old55

Here's a feasible R1 team of currently available players that doesn't include any of them: Whelan Carroll Bell Frawley Rivers Bartram Johnstone McLean Green Bate Dunn C.Johnson Davey Neitz Robertson White Bruce McDonald Jamar Jones Moloney Buckley

It's certainly going to be interesting who of Bizzell, Holland, Miller, Ward, Yze, Brown, Godfrey, Pickett and Ferguson play ...

ND (and I) have explained how using r&c, tempo footy and kicking to free targets can be used efffectively - it's easy to criticise. What are your "ideologies about the game of football"? How are we going to win at AAMI and Subi by following your them? Who else has won there using them? Please note that you have to do it with the current list. I hoping for something more than Pedro's "kick it in long and fast to a leading forward". I'm pretty sure I countered that (and Neil Craig did too) by starting an extra two back.

Teams only need one power forward. Neitz can play CHF-FF like Hall does, they're fairly similar players. Succession plan is a problem but it's not for want of trying. I was keen that we went for KPPs in this year's draft for that reason and we went for them with 1st and 3rd pick. Nick Smith, Luke Molan, Brent Grgic ... Power forwards are hard to come by. Got any trade ideas? Don't think J.Brown, Pavlich or N.Riewoldt will be available.

Absolutely critical player is we are going to win this year's flag. If we make the GF and he plays well and everyone else does what they're supposed to - we win!

You and Pedro seem to believe we are going exclusively "run and carry", every game all the time. That's not the message I'm getting. We need to do something to improve our results at AAMI and Subi. The Crows put 2 extra players back to start the match. ND instructs the team to run and carry so we don't kick to an outnumbered contest. We kick 3 or 4 goals ahead using this tactic, then Neil Craig has to decide whether to persist and hope that we'll tire or release his two extra backmen. If he does the former we can use our increased running capacity specifically built up over summer to complement the plan and play tempo footy at times in the 2nd half if we need to maintain our 3-4 goal break. If he releases his extra backmen then we can kick longer to a less crowded forward line. We've got three options up our sleeve which we can use pro-actively. If we don't kick ahead trying this tactic what have we lost? In previous years all we've been doing is get beaten there - how can it get worse? Here's my position: - ND is coach for 2007 - He's done a good job, 6/9 years in finals, last 3 years in finals, top finishing Vic team last year - He's trying something new to overcome the final hurdle we have against 3 of last year's top 4 - He knows 10 times more about footy, spends 10 times more time working on it and has 10 times more invested in our success than me or you - I'm behind him and the team in 2007 How about you?

Exactly Port Adelaide: Byron Pickett and Damien Hardwick ... Brisbane: Martin Pike and Mal Michael ... It'a amatter of getting the balance right. ND's approach has assured us of a long period in the top half of the ladder but will we have the edge to win a flag. This is the more conservative approach. Roos has delivered one at Sydney but has said he'll quit when his current veterans retire and IMO the bottom will drop out for Sydney. This is the high risk approach, but great if it delivers a flag - not if it fails - ask Peter Schwab and Dean Laidley.

No-one except you said "always" handball - kick long when there's a free target. No-one said ND invented run and carry, he's just adapting it as a tool. Yes it's tiring and that's why we've been working on our running with Babba - and why Nathan Jones, for example, changed his body shape. We're going to use run and carry as a tactic at the appropriate time. We're going to kick it at the appropriate time. We're used to kicking it but we're not used to run and carry so we're practicising that now when it's safe to do so.. What is your problem?

Seen the SEN Ad on the back cover of the last week's Issue No.1179 21-27 Feb Inside Football? That's almost more beautiful than Jennifer Hawkins in the buff.

Yes kick it long is good sometimes, yes run and carry is good sometimes. Apparently you've just agreed that "run and carry is good sometimes" Apparently that's what you've said all along. But you don't actually want us to do it. Huh?!? That must be some version of "common sense" that I am unfamiliar with. Yes it will be a key tactic in the H&A season and you have described a situation where it is useful. The implementation against Adelaide in R22 was poor but there's nothing wrong with the idea. It was flawed to try to implement it cold but now we have practised it over summer. Yes I would. I'd take possession in your 32 man forward 50, run and carry because I outnumber you thru the midfield, kick to my FF one-out in the 50 if your defenders come to meet me or run to 50 and kick over their heads at goal if they don't - just as you described.

Yes I think they're both high.

I'd move another two back on you and make it 10-8 and very, extremely, awfully crowded down there. The more you move forward, the more I'll move back. I'll be happy if we have 17-15 in your forward 50 and my FF against your 3 defenders in mine. I have absolutely no problem with that and it is a re-phrasing of my argument above in favour of run and carry. Yes kick it long is good sometimes, yes run and carry is good sometimes. We've been a kicking team, now we're trying to introduce some run and carry into our armoury and overdoing it in some meaningless NAB Cup and pre-season practice games and you Chicken-littles are wailing - about what I am not sure?

Very hard match up - very handy!

But you don't want us to try any variations in the game plan, just kick it long. You've just given him a massive bake but you're right behind him - trying to push him off a cliff.

