Darcy and Grant?

[Raw Toast]

Very glad that Darcy is making some progress and is likely to play round one. But does this mean that Grant's value as a utility is reduced a bit?

Can we afford to play both in the forward line at the same time for any period of time?

I think Darcy can read the play well and his footskills mean he might spend a bit of time floating a a loose man down back. But then the question becomes, does Grant have to play forward if Darcy is down back?

Of course the other option is the bench for one of them, but this will put pressure on players like Street and Minson to play forward when not rucking, otherwise we'll have two talls on the bench which will limit our midfield rotations (which seem to have been increasing at least over the pre-season).

So if all four talls play (plus Doogs?), we've got issues of how to stop the ball coming quickly back out the forward line (which Eade seems to hate). This might indicate a real need for Robbins, as long as he can make his pressure top-notch again, but with talls up forward we'll also need at least one crumber (which Robbins can't do well enough IMO).

None of these are disastrous problems, as having fit big men is clearly an advantage, but our flexibility might be reduced a bit.

[westdog54]

Very glad that Darcy is making some progress and is likely to play round one. But does this mean that Grant's value as a utility is reduced a bit?

Can we afford to play both in the forward line at the same time for any period of time?

I think Darcy can read the play well and his footskills mean he might spend a bit of time floating a a loose man down back. But then the question becomes, does Grant have to play forward if Darcy is down back?

Of course the other option is the bench for one of them, but this will put pressure on players like Street and Minson to play forward when not rucking, otherwise we'll have two talls on the bench which will limit our midfield rotations (which seem to have been increasing at least over the pre-season).

So if all four talls play (plus Doogs?), we've got issues of how to stop the ball coming quickly back out the forward line (which Eade seems to hate). This might indicate a real need for Robbins, as long as he can make his pressure top-notch again, but with talls up forward we'll also need at least one crumber (which Robbins can't do well enough IMO).

None of these are disastrous problems, as having fit big men is clearly an advantage, but our flexibility might be reduced a bit.

Excellent pick-up RT, great thread.

I think you've brought up a great point. However I can see Grant doing a heck of a lot more work down back than Darcy will. I think the coaching staff will have learnt a big lesson from last year's final against West Coast, namely that Grant can't play forward if they have someone fast and agile matching up on him. Adam Hunter tore us apart in that first quarter and pretty much shut us out of the game considering the conditions.

As for which ruckman goes forward, I haven't seen much of pre-season training, which leads me to ask what Street's one-on-one marking is like. I ask this because I think his kicking for goal is better than Minson's, and if he can take a mark above his head then he's clearly the better option up forward. On top of that, having seen Minson against Brisbane, he seems to move a lot better and is more agile than last year, which is phenomenal given that he's a mobile fortress. He seems to me to be better suited to around the ground work

[firstdogonthemoon]

So if all four talls play (plus Doogs?), we've got issues of how to stop the ball coming quickly back out the forward line (which Eade seems to hate).

Lovely and typically perceptive thread Mr Toast.

Just wondering what it is that indicates Eade hates the ball coming quickly back out of the forward line. Not doubting you, but merely attempting to expand my understanding of the games subtleties.

[westdog54]

Lovely and typically perceptive thread Mr Toast.

Just wondering what it is that indicates Eade hates the ball coming quickly back out of the forward line. Not doubting you, but merely attempting to expand my understanding of the games subtleties.

IMO our defence isn't exactly a brick wall, and we're vulnerable on the counter-attack.

One of the things that helped us in Round 1 last year against Richmond was that because everyone was able to man up quickly, the ball couldn't go forward with any sort of speed for Richmond. We then slaughtered them on the counter attack.

[Raw Toast]

Lovely and typically perceptive thread Mr Toast.

Just wondering what it is that indicates Eade hates the ball coming quickly back out of the forward line. Not doubting you, but merely attempting to expand my understanding of the games subtleties.

Thanks space-faring dog.

In his early days with us Eade mentioned a few times that he didn't like it when the ball came back out quickly and that it was unlikely that he would play talls like Darcy and Grant (or Morgan) at the same time in the forward line. Now that we've got a few talls relatively healthy again, Eade has continued saying he only wants one tall deep (rather than the 2 or 3 the Saints might go with) so that we have target we can bomb it to we don't have the time or space to pass it to a leading forward.

As Westdog54 has noted, we are vulnerable on the counter-attack. There are a few reasons for this. One is that most teams these days like to begin their attacks from defence and put play-makers like McMahon and Gilbee down back. These types will cut teams up if given time and space.

A second reason is that we play a particularly risky style of football where once we have the ball (and unfortunately sometimes when we don't!), players leave their opponents and run forward. This means our defenders and midfielders have more scoring opportunities than many others, but also that if the ball comes quickly back the other way, lots of our players will be out of position, with the opposition being able to stream unimpeded towards their forward line.

