-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
pre-season 2015-16
- Thread starter nswtiger
- Start date
I think McBean is better off honing his ruck work in the VFL than flirting as a tall defender.
This is a guy who is 201cms. Who does he play on if it's not tall forwards?
Tell you what though, if an experiment like that is to be tried VFL level is where it must happen first.
This is a guy who is 201cms. Who does he play on if it's not tall forwards?
Tell you what though, if an experiment like that is to be tried VFL level is where it must happen first.
i'd hope that if McBean is to be tried in defence next season then he should be spending the pre-season in the backline as well
Tigers of Old said:
He's about the same height as Jake Carlisle, don't see it as a major problem, Grimes is the man who can play small if need be. The point about playing McBean as a defender is to create flexibility, not stifle it, no doubt he'll be swung forward when the need arises. As for the ruck, don't think he's got the mass for that, much better to use him as the swingman.
Tigers of Old said:
Hard to say without seeing the team sheet, round 1 perhaps he takes Jaksch, Rance takes Casboult and Grimes takes Everitt. Against the premiers he could be used on the resting ruckman, McEvoy and perhaps Ceglar. Given his height and agility I think there's plenty of options.
bullus_hit said:
I'm not convinced but it's certainly thinking outside of the box. Would want to see him tried there in a VFL role first.
I'm not convinced Mc Bean has many of the traits traditionally associated with a key defender. He's not that strong in the contest, so forget about those one on one contests for a mark. He's not actually that good overhead, so likely would get outmarked on many occasions. He's not very agile, so forwards could probably run around him at will.
So apart from his good football brain I'm not sure what he brings to the party as a defender. If I had to pick one of our key forwards to go back it would probably be Mc Kenzie. At 197 and 100+ kilos he could monster some of the big key forwards. He's not overly agile either, but body on body he can compete with anybody.
So apart from his good football brain I'm not sure what he brings to the party as a defender. If I had to pick one of our key forwards to go back it would probably be Mc Kenzie. At 197 and 100+ kilos he could monster some of the big key forwards. He's not overly agile either, but body on body he can compete with anybody.
Give McBean the ball and tell one of the small guys to pretend he is Nahas and if he kicks over him and doesn't try to play on and dodge him then he has the backline gig .
As an aside I reckon Callum Moore is going to be developed as a tall back from the way it's reading
As an aside I reckon Callum Moore is going to be developed as a tall back from the way it's reading
I know Griff has been tried in the back line but I think he would be a better option there instead of the McBean. Bean is a natural creative forward
Rancey18 said:
Agree.
Griff doesn't seem to read the play that well as a forward and often gets led to the ball.
Arriving to the contest late or behind, Griff seems to punch more often than attempt to mark from behind.
I would be happy to see him get a run at FB/CHB
hear what you are saying Bullus, but would love to see Bean be given an opportunity up forward before turning a potential X factor player into a stodgy defender.
When they 1st tried Griff at CHB he toweled up Buddy and someone else in consecutive weeks, this had Leigh Mathews/Mick Malthouse, (can't remember which), saying "if Griffiths doesn't become a 200 game player i'll go he!, (the're heing as we speak ha). But I agree with Tigermad, I would much rather Beanie forward and Griff back if we are are trying to fit both into the starting line up.
Which is why he was sent back in the first place IMO. If you look back at Griffs early vfl games that was what categorised him. Very talented but always where the ball wasn't.TigerMad said:
The other reason to look at him going back is that a few times he has been sent back late in games especially in 2014 and his marking power when everyone is tired was very important.
I don't mind Griffiths in the back half but overall he is still a mystery to me because he has so much talent. How a player who kicks the ball so well can be so bad in front of goal is a worry. In the head I suspect.
Ruck.
Leysy would 100% develop him into our next first ruck. Suits all his pro's and con's down to the ground. Let alone our list needs.
Really hope the Dimmer gives it a genuine shot.
Leysy would 100% develop him into our next first ruck. Suits all his pro's and con's down to the ground. Let alone our list needs.
Really hope the Dimmer gives it a genuine shot.
brucerfc said:
he had a run of a few games where he played well. his opponents included Roughhead and Tippett. that was 2012 tho. he then played rd 1 2013 and got beat by Hampson, and has barely played there since.
i agree though that it could be his best option, especially when trying to fit McBean in the line up.
I dont mind the ruck option either. a combo of he and TV could be effective.
I think the club shelved the defender experiment with Griffiths after that opening round against Carlton. The longer the game went, the more his confidence dropped. We had Cotch taking the kick outs in the last quarter, because all confidence had deserted Griff. If he can sort out the kicking for goal we'd have a good forward/ruck player.Brodders17 said:
