The conundrum for Bevo

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

Bevo and the coaching group have a big issue.. They clearly know it too. You don't win a premiership without being tactically and strategically astute.

We have a gameplan that has a heart beat around extreme, almost unseen levels of pressure and predicated on:

elite fitness
winning hard balls
forcing repeat stoppages if the ball isn't looking like getting out on our terms with quick hands
hard running, both ways
elite skill moving the ball, leading to
maximum time spent with the ball inside our 50.


All to generate a tonne of shots on goal and keep the game in our forward line for large swathes of game time.

This game plan accepts that an opposition is likely to score 6-7 goals from turnovers or clean ball movement per game. All acceptable.. IF...we:

get the game on our terms more than the opposition, and
get quality entries inside 50s resulting in shots on goal, AND
we kick accurately more often than we miss.


Right now our guys are not fulfilling the last two criteria, by a long margin. And unless it's fixed we're going to struggle to be a top side in 2017.

First off the mark, our skill execution is not enabling us to control the game on our terms as we'd like. Uncharacteristic turnovers when we're trying to move forward is enabling opposition sides to get more of those easy inside 50's than we'd plan for.

Second, our entries inside 50 are inept. When guys like Dahl, Macrae, Matty Boyd, JJ and Hunter (when not switched on) just deliver the ball horridly to our forwards when they have the ball between 50-70 metres out. So many times, they take a mark....stop... and our forward has a one on one... They hesitate.. allowing opposition to get numbers back.... and then end up kicking it to the guy that was originally one on one, but is now one on two or three, or sometimes 4.
Why not pull the trigger when the odds are 50/50, if you're going to go there anyway??

3rd..When we do finally manage to get a legitimate mark and shot on goal, we're just murdering it and squandering it.

I think we're 68.99 in shots on goal, this year or something like that. That's cellar dweller stuff..

Caleb Daniel, Bont, Murph, Mclean and Hunter (when switched on) are the only guys I have any semblance of confidence in to lower eyes and find a target inside 50.

What is to be done? How do Bevo and the coaching team fix these issues?
Bringing the ball better inside 50 is at least something that SHOULD be able to be addressed via coaching.
But goalkicking? In the middle of the season.
That's all in the head for a large part. I think we're going to have to hope for a lucky break where we snap and kick 16.5 one week and it releases the pressure valve from the guy's heads.
What does everyone think?
Am I off the mark in my thinking?

[ledge]

I agree with it all except you haven't taken into account our injuries .. Cloke Crameri and Dickson our (straight shooter)is missing.
Roughead out means Boyd can't go forward and we have been forced to play our fullback in the forward line.
Admittedly the kicking straight at goal has no excuse on set shots.
But with Adams playing forward has he got his leading patterns right ?
Luckily Redpath was back as he is a natural forward and has had a few years in forward patterns.
Don't get me wrong I think Adams will make a good forward too but it takes time to learn the teams patterns.
Yes out delivery looked terrible , only had to get three more right and we would have won .. We aren't that far off,especially when we get our players back .. Wallis,Roughead, Dickson and Morris will make a big difference.

[Topdog]

Cellar dweller stuff yet lost to 2 premiership favourites interstate by a total of 11 points.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

Cellar dweller stuff yet lost to 2 premiership favourites interstate by a total of 11 points.

My reference to cellar dweller stuff was directly referencing our goalkicking ratio.
Clearly we are doing lots right. My point being that unless we fix the other parts of our game that are off then we're going to struggle this year.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

I agree with it all except you haven't taken into account our injuries .. Cloke Crameri and Dickson our (straight shooter)is missing.
Roughead out means Boyd can't go forward and we have been forced to play our fullback in the forward line.
Admittedly the kicking straight at goal has no excuse on set shots.
But with Adams playing forward has he got his leading patterns right ?
Luckily Redpath was back as he is a natural forward and has had a few years in forward patterns.
Don't get me wrong I think Adams will make a good forward too but it takes time to learn the teams patterns.
Yes out delivery looked terrible , only had to get three more right and we would have won .. We aren't that far off,especially when we get our players back .. Wallis,Roughead, Dickson and Morris will make a big difference.