As westdog54 also said, if we don't let the ball come out quickly (for instance if no one marks the ball and then Robbins tackles an opponent and we get a ball up, or if one of their players gets it but can't pass it to anyone because we've manned up the close options), then we slow the other team down, stop them running freely forward and force them to kick it to a contest. We also allow players to clog up our defensive 50, making it harder for them to find a leading forward.

Of course, stopping the ball coming out quickly is not so easy, especially if the other team plays a loose man back, or if one of our forwards cannot keep up with his opponent.

[Raw Toast]

Excellent pick-up RT, great thread.

I think you've brought up a great point. However I can see Grant doing a heck of a lot more work down back than Darcy will. I think the coaching staff will have learnt a big lesson from last year's final against West Coast, namely that Grant can't play forward if they have someone fast and agile matching up on him. Adam Hunter tore us apart in that first quarter and pretty much shut us out of the game considering the conditions.

As for which ruckman goes forward, I haven't seen much of pre-season training, which leads me to ask what Street's one-on-one marking is like. I ask this because I think his kicking for goal is better than Minson's, and if he can take a mark above his head then he's clearly the better option up forward. On top of that, having seen Minson against Brisbane, he seems to move a lot better and is more agile than last year, which is phenomenal given that he's a mobile fortress. He seems to me to be better suited to around the ground work

Ta westdog54.

The more I think about this, the more likely I think it is that we'll play a few games this season with oen main ruck like Minson or Street and rely on small burst of help from McDougall, Wight and Darcy.

While I can see Eade going v tall up forward a few times just to stretch the opposition and keep things unpredictable, I can't see Street/Minson and Darcy spending that much time together deep in the forward line. That means one would have to be on the bench and if Grant does not have a good match-up down back then our midfield rotations suffer if we've got him and Darcy rotating up forward as well. I guess a lot depends on how Darcy goes up forward and Grant down back.

Skipper will probably get his chance/s, as he can try and show something up forward or down back as well as rucking. I have a feeling he and McDougall might end up competing for the same spot.

[southerncross]

Very glad that Darcy is making some progress and is likely to play round one. But does this mean that Grant's value as a utility is reduced a bit?

Can we afford to play both in the forward line at the same time for any period of time?



RT, Firstly as others have pointed out this is a good discussion.

Playing 2 KPP's in the forward line is almost a necessity as far as I am concerned. I understand that this hasn't always been Eade's public preference to play 2 talls but I think deep down we need to make this work.
I think Grant will play in the back line for the majority of the season as well so it might be Doogs and Darcy as the key forwards




I think Darcy can read the play well and his footskills mean he might spend a bit of time floating a a loose man down back. But then the question becomes, does Grant have to play forward if Darcy is down back?



This is a real possibility. It was a strange move when he played against the Bombers in the same manner but I wonder if it was a sign for something that we will also see during the season.



So if all four talls play (plus Doogs?), we've got issues of how to stop the ball coming quickly back out the forward line (which Eade seems to hate). This might indicate a real need for Robbins, as long as he can make his pressure top-notch again, but with talls up forward we'll also need at least one crumber (which Robbins can't do well enough IMO).

None of these are disastrous problems, as having fit big men is clearly an advantage, but our flexibility might be reduced a bit.


Perhaps the bigger picture is to only play one ruckman and have him supported by Darcy and Doogs?

[dog town]

As far as I am concerned it just gives Eade more flexibility. Whichever way he goes he isn't going to allow us to go too tall so if it does look like we are a bit tall for a particular opponent then he will adjust. It is fantastic to have so many different ways of structuring the forward line. I like to think back to the last time we had all our players up and running which was Grants 300th against Adelaide. In that game Grant started dangerously up forward then went back and Darcy blew the game open in the 3rd. Just as Adelaide were coming to grips with what we were doing Eade went small. He loves to keep the opposition on the back foot and we are in a fantastic position to do this. Expect Johnson to play out as a lead up player outside 50 alot more which is IMO his best position.

[Go_Dogs]

Grant will probably play the role of third tall in the back half and play off his man, relying on his ability to read the play better than others to have his influence on the game. If he can be third man up in contests and cut of play with his reading of the ball, it will be of great help. It will allow Harris to concentrate more on his man, and allow Hargrave and Morris to probably play on smaller, better matched players. This would mean that Wight / Hargrave would take the second tall - depending on who it is.

Darcy will spend about 60-70% of the games forward I think, with little spells in the centre to give Minson a rest. Street/Skipper will have to work very hard to get back into the team if Darcy is able to hold a bit of the ruck responsibility.

[Raw Toast]

Perhaps the bigger picture is to only play one ruckman and have him supported by Darcy and Doogs?

I reckon this is becoming increasingly likely - Wight can also ruck a bit and Skipper might challenge Doogs for a spot depending on how Doogs does.

[Raw Toast]

As far as I am concerned it just gives Eade more flexibility. Whichever way he goes he isn't going to allow us to go too tall so if it does look like we are a bit tall for a particular opponent then he will adjust. It is fantastic to have so many different ways of structuring the forward line. I like to think back to the last time we had all our players up and running which was Grants 300th against Adelaide. In that game Grant started dangerously up forward then went back and Darcy blew the game open in the 3rd. Just as Adelaide were coming to grips with what we were doing Eade went small. He loves to keep the opposition on the back foot and we are in a fantastic position to do this. Expect Johnson to play out as a lead up player outside 50 alot more which is IMO his best position.

I guess the big question is how much Darcy rucks. If he can ruck for more than one 3-5min burst per quarter then he adds alot to our overall flexibility. Otherwise we're unlikely to have an Adelaide-game situation, in that Eade won't be able to switch Grant between defense and attack as much because Darcy will already be forward, whereas he was rucking most of the first half v Adelaide. IIRC even before Darcy went down the first time, Eade said he was unlikely to play both up forward at the same time.

Another question is which forward position will suit Darcy best as he comes back. He played full-forward v Adelaide and dominated with lots of contested marks (was it v Rutten?). However, in the pre-season games I've read about, he seems like he's struggled for touch deep forward, and has been better running towards goal.

I think Darcy offers best value to us if he can play like he did against Adelaide - ie as a deep forward who take's a few contested marks. However, he might be best played around the chf line for awhile to get his touch and confidence back. This way he can get some more touches and not have everything rest on his shoulders. But it might mean he's competing with Doogs, or that Doogs has to play closer to goal. This might suit Doogs as his kicking seems best suited atm to shots at goal v passes to leading forwards, but it will test his contested marking, work-rate and nous. Can Doogs work hard enough to get the kind of space Johnson gets? If Darcy plays a bit out from goal, Johnson might also have to playas a ff type for awhile longer, and there might be more of a place for Robbins to do his leading.

This is all speculation of course. We do have more flexibility in that we can go tall as well as small and a few variations in between. But if Darcy can't ruck much and doesn't fire initially close to goal, it'll be interesting to see what Eade does with him. Of course, he might just play him like Morgan and get him to bring the ball to ground, but this will still limit what Eade does with Grant imo.

[dog town]

Agree with all of that RT. Going to be very interesting to see how Eade goes about it.

I think his use of Doogs will be fascinating as well. Most have him pencilled in as a leading CHF and while I am sure he will play that role alot I reckon we will find him closer to goal a fair bit as well. It is a very adaptable and balanced forward line with a full list to choose from with only one or two players that have slight restrictions on how deep they need to play.

I have never rated Darcy all that highly playing outside 50 as a forward but it might be neccesary to get him into it especially early in the year when he will be struggling for confidence. I really hope he gets back to being a capable deep forward because it will free up other players so much. Take round 1 as an example where you would think Geelongs preference would be to either play Scarlett loose or on Johnson but with a fit and firing Darcy I dont think it gives them that luxury and most other teams would be in the same situation.

[dog town]

Agree with all of that RT. Going to be very interesting to see how Eade goes about it.

I think his use of Doogs will be fascinating as well. Most have him pencilled in as a leading CHF and while I am sure he will play that role alot I reckon we will find him closer to goal a fair bit as well. It is a very adaptable and balanced forward line with a full list to choose from with only one or two players that have slight restrictions on how deep they need to play.

I have never rated Darcy all that highly playing outside 50 as a forward but it might be neccesary to get him into it especially early in the year when he will be struggling for confidence. I really hope he gets back to being a capable deep forward because it will free up other players so much. Take round 1 as an example where you would think Geelongs preference would be to either play Scarlett loose or on Johnson but with a fit and firing Darcy I dont think it gives them that luxury and most other teams would be in the same situation.

[Raw Toast]

Agree with all of that RT. Going to be very interesting to see how Eade goes about it.

I think his use of Doogs will be fascinating as well. Most have him pencilled in as a leading CHF and while I am sure he will play that role alot I reckon we will find him closer to goal a fair bit as well. It is a very adaptable and balanced forward line with a full list to choose from with only one or two players that have slight restrictions on how deep they need to play.

I have never rated Darcy all that highly playing outside 50 as a forward but it might be neccesary to get him into it especially early in the year when he will be struggling for confidence. I really hope he gets back to being a capable deep forward because it will free up other players so much. Take round 1 as an example where you would think Geelongs preference would be to either play Scarlett loose or on Johnson but with a fit and firing Darcy I dont think it gives them that luxury and most other teams would be in the same situation.

Yep. The game v Adelaide was a tantalising taste of what Darcy could provide as a deep forward for us, and while that was a standout performance, half as much would still give us a dimension we haven't had for years.

[Mofra]

Eade has siad Darcy may be used in defence as well - and in the practice match against Essendon he did play back for a bit. Perhaps both Darcy & Grant will be used to plug holes this year?