We should play Jesse one out up forward as a target in the square. Could kick a ten bagger...

 

Discuss

Edited July 17, 20178 yr by Bring Back Barassi

team defence...team defence Ronald dale... - it aint pagans paddock in 1996

Could be time for a paradigm shift

2 minutes ago, Danelska said:

team defence...team defence Ronald dale... - it aint pagans paddock in 1996

Its very much Danger's Field though!

We should do no such thing.

When I saw the header "in the square" I thought. you were referring to the centre square.

I reckon he should spend a bit of time up in the centre of the action, but do NOT think he would do the job as a on eon one "Pagan's paddock" type FF.    IF he did not take the mark it would be cleared with ease.   

IF anyone was to play a deep isolated FF role, which I don't think is a great idea, Tom McDonald would be a far better candidate, or even Tracc, but not Jesse.

Why the new thread.

10 hours ago, Bring Back Barassi said:

We should play Jesse one out up forward as a target in the square. Could kick a ten bagger...

 

Discuss

Why would you play a CHF out of the goal square?

The issue isnt Jesse. Its our delivery into the forward line.

Sitting in the goal square just encourages the stupid one dimensional long bombs in.

Get him up the field and our players should be lowering their eyes and kicking to the best option. Not just bombing it to Jesse

Has some merit because he can't kick a goal from more than 10 metres out at the moment. But on the other hand  if he doesn't clunk the mark his opponent will waltz the ball away with no pressure. As a CHF, he lacks decision making and disposal efficiency. Needs a lot of work in multiple areas.

Edited July 17, 20178 yr by america de cali

57 minutes ago, Brownie said:

The issue isnt Jesse. Its our delivery into the forward line.

Sitting in the goal square just encourages the stupid one dimensional long bombs in.

Get him up the field and our players should be lowering their eyes and kicking to the best option. Not just bombing it to Jesse

I think this is the bigger issue, with Watts and Salem in the team our delivery into FW50 improves incredibly. We just bombed it on Jesse's head on Saturday night, which played right into Lever and co hands and made it too easy to read then beat.

For mine if we were going to do something like this, then I'd prefer Weid to come in and sit in the square. Hogan has a big engine and is more valuable roaming around, while I think Ped will be dropped for Watts, who again (and along with TMac) should be out roaming when the ball is in our back half, and they would command a player being on them all the time. Weid would then get the 3rd or 4th best defender and then wouldn't be shown up around the ground which he currently is. If he created a contest then back in Jeffy and the others to get to the crumb or he marks and is a pretty good shot at goal, might give him a bit of confidence doing this as well. 

Gotta worry about chasing, tackling and pressure first. 

Kid he doesn't improve in those areas I'd drop him. We have proven he isn't replaceable for us to win. 

If he offers little in the defensive side then we are better off with him playing at Casey. 

Does Hogan lead enough? Repeat lead? Is this a tactic by Goodwin?

8 minutes ago, Gorgoroth said:

Gotta worry about chasing, tackling and pressure first. 

Kid he doesn't improve in those areas I'd drop him. We have proven he isn't replaceable for us to win. 

If he offers little in the defensive side then we are better off with him playing at Casey. 

True. The argument is made that he takes on the best defender. Yet when the ball hits the ground the opposition have the best defender free and we have one less forward. Watts, Pederson and TMac looks a far more effective combination. Pederson  can be counted on contesting everything even if he doesn't win the ball. Next game is the line in the sand for him or else back to Casey.

If your tactic is to emulate what Geelong did with Danger on Saturday, leaving him "one out" in the goal square,Jesse's not your man.

It needs to be someone very fast, who is good one on one.......Jeffy Garlett!

He's pretty good at body work in marking duels, too, but the ball should be delivered low.

It's incredible to me, that no teams ever try leaving someone one out in the goal square. Conventional wisdom is that it leaves you one short up field.

It created match -losing problems for the Tassie Hawks last match.

23 minutes ago, SFebey said:

Does Hogan lead enough? Repeat lead? Is this a tactic by Goodwin?

Yes he leads. He got burnt multiple times on Saturday night.

The kicks to him were constantly high and  I noticed Jesse several times after we bombed it point to the kicker and say he wanted it in front of him and to lower their eyes.

 

Just now, Demon77 said:

Yes he leads. He got burnt multiple times on Saturday night.

The kicks to him were constantly high and  I noticed Jesse several times after we bombed it point to the kicker and say he wanted it in front of him and to lower their eyes.

 

It was possibly the worst disposal inside 50 that I had seen in a long time. Interestingly it seemed a plan to do this before the match as Goody was interviewed and said he wanted to expose Crows defenders. Anyway, whats done is done, I just wish Hogan would work harder and not sook

Jesse or TMac in the square, with Garlett nearby!

Or let big Max rest in the square, combining  with Jeffy!

On team defence, last year I lost count of the number of times our opposition ended up with an easy goal with someone out the back on their own! Other teams still let it happen!

 

19 minutes ago, Jumping Jack Clennett said:

If your tactic is to emulate what Geelong did with Danger on Saturday, leaving him "one out" in the goal square,Jesse's not your man.

It needs to be someone very fast, who is good one on one.......Jeffy Garlett!

He's pretty good at body work in marking duels, too, but the ball should be delivered low.

It's incredible to me, that no teams ever try leaving someone one out in the goal square. Conventional wisdom is that it leaves you one short up field.

It created match -losing problems for the Tassie Hawks last match.

Once our Midfield returns from injury, we have the ideal player for that role, someone that is strong, quick, hard at it very good mark, kicks it well.  Reminds me a bit of Patrick Dangerfield.

Petracca is your man to have one out in the square...

43 minutes ago, Jumping Jack Clennett said:

If your tactic is to emulate what Geelong did with Danger on Saturday, leaving him "one out" in the goal square,Jesse's not your man.

It needs to be someone very fast, who is good one on one.......Jeffy Garlett!

He's pretty good at body work in marking duels, too, but the ball should be delivered low.

It's incredible to me, that no teams ever try leaving someone one out in the goal square. Conventional wisdom is that it leaves you one short up field.

It created match -losing problems for the Tassie Hawks last match.

Petracca - think Darren Jarman in that GF v Saints. 

Edited July 18, 20178 yr by monoccular

Hannan has been a little quiet in his last couple of games, I wouldn't be against giving him a run in a pocket and playing the crumbing role. 

24 minutes ago, Demonator said:

Petracca is your man to have one out in the square...

Yep, if not this year but in 2018 if any club sees this bloke one out deep forward they will be extremely worried.  Again though we need to get the ball to him

1 hour ago, SFebey said:

Does Hogan lead enough?

No, he hasn't for the last couple of years.