Good points regarding our outs.
In fact whilst we'd clearly like to have all our key outs olaying, these past two injury riddled seasons may turn out to have a long term positive for us.
As ahown in another thread, we are running a very young and inexperienced side right now. The fact we have been ultra competitive each week is a real testamemt to our depth & we are getting vital games experience deep into our list.
Providing we can keep our list together we are going to have a good chance at being strong for many years to come.

[boydogs]

What's the conundrum?

Our best forwards not being injured will help draw the ball to the right places with our inside 50 entries and finish our work better

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

What's the conundrum?

Our best forwards not being injured will help draw the ball to the right places with our inside 50 entries and finish our work better

Which of our missing forwards apart from Dickson is a reliable shot for goal?
Crameri? Stringer? Cloke? I'd prefer not to have any of those kicking for my life from 30-40 out.

The shots we've missed haven't predominantly been shots from the pocket or right on 50. Theres a good portion across a wide spread of players from vety gettable shots.

[GVGjr]

Which of our missing forwards apart from Dickson is a reliable shot for goal?
Crameri? Stringer? Cloke? I'd prefer not to have any of those kicking for my life from 30-40 out.

The shots we've missed haven't predominantly been shots from the pocket or right on 50. Theres a good portion across a wide spread of players from vety gettable shots.

I think Bevo has finally conceded that we aren't playing good enough to keep winning close games unless we start to improve our set shot conversions.

Lets hope they focus on a few of them and start to work on goal kicking techniques.

[bornadog]

I think Bevo has finally conceded that we aren't playing good enough to keep winning close games unless we start to improve our set shot conversions.

Lets hope they focus on a few of them and start to work on goal kicking techniques.

We also need to fix up our field kicking. Passing the ball to some one and hitting them up, has been a real issue.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

We also need to fix up our field kicking. Passing the ball to some one and hitting them up, has been a real issue.


Yep. We have gifted a lot of goals to the opposition from totally unforced errors. Our super aggressive game is always going to see us budget for some easy out the back scores, but the raft of unexpected turnovers are seeing us get hurt more often.
Last year we slowed opposition movement, which allowed us the time to play team defense with 2 or 3 defenders going up against the opposition forward.
We are seeing our defenders get caught in mismatched one on ones with no support coming over the top due to the turnover up field catching everyone out of position.

[1eyedog]

Our depth has been tested again but we've proved we are still superior to a middle of the road team even with the worse injury list in the competition. There's 3 players who will make us an exponentially better team and they are Roughie, Morris and Dicko.

We can and have covered Wally but he provides inside grunt potentially freeing up Bont and Jack but Roughie in the team gives us a tall presence around the ground, something T. Boyd is simply not capable of achieving yet due to lack of a few more preseasons.

We've missed no one more than Morris, when he comes back in we will be back to our stingiest best. He is never beaten and we miss him dearly. Dicko provides that lead up target that we miss, badly and hits the scoreboard hard during the game and is our best conversion player. He provides scoreboard pressure and surety for our players moving the ball forward.
These three players back in the team make all the difference. Stringer provides the mayo.

[Danny the snakeman]

Roughead out means Boyd can't go forward

Boyd's taken about 3 marks this year so just as well he's not forward.

[chef]

Boyds not the answer for our forward line.

[Flamethrower]

The big issue with our forward line, and or forward entries, is that we are playing a bunch of defenders and midfielders in the forward line to cover all of our injuries. Defenders do not know how to execute leading patterns, and midfields naturally hunt the ball rather than make space for other forwards - that is why our forward line always appears crowded.

Having Redpath back meant we finally had 1 tall who was a natural forward. We will be far more potent once Roughead, Stringer, Cloke and Dickson are back.

Redpath at full forward, Tom Boyd in the forward pocket swapping with Roughy in the ruck, Trav at CHF and Dickson and Stringer rotating through half forward and on ball with the likes of Bont, Caleb, Wally, Toby, Clay, Lin, Lachie and Picko will give us a far more potent attack.

[GVGjr]

Boyd's taken about 3 marks this year so just as well he's not forward.

