2018 Rd 2: Post Game Prattle: Carlton vs Gold Coast

[kruddler]

Casboult won't exploit anything, that is the problem with that logic.

If you have Curnowfides, Casboult and McKay in the same forwardline....name me a side with 3 backmen tall enough to take them. You can't because we are hoarding them all.

The moment you put a smaller bloke on any of them, thats the moment that player gets an advantage. Is it enough to win us a game? Depends what our mids can do and how good our delivery is. But put simply, Casboult will be a better player if he has McKay in the side with him.

[LP]

If you have Curnowfides, Casboult and McKay in the same forwardline....name me a side with 3 backmen tall enough to take them. You can't because we are hoarding them all.

The moment you put a smaller bloke on any of them, thats the moment that player gets an advantage. Is it enough to win us a game? Depends what our mids can do and how good our delivery is. But put simply, Casboult will be a better player if he has McKay in the side with him.

You don't need a tall to take Casboult, that is another flaw in the logic, he's easily manhandled and out-bodied by medium defenders. Harass him, take away his run, and he's finished.

Secondly, even on his good day he's probably got to get twice as much footy as the others, to have just half the amount of impact.

If you want to sacrifice McKay to be a patsy for Casboult, you may as well replace Casboult with Kerr or Silvagni.

Let's face it, Charlie is the man now, for us and for the opposition.

[ElwoodBlues1]

If you have Curnowfides, Casboult and McKay in the same forwardline....name me a side with 3 backmen tall enough to take them. You can't because we are hoarding them all.

The moment you put a smaller bloke on any of them, thats the moment that player gets an advantage. Is it enough to win us a game? Depends what our mids can do and how good our delivery is. But put simply, Casboult will be a better player if he has McKay in the side with him.

Agree on Casboult and Mckay playing together and Casboult being better for it......Richmond have three tall defenders in Rance, Astbury and Grimes...McIntosh aint small either.

[kruddler]

You don't need a tall to take Casboult, that is another flaw in the logic, he's easily manhandled and out-bodied by medium defenders. Harass him, take away his run, and he's finished.

Secondly, even on his good day he's probably got to get twice as much footy as the others, to have just half the amount of impact.

If you want to sacrifice McKay to be a patsy for Casboult, you may as well replace Casboult with Kerr or Silvagni.

Let's face it, Charlie is the man now, for us and for the opposition.

Your hatrid is blinding you from logic. Again, let me point out that i have been on the replace casboult bandwagon for years.

re bold, don't think about it that way.
Think about it as Casboult being the patsy for McKay.

[LP]

Think about it as Casboult being the patsy for McKay.

So Charlie is top banana, no need to make any assumptions there.

You think opposition teams will seriously focus on Casboult as the 2nd forward and leave a McKay, Kerr, Silvagni or others as the 3rd or lesser options?

I say there is a long history of our performance that says that's bogus logic.

I think if Charlie, Casboult, Wright, Silvagni and McKay are in the mix Casboult will be last on the oppositions hit list because he hurts them so little, he has little physical presence, can be covered by a smaller player, isn't a significant scoring threat and even if he gets hold of the ball he is likely to shoot us in the foot at any moment.

Is that what we want, is that fair of those 20 year olds?

[Thryleon]

No one will leave Casboult free to mind McKay (initially).

He's not that good but he's good enough to be the difference between winning and losing.

It's also worth noting that he kicks straighter when he doesn't have to take a big contested mark.

We could even instruct him to pass it off every time he takes a mark and that would be enough to free up McKay to score (who's not that great a kick either I might add).

[kruddler]

So Charlie is top banana, no need to make any assumptions there.

You think opposition teams will seriously focus on Casboult as the 2nd forward and leave a McKay, Kerr, Silvagni or others as the 3rd or lesser options?

I say there is a long history of our performance that says that's bogus logic.

Your bogus logic is ignoring that on the odd occasion, when casboutl has been the top banana, that he has managed to eek out 4 goals on 5 occassions, and 3 goals on 8 more occasions. Playing the numbers game says 1 in 7.3 games, he'll kick 3 goals or more. Can he be relied upon, week in week out? No. Can he do some damage as the 2nd or 3rd tall....yes. The numbers don't have a bias, unlike you.

I think if Charlie, Casboult, Wright, Silvagni and McKay are in the mix Casboult will be last on the oppositions hit list because he hurts them so little, he has little physical presence, can be covered by a smaller player, isn't a significant scoring threat and even if he gets hold of the ball he is likely to shoot us in the foot at any moment.

Is that what we want, is that fair of those 20 year olds?

If he is last on their hit list or if he is in the VFL, you are not getting any extra help to the 20 year olds under your scenario. Having him in the side, at least he can throw his weight around.

I don't expect you to change your mind, but perhaps you can open it up a bit.

[Barbs]

If you have Curnowfides, Casboult and McKay in the same forwardline....name me a side with 3 backmen tall enough to take them. You can't because we are hoarding them all.

Maybe Essendon - Hurley, Hartley and Brown, or West Coast - McGovern, Barass an Schofield.

But I agree, making each of them accountable for the Curnow Show, Casboult and Mckay is far better than letting Charlie get double teamed by the loose man back.

[LP]

Your bogus logic is ignoring that on the odd occasion, when casboutl has been the top banana, that he has managed to eek out 4 goals on 5 occassions, and 3 goals on 8 more occasions. Playing the numbers game says 1 in 7.3 games, he'll kick 3 goals or more. Can he be relied upon, week in week out? No. Can he do some damage as the 2nd or 3rd tall....yes. The numbers don't have a bias, unlike you.

If he is last on their hit list or if he is in the VFL, you are not getting any extra help to the 20 year olds under your scenario. Having him in the side, at least he can throw his weight around.

I don't expect you to change your mind, but perhaps you can open it up a bit.

And how many of those 4 goal games helped get us a win?

He doesn't throw his weight around, that is part of the problem!

The game plan we use that sees him score doesn't help us, that is my main point, we have tried him over and over and he takes us nowhere!

[kruddler]

And how many of those 4 goal games helped get us a win?

He doesn't throw his weight around, that is part of the problem!

The game plan we use that sees him score doesn't help us, that is my main point, we have tried him over and over and he takes us nowhere!

Your logic is completely up $hit creek.

The games he kicks goals in we lose...so lets not play him. Or lets not let him kick goals?

Wait, last week Curnowfides kicked 5 as did Wright. But we lost. Yep, better drop them too. Didn't help us get a win. The game plan we use that sees them score doesn't help us win.

Yes, i am being sarcastic. Sadly, you are not.

Give it up.

We don't have a 100 goal a game player collecting dust in the VFL. Excluding casboult...
Our #1 target has played about 25 games.
Our #2 target has played 2.
Our #3 target has played 0.

Love him or hate him, we are better off playing him at present because we got SFA else. That which we do have would benefit from having him in the side.


Missed 8 weeks from casboults hit.
[flash=560,315]https://www.youtube.com/v/N3u1epveWm0[/flash]

Ask him if he'll be looking over his shoulder next time he plays Carlton.