Keen to know what your solution is when the opposition STARTS two extra players behind the ball in our forward line on the narrower grounds like Subi, Telstra Dome, AAMI and Kardinia Park? Your trade-mark kick it fast and long into the forward line will just end up with 3 against one or 4 against 2 contest every time. A backman can cover 10-20 metres to a contest in the time a long ball travels through the air and the ground gets thinner the closer to goal you get and therefore easier to cover space. Please tell me how kicking long to a narrow forward line with 6 forwards and 8 backs is going to work? Kicking long is right some of the time but it's not right ALL the time and with particular set-ups as described above it is very, very wrong. We need to have variations - that's what run and carry is about. If the opposition starts with extra men back or floods extra men back then we may outnumber them in the midfield and can run and handball the ball to break the lines. If that draws their extra backs to the ball then we are no longer out-numbered in defence and can kick to space on the lead or to a more even contest. If they don't come to meet the ball we can keep running and shoot long on goal not to a contest.

I'm happy with that article. Neale Daniher was a great choice as coach in 98. He's been great for MFC. Of course I really hope we win the flag, but even moreso for Neale too.

It's a pity we're not playing at Subi - maybe next week.

Not sure that Brown plays in the backline, I think he's part of the "midfield rotation" - however you define that. He has been training with the midfield group the last two years - maybe the FD agree that he can't actually defend. I agree it gets blurry - where does Bartram play - midfield or back? At least he does do a job on someone whichever it is, or wherever he's required. I reckon that's the critical thing, Ward doesn't do a job on anyone and that limits his value as a backman. Maybe he's not required to and he's the free agent and Bell and Whelan will leave the man to cover his man. I agree he can run and break the lines but his decision making and kicking is not good enough for this role IMO. Brown is definitely not a better alternative. Other alternatives are Green, Wheatley, Bate, Buckley, maybe Petterd, I like CJ in a genuine attacking role. I have been pumping up Sylvia for this role if he can get his running together but no-one seems to be interested in that. Three tall backs - Rivers, Carroll and ? Three small backs - Whelan, Bell and ?

Maybe we should've played tempo footy at the end of the 3rd to make sure we were in a winning position?

Yes, judge our performance re our aims, it's not about winning that game - I was pleased to see some youngsters in action and some new game-style trialled.

Agree with that Jaded, but the "run and carry" is for all narrower grounds including TD. As said by other posters, you can't expect it to work completely first time, and btw I think it's actually 2nd time out after R22 last year. Maybe the fact that we lost 3 times at Subi last year, three times at TD and haven't won at AAMI since the Schwarz-Leoncelli miracle is a coincidence and we should keep trying the same stuff each year. Foxtrot Foxtrot Sierra, maybe " ... throwing Fergy forward ... " will solve all our problems?

The 2007 premier will either come out of the NAB Cup R1 winners: Dogs, Freo, Cats, Port, Blues, Hawks, Lions, Roos or the losers: Eagles, Swans, Crows, Saints, Demons, Pies, Bombers, Tigers I'd really like to see Jared Rivers play on their key forward. What's the point of being 3rd man if you're dragged out of the play and never get it? I'd even tolerate playing Bizzell as 3rd man if this forced the issue. Nathan Carroll is heart in mouth material. Our rucks spanked theirs, I though PJ showed good commitment when it hit the deck and Jamar provides an aerial contest, but winning rucks doesn't mean everything. Nathan Jones is like steamed rice, you've gotta have it but you need the green curry chicken to go with it.

From Caroline Wilson in today's Age re the Roos: Demetriou said then: "... This is a club that the AFL has completely supported with football money and continued to support. "There is no sinister plot here but when we put money into a football club, we expect to have a say in its direction. "It is the same as any investment. We put $1.4 million a year into North along with a lot of money into Carrara and the Gold Coast. It's a pretty serious investment and it's football money, as I say. "The other 15 clubs would be disappointed if we didn't and they are well within their rights."

All 7 tall defenders on our list in the 28: Rivers, Carroll, Holland, Bizzell, Ferguson, Warnock, Frawley. 3 is usually enough in 22, I could stretch to 4 in 24. Logic would say that 3 of them should miss, particularly when we have 4 tall forwards also, but logic seldom applies. Also we have 5 of 6 modern day tall running prototypes selected which is exciting: Buckley, Bate, CJ, Bell, Bruce. Only Wheatley missing and maybe Petterd is one too.

Yes but it was just rehetoric at Sydney - they didn't rebuild, the didn't trade senior players for picks, they didn't stock up on young talent - they traded their picks for experienced players and have continued to do so. Roos is a great tactical coach and extracted a flag, he's stretched the rubber band. But believers in the clock reckon he is now eyeballing a far greater list catastrophe. If the clock has no validity then the Swans philosophy will be sustainable and they can stay at the top for years to come. Interesting that Roos has vowed that he'll quit when his current generation of senior players retires in a year or so. As Fan says, the clock does not fully describe the complexity in footy, but it's a valuable model.