And yet in the grand final he was a genuine threat and looked comfortable in the role. I think people are way to quick to write him off as a key forward.

[Rocket Science]

Boyd's taken about 3 marks this year so just as well he's not forward.

His inability to grab anything this year is a concern.

[GVGjr]

His inability to grab anything this year is a concern.

I wonder if off season shoulder surgery has contributed to this? Earlier last year we were considering shutting him down from playing and getting the surgery done.

[comrade]

And yet in the grand final he was a genuine threat and looked comfortable in the role. I think people are way to quick to write him off as a key forward.

He barely took a mark as a key forward that day. His big marks were around the ground with a free jump at the ball, not with a big defender on his hammer.

He's not a KPF. Bevo knows it and has been quite public about it in recent weeks.

[GVGjr]

He barely took a mark as a key forward that day. His big marks were around the ground with a free jump at the ball, not with a big defender on his hammer.

He's not a KPF. Bevo knows it and has been quite public about it in recent weeks.

I think Bevo is putting him forward as a ruckman in the media because it explains why he has been using him there.

At the moment he is an average ruckman and that might be stretching things. If we have already given up on him as a key forward then it's an awful advertisement for our ability to develop players and the likes of Barrett and others in the media that have focused on him and his massive contract since his arrival might be vindicated.

I will have the chance to ask a few at the club why we appear to be giving up on Boyd as a forward and I will be interested in their responses.

[Topdog]

My reference to cellar dweller stuff was directly referencing our goalkicking ratio.
Clearly we are doing lots right. My point being that unless we fix the other parts of our game that are off then we're going to struggle this year.

Yes my point being that I dont believe there is such a conundrum.

Every injury plays its part. People write off the impact of Boyd as a forward by pointing to his lack of marks but him missing from the fwd line means that 2 big guys go to Stringer or that its easier to intercept our F50 entries.

We have been smashed by injuries early, are 1 win off first and are in every game to the final whistle.

I'm just not even close to being worried.

[MrMahatma]

He barely took a mark as a key forward that day. His big marks were around the ground with a free jump at the ball, not with a big defender on his hammer.

He's not a KPF. Bevo knows it and has been quite public about it in recent weeks.


He's 21 and has been forced to play most of his career with us as ruck.

Reckon it's a couple of years before we can make that call.

[comrade]

I think Bevo is putting him forward as a ruckman in the media because it explains why he has been using him there.

At the moment he is an average ruckman and that might be stretching things. If we have already given up on him as a key forward then it's an awful advertisement for our ability to develop players and the likes of Barrett and others in the media that have focused on him and his massive contract since his arrival might be vindicated.

I will have the chance to ask a few at the club why we appear to be giving up on Boyd as a forward and I will be interested in their responses.

I'd give Bevo more credit than that but I understand why you'd think that.

Barrett vindicated? His performance in the finals as a ruck who went forward won us a flag. Let's not get hysterical because he's not turning out to be one of the greatest KPF of all time despite being paid like one. And his signing was symbolic of something much bigger, which I'm sure you know.

You seem to be stuck in the old fashioned thinking that a ruckman must win taps and that's it, and a key forward must stay inside 50. He's becoming a very good modern ruck man, not in the old fashioned way, but in the new way of being able to navigate a zone by hands, can use it well by foot etc. He doesn't win 40+ taps a game, but he doesn't need to.

Our development isn't the problem. An AFL flag and 2 VFL flags in a 3 year period with an historically young list is evidence enough. The player is the issue here. He's just not a KPF. We had a junior career and 1 year of senior footy to base our decision on. He spent most of his formative years as a ruckman I understand, before going forward at the Ranges. He was a 200cm kid up against beanpoles and dominated them, shock horror. Roles change with the environment.

I look forward to hearing what your contacts at the club say about it all.

