Hope everyone's on board now and starting to see why we targeted him. He'll be a great link man and will allow us to be less predictable coming out of defense (instead of kicking long to Gawn)

Now if we could just fix our kicks inside 50. What a difference a guy like Hogan would've made in tonight's game....

8 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Hope everyone's on board now and starting to see why we targeted him. He'll be a great link man and will allow us to be less predictable coming out of defense (instead of kicking long to Gawn)

Now if we could just fix our kicks inside 50. What a difference a guy like Hogan would've made in tonight's game....

If Hogan played, we wouldn't have had May tie down Patton.

And regardless we won by 5 goals.  Why would we need another forward?

I thought the knock on Tomlinson was that he doesn't get enough of the ball.  Wow!  32 isn't too shabby.

He was very prolific against North too.

Maybe he is fitter, and has a more defined role with us and loving it.

2 hours ago, Deeoldfart said:

I thought the knock on Tomlinson was that he doesn't get enough of the ball.  Wow!  32 isn't too shabby.

Definitely one of my knocks on him and a reason I wasn't a fan of picking him up.

A defined role and not being used to pinch hit all over the place might just be the answer.

He was in everything last night.

If he tidies up his kicking and carries this form into the season he will be an inspired choice.

Forgive me anyone else who has already brought this up, but the radio coverage of the game digressed a bit to discuss Tomlinson's numbers and the story that GWS used him on the 'non active wing', the theory being that his job was to limit the appeal/effectiveness of switching play. Hence, relatively low (sometimes very low) possession counts and probably also his keenness to change role/club.

So, he racked up the disposals, took a lot of connecting and relieving marks, appears to have run well whenever he was out there.  Having only had radio and not even any stats to reference  except the 'high 70s efficiency' comments post-game on radio, I can't get an idea of how useful his disposal was - was he moving it along well enough?  Actually going forward?

3 hours ago, Little Goffy said:

Forgive me anyone else who has already brought this up, but the radio coverage of the game digressed a bit to discuss Tomlinson's numbers and the story that GWS used him on the 'non active wing', the theory being that his job was to limit the appeal/effectiveness of switching play. Hence, relatively low (sometimes very low) possession counts and probably also his keenness to change role/club.

So, he racked up the disposals, took a lot of connecting and relieving marks, appears to have run well whenever he was out there.  Having only had radio and not even any stats to reference  except the 'high 70s efficiency' comments post-game on radio, I can't get an idea of how useful his disposal was - was he moving it along well enough?  Actually going forward?

He moved very well and caused Clarkson a lot of grief moving forward...

He just missed some easy targets and made the odd decision error but on the whole a very complete game.

Both him and Langdon are running machines and bring a lot to the team balance/game plan.

Langdon is very quick and Tomlinson is not slow, he can move.

hawks had to switch their wings cos of the damage he was doing on the switch and they still couldn't come close to containing him

positive signs

He is Jack Watts on steroids 

19 hours ago, daisycutter said:

hmmmmm...................

The anti-oracle once again...

Tomlinson vs Frost - @Dr.D and @TGR what did you make of last night?

39 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

Tomlinson vs Frost - @Dr.D and @TGR what did you make of last night?

Mr. Speaker, I will refrain from commenting on the basis that there is little riding on practice games.

Paul Roos has the worst practice match winning % of any coach in the history of the game for example.

Tomlinson would probably be a fringe player if rotations weren’t capped.  The tighter the cap, the greater his value.

I saw Bambi play in the GF against a hungry intense TiGeR outfit.  I don’t recall being overwhelmed.

Our side now has a sprinkling of multidimensional mobile talls, so in the air  on dry day we’ll be OK.  But our speed will be tested and then we will see what team of 3rd gear players can do.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3 hours ago, Fifty-5 said:

Tomlinson vs Frost - @Dr.D and @TGR what did you make of last night?

didn't watch it. wake me up when the real season starts.  Surely you've learnt by now and especially from last season that Melb fans always get ahead of themselves. we came 17th. 

8 hours ago, Dr.D said:

didn't watch it.

That's convenient. 

The sample size of what we have to go on is positive from Tomlinson (and Langdon). Whichever way you look at him, getting Tomlinson to the club has improved the overall quality of the list and I think he’ll be a positive contributor this year. 

Only up against Smith and Scully.

23 hours ago, Little Goffy said:

Forgive me anyone else who has already brought this up, but the radio coverage of the game digressed a bit to discuss Tomlinson's numbers and the story that GWS used him on the 'non active wing', the theory being that his job was to limit the appeal/effectiveness of switching play. Hence, relatively low (sometimes very low) possession counts and probably also his keenness to change role/club.

So, he racked up the disposals, took a lot of connecting and relieving marks, appears to have run well whenever he was out there.  Having only had radio and not even any stats to reference  except the 'high 70s efficiency' comments post-game on radio, I can't get an idea of how useful his disposal was - was he moving it along well enough?  Actually going forward?

That's interesting! There's an article on the AFL website about 196 cm Jarrod Brander for WCE saying he's been preparing to play on the wing this year. They say his role is exactly that - to play on the non-active wing. Should be a good match-up with Tomlinson (height-wise if nothing else) although Brander may find it way more active than he'd bargained for. Tomlinson had a great game.

One query though. Is Tomlinson wearing last year's mouthguard which might possibly be in GWS colours? If so, could a player, friend or any member of the MFC staff please rip it out of his gob and stick it down the bog - thanks!

On 3/7/2020 at 12:12 PM, Little Goffy said:

Forgive me anyone else who has already brought this up, but the radio coverage of the game digressed a bit to discuss Tomlinson's numbers and the story that GWS used him on the 'non active wing', the theory being that his job was to limit the appeal/effectiveness of switching play. Hence, relatively low (sometimes very low) possession counts and probably also his keenness to change role/club.

So, he racked up the disposals, took a lot of connecting and relieving marks, appears to have run well whenever he was out there.  Having only had radio and not even any stats to reference  except the 'high 70s efficiency' comments post-game on radio, I can't get an idea of how useful his disposal was - was he moving it along well enough?  Actually going forward?

Read back to my posts in this thread,  and I described exactly that: he played on the defensive wing, forcing opposition wing to match him up because of his height,  offering a long switch option when they won the ball, and dropping back quickly to prevent/inhibit the opposition switch,  when they lost the contest. 

It will be interesting to see if we leave Tomlinson/Langdon on one side of the ground each, playing the same role mirrored, or if they switch sides depending on game position. 

https://www.afl.com.au/news/381780/liked-the-look-of-who-impressed-for-your-club-in-marsh-week-three-

If he continues the great form, i look fwd to Finey on the footyology podcast eating his words. Been potting us at every opportunity for our trade period acquisitions.

Edited March 9, 20205 yr by John Demonic

I don't know what his role is exactly at the moment (seems to be some type of stopper in the back 6), which has helped free up May/Lever.

Not getting much love but I think hes done a decent job since coming back in.

Will be interesting to watch how he is used going forward.

His value will be when we are back playing 12 games a season on the MCG.

i am sure part of the reason we got him was our poor record there and on big grounds.

I reckon he's a great addition. He's like James Milner for Liverpool. Can play anywhere and you know what you're going to get. 

13 minutes ago, A F said:

I reckon he's a great addition. He's like James Milner for Liverpool. Can play anywhere and you know what you're going to get. 

There may be some who liken him more to Dejan Lovren ?

I like your comparison though!

Versatility has always been an underrated commodity. Tomlinson can play a number of roles reasonably well.  That makes him a very useful AFL player.  He's covering off the second or third tall forward in the opposition at the moment which is helping our defensive unit function much better overall. He can be a serviceable wingman who gives us that long, down the line option. He can pinch hit in the ruck and not be outbodied. I think as time goes on he'll prove his worth.  Would I like to see him attack contests a bit harder - for sure, but overall he's going ok.