell, our big man stocks are in need of a top up. No real backup for gawn, Pedersen is 29, Dawes is Dawes, OMac is a long way off and i think Frost is NQR.

Hurley, anyone?

Did our former tunnel baller, Jack Fitzpatrick, offer more?

"Former tunnel baller"...lol

8 minutes ago, Return to Glory said:

Did our former tunnel baller, Jack Fitzpatrick, offer more?

The Hawks seem to think so