[bulldogtragic]

Simon Dalrymple said this week that he has absolutely no doubt that Tom Boyd will still become a commanding KPF. I'm happy that Dal knows his stuff. There's no other fit tall that Bevo wants in the team to ruck. So that's fine. I agree with Dal, Boyd will be a commanding KPF. He's still only 21 and writing him off now is not something I would do, especially that since his GF performance he's had to ruck by himself for half of the season to date. You can't develop as a KPF when other rucks aren't selected and you're forced to ruck alone and not spend time forward. But when that changes, like guru Dalrymple says, I have no doubt he will be a commanding KPF.

[bulldogtragic]

I think Bevo is putting him forward as a ruckman in the media because it explains why he has been using him there.

At the moment he is an average ruckman and that might be stretching things. If we have already given up on him as a key forward then it's an awful advertisement for our ability to develop players and the likes of Barrett and others in the media that have focused on him and his massive contract since his arrival might be vindicated.b

I will have the chance to ask a few at the club why we appear to be giving up on Boyd as a forward and I will be interested in their responses.

Is it all about Tom Boyd though? Campbell & English aren't being selected, so by default Boyd has to play ruck. I think it's not solely giving up on Boyd as a KPF, but that it speaks to the match committee and coach and their views on the rucks we have fit. When Roughy is back, and English forces his way in, then we will know if we've given up. Dalrymple still has no doubt about Boyd becoming a commanding KPF with more time to develop.

[comrade]

Simon Dalrymple said this week that he has absolutely no doubt that Tom Boyd will still become a commanding KPF. I'm happy that Dal knows his stuff. There's no other fit tall that Bevo wants in the team to ruck. So that's fine. I agree with Dal, Boyd will be a commanding KPF. He's still only 21 and writing him off now is not something I would do, especially that since his GF performance he's had to ruck by himself for half of the season to date. You can't develop as a KPF when other rucks aren't selected and you're forced to ruck alone and not spend time forward. But when that changes, like guru Dalrymple says, I have no doubt he will be a commanding KPF.

You know I respect Dalrymple but he wouldn't be the first recruiter to overrate a junior who dominated smaller opponents. I mean, what else do you expect him to say?

I'm fairly confident that even when Roughy is back, Boyd won't be spending a heap of time up forward.

[chef]

He doesn't have the hands to become a dominant KPF or the mobility.

Ruck/forward is what he's born to do and he's very good at it. He'll never be a commanding KF and the sooner Roughie is back the better.

[GVGjr]

I'd give Bevo more credit than that but I understand why you'd think that.

Barrett vindicated? His performance in the finals as a ruck who went forward won us a flag. Let's not get hysterical because he's not turning out to be one of the greatest KPF of all time despite being paid like one. And his signing was symbolic of something much bigger, which I'm sure you know.



In what game in the finals series last year did he start as a ruckman? He was a forward that helped out in the ruck. Lets not ignore the facts to suit a viewpoint. Did he start any games at all last year as the main ruckman?

I haven't given up on him as an effective key forward, why would I given he is just 21 and and has battled injuries since he arrived.



You seem to be stuck in the old fashioned thinking that a ruckman must win taps and that's it, and a key forward must stay inside 50. He's becoming a very good modern ruck man, not in the old fashioned way, but in the new way of being able to navigate a zone by hands, can use it well by foot etc. He doesn't win 40+ taps a game, but he doesn't need to.



Can you show we one post where I have apparently said hit outs are the measure of the modern day ruckman and that I have applied them to Tom Boyd? I don't believe that it is a good measure and you are making assumptions on my POV that aren't correct.



Our development isn't the problem. An AFL flag and 2 VFL flags in a 3 year period with an historically young list is evidence enough. The player is the issue here. He's just not a KPF. We had a junior career and 1 year of senior footy to base our decision on. He spent most of his formative years as a ruckman I understand, before going forward at the Ranges. He was a 200cm kid up against beanpoles and dominated them, shock horror. Roles change with the environment.



If we use an early draft pick and trade away the captain to recruit a key forward prospect and of course put forward our biggest player contract to date to do so and then, as you have implied, now assess him as a ruckman first who goes forward then I don't think that reflects that well on our development with Tom Boyd. We were that desperate to land a key forward that year we also put forward a bid for Darcy Moore.

The only reason he is being used primarily in the ruck this season is because Roughead is injured and we didn't close other deals for ruckman we were interested in. We started the season with the view that Roughead would ruck the majority of game time and that Cloke would play alongside of Boyd as the key forwards.

We've adapted to the hand injuries have dealt us and in my opinion it was never planned that Boyd would be the number one ruckman this year.

[comrade]

In what game in the finals series last year did he start as a ruckman? He was a forward that helped out in the ruck. Lets not ignore the facts to suit a viewpoint. Did he start any games at all last year as the main ruckman?

A ruck that helps out up forward or a forward who rucks. Same thing. What he isn't is a stay at home KPF.




Can you show we one post where I have apparently said hit outs are the measure of the modern day ruckman and that I have applied them to Tom Boyd? I don't believe that it is a good measure and you are making assumptions on my POV that aren't correct.

You said Boyd is 'average ruckman and that might be stretching things'.




If we use an early draft pick and trade away the captain to recruit a key forward prospect and of course put forward our biggest player contract to date to do so and then, as you have implied, now assess him as a ruckman first who goes forward then I don't think that reflects that well on our development with Tom Boyd. We were that desperate to land a key forward that year we also put forward a bid for Darcy Moore.

It says more about our identification process than our development, which is a proven success (2 VFL flags + 1 AFL flags is definitive proof). We also played the hand dealt to us, for symbolic reasons as much as anything. Just because we sold the farm to get him, doesn't mean we shoe horn him into a role he's not suited to. Have you heard of the 'sunk cost' fallacy?



The only reason he is being used primarily in the ruck this season is because Roughead is injured and we didn't close other deals for ruckman we were interested in. We started the season with the view that Roughead would ruck the majority of game time and that Cloke would play alongside of Boyd as the key forwards.

Incorrect. We have a perfectly healthy ruckman with AFL experience toiling away in the VFL. We also had one on the list last year but decided not to keep him on, likely because when we rated our list needs, Boyd was considered a ruck option.



We've adapted to the hand injuries have dealt us and in my opinion it was never planned that Boyd would be the number one ruckman this year.

I agree we've adapted to injuries and Boyd isn't considered the number one ruckman.

My point is he's not also considered the number one KPF, because he isn't one.

Bevo has been quite public about tempering those expectations, for good reason. He's not stupid and says things for no reason. Also explains why we were so keen to bring Cloke into the fold.

[ledge]

Boyd's taken about 3 marks this year so just as well he's not forward.

Because he is in the ruck where the ball is, not where the ball is going.
You can't take marks up forward when your in the ruck.
Once Roughead comes back he will give us more up forward.
If we can get him and Redpath teaming and getting their patterns right , what team can stop them ?

[bulldogtragic]

You know I respect Dalrymple but he wouldn't be the first recruiter to overrate a junior who dominated smaller opponents. I mean, what else do you expect him to say?

I'm fairly confident that even when Roughy is back, Boyd won't be spending a heap of time up forward.

I'd actually expect him to say 'I'm 100% with Bevo, he's a ruckman' and tow the new company line. That Dal didn't hesitate for a nanosecond in his statement to me has a sense of strong confidence in his assertion. With the greatest of respect to those arguing against Simon Dalrymple, I personally accept his opinions to hold greater weight than mine and other members. So when Dal says he has no doubt Boyd will be a commanding KPF and needs time to develop into the role as he's still just 21, I think the gun AFL recruiter whose watched Tom Boyd for probably 7-8 years is a very decent authority on Tom Boyd. We can all agree to disagree, but I'm happy to side with Simon Dalrymple.

[comrade]

I'd actually expect him to say 'I'm 100% with Bevo, he's a ruckman' and tow the new company line. That Dal didn't hesitate for a nanosecond in his statement to me has a sense of strong confidence in his assertion. With the greatest of respect to those arguing against Simon Dalrymple, I personally accept his opinions to hold greater weight than mine and other members. So when Dal says he has no doubt Boyd will be a commanding KPF and needs time to develop into the role as he's still just 21, I think the gun AFL recruiter whose watched Tom Boyd for probably 7-8 years is a very decent authority on Tom Boyd. We can all agree to disagree, but I'm happy to side with Simon Dalrymple.

And I'm happy to side with the reigning premiership coach ;)

[Stefcep]

He doesn't have the hands to become a dominant KPF or the mobility.

Ruck/forward is what he's born to do and he's very good at it. He'll never be a commanding KF and the sooner Roughie is back the better.

THIS.

Have a close look at his hands when he tries to mark- flat, bent back, fingers not spread, doesn't attack the ball but rather waits for it to hit has hands. I can't actually recall him plucking the ball out of the air.

[LostDoggy]

Yes my point being that I dont believe there is such a conundrum.

Every injury plays its part. People write off the impact of Boyd as a forward by pointing to his lack of marks but him missing from the fwd line means that 2 big guys go to Stringer or that its easier to intercept our F50 entries.

We have been smashed by injuries early, are 1 win off first and are in every game to the final whistle.

I'm just not even close to being worried.

This.

[comrade]

THIS.

Have a close look at his hands when he tries to mark- flat, bent back, fingers not spread, doesn't attack the ball but rather waits for it to hit has hands. I can't actually recall him plucking the ball out of the air.

Before the WC match, Fox Footy showed some footage of his technique and Brereton (who for all his verbosity related faults, does analyse key forwards reasonably well) made the point that Boyd is more suited to marking the ball as a ruckman, as it's generally down the line, higher in the air type ball movement, rather than the hard leading, soft hands in front that's required as a genuine key forward. FWIW, he also thinks Boyd will be a ruck/forward hybrid rather than the top banana KPF.

[bornadog]

It really doesn't matter who the number 1 ruckman is. Bevo doesn't care about that, he has a game plan that involves winning contested possession, winning at Stoppages. We now have two ruckman who can play forward and who can contest around the ground. Tom is still learning his craft and getting better every week.

Roughie will be back in the next few weeks and will combine with Boyd in the duel role. Forget about the reasons why we're recruited Tom, those plans changed when Bevo was appointed.

[GVGjr]

You know I respect Dalrymple but he wouldn't be the first recruiter to overrate a junior who dominated smaller opponents. I mean, what else do you expect him to say?



Boyds arrival at the club had little to do with Dalrymple so why dismiss his thoughts on Boyd being a key forward now?
His job is to assess players value and a few years later I think I'd give him enough credit to suggest this isn't a recruiter who overrated a junior key forward and feels like he still needs to defend it.

He could have offered up that 'players need to be versatile' but didn't.

[bulldogtragic]

And I'm happy to side with the reigning premiership coach ;)

True. To be fair you're siding with the first half of Bevo's comments in the presser last week. Bevo said Tom's a ruckman, but may still become a dangerous KPF into the future. So Bevo hasn't written him off as a KPF. Bevo also is a part of a MC that's not selecting other ruckman, so he's seeing our ruck situation/selection through that prism. As Dalrymple said in the interview, he doesn't go to games each week and get taken in with the emotion of winning and losing, but in watching players intently. Dal's watched Tom for 7-8 years you'd imagine, and has no vested interest in match day stuff or in game strategies/positioning. 17 of the 22 premiership players have had Dalrymple's immediate involvement in coming to the club, so he knows these players and their games intently. If he says that Tom is only 21 and we need to give him opportunities and time to develop into the commanding KPF he will become, maybe we should give him the opportunities and time to develop. Tom playing as the solo ruck in most of our games this year, isn't giving him time up forward or the opportunities to learn by doing. What will be, will be. But stamping his papers or highlighting lower than ideal stats, because he's been rucking solo is in my view harsh on a 21 year old.

[GVGjr]

You said Boyd is 'average ruckman and that might be stretching things'.


So in response to me asking the question "Can you show we one post where I have apparently said hit outs are the measure of the modern day ruckman and that I have applied them to Tom Boyd?"

The above is what you have drawn your initial, and now I think proven to be an incorrect, conclusion from?

OK, I'll move on but it's going to be difficult to have good debate if this is how you are interpreting my responses.



Incorrect. We have a perfectly healthy ruckman with AFL experience toiling away in the VFL. We also had one on the list last year but decided not to keep him on, likely because when we rated our list needs, Boyd was considered a ruck option.



So I offer up "The only reason he is being used primarily in the ruck this season is because Roughead is injured and we didn't close other deals for ruckman we were interested in. We started the season with the view that Roughead would ruck the majority of game time and that Cloke would play alongside of Boyd as the key forwards"


And you refer to Campbell

Yep, time to move on

[comrade]

So in response to me asking the question "Can you show we one post where I have apparently said hit outs are the measure of the modern day ruckman and that I have applied them to Tom Boyd?"

The above is what you have drawn your initial, and now I think proven to be an incorrect, conclusion from?

OK, I'll move on but it's going to be difficult to have good debate if this is how you are interpreting my responses.

So on what are you basing your opinion that he's a below average ruck/forward?




So I offer up "The only reason he is being used primarily in the ruck this season is because Roughead is injured and we didn't close other deals for ruckman we were interested in. We started the season with the view that Roughead would ruck the majority of game time and that Cloke would play alongside of Boyd as the key forwards"


And you refer to Campbell

Yep, time to move on

I think your assumption is completely incorrect that Boyd would play alongside Cloke as a key forward only. And the evidence is pretty definitive. I think he was always earmarked for the dual ruck/forward role and is considered part of our ruck line up, hence why we moved Minson on. If he was capable of being a difference making key forward, would we not play Campbell in the ruck and let Boyd do his thing up forward (especially given our goal kicking woes)? Or are you suggesting that the below average ruck version of Boyd is better than a combination of Campbell rucking & Boyd up forward?

You can't have it both ways.

[Doc26]

Using our valuable first round selection on a pure elite mobile ruck prospect in English last year might indicate where Dal and Bevo, assuming they were on the same page, see TBoyd's future.

[Danny the snakeman]

Because he is in the ruck where the ball is, not where the ball is going.


Tell that to Sandilands, he must of missed that bit.

[comrade]

I will have the chance to ask a few at the club why we appear to be giving up on Boyd as a forward and I will be interested in their responses.

Any further developments on this, GVG?

[Jeanette54]

In Tom's defence I am not sure just how good Tom Hawkins' hands would be if he had to ruck all day, and then try to pack mark kicks bombed into the forward line where he is considered to be resting.

Tomahawks mode is make an effort, take the kick, and sod off to take a rest on the pine. The same could be said for most key forwards, with the exception of Saint Nick.

Bevo is asking a lot of young Tom at the moment, and he is no doubt doing his best to deliver.

I also believe that there has been significant improvement in both his ruck work and inside competitiveness this season. He may not have hands quite as quick as Libba's, but he is improving week by week.

[boydogs]

Which of our missing forwards apart from Dickson is a reliable shot for goal?
Crameri? Stringer? Cloke? I'd prefer not to have any of those kicking for my life from 30-40 out.

The shots we've missed haven't predominantly been shots from the pocket or right on 50. Theres a good portion across a wide spread of players from vety gettable shots.

Tom Boyd & Stringer have good career records, but the point is good forwards leading to good positions and taking inside 50 marks makes a big difference to your goals to behinds ratio. It's not just Tory Dickson's kicking action that has created his incredible goalkicking record, it's that he leads to areas he knows he can kick straight from. Contrast with McLean, Dunkley, Dahlhaus throwing the ball on the boot in congestion to register scores

[boydogs]

In Tom's defence I am not sure just how good Tom Hawkins' hands would be if he had to ruck all day, and then try to pack mark kicks bombed into the forward line where he is considered to be resting

Tom's got a lot of work to do with his weight, strength and fitness. GWS bulked him up enormously and it took him 2 years to remodel his body with us. He's developing his fitness in the ruck which has come a long way, but he still comments that he can't attack the ball with vigour when playing forward given the minutes he is spending in the ruck. He has also had shoulder troubles which affects marking but also strength, it's notoriously hard to hit the gym when your shoulders are buggered

Give him 2017 playing big ruck minutes, an injury free preseason in the gym and see in 2018 if he is more of a forward threat