Josh Battle and Carlilse

[Saint_Singapore]

I really liked the way Battle went about it up forward last year with his hardness and lead up marking and I was actually envisaging him and Marshall being our future key forward set up (pre Max King). This was mostly due to poor Paddy not being able to get on the park.

However, (perhaps less recognised by the wider football community) Battles first year at CHB would have to be one of the best responses to being switched back as a junior at AFL level in a long time. He is hard at it but somehow manages not to give away too many free kicks, quick enough, reads it and marks well and kicks sensibly.

Just wondering everyones thoughts - once Carlisle returns - do we have a reading on whether Battle will be used in defense in Marshs current position? Or will Battle be switched up forward until King is ready? It would be great if we were in a position where Battle could be used as an Adam Hunter style swing man depending on matchups each week.

[The_President]

I really liked the way Battle went about it up forward last year with his hardness and lead up marking and I was actually envisaging him and Marshall being our future key forward set up (pre Max King). This was mostly due to poor Paddy not being able to get on the park.

However, (perhaps less recognised by the wider football community) Battles first year at CHB would have to be one of the best responses to being switched back as a junior at AFL level in a long time. He is hard at it but somehow manages not to give away too many free kicks, quick enough, reads it and marks well and kicks sensibly.

Just wondering everyones thoughts - once Carlisle returns - do we have a reading on whether Battle will be used in defense in Marshs current position? Or will Battle be switched up forward until King is ready? It would be great if we were in a position where Battle could be used as an Adam Hunter style swing man depending on matchups each week.

I've said it a few times now, but Bruce just isn't much chop. If a club like the Bulldogs who need some bigs come sniffing around, we should offload him.

[Ape_Man]

I think Battle’s move back has quite possibly been the best thing the coaches have done this year.

I would like to see him play the McGovern role on Carlisle’s return. He reads the play and the flight of the ball really well.

We haven’t had a great zone off intercept mark since Dempster.

[barneyboyz]

I really liked the way Battle went about it up forward last year with his hardness and lead up marking and I was actually envisaging him and Marshall being our future key forward set up (pre Max King). This was mostly due to poor Paddy not being able to get on the park.

However, (perhaps less recognised by the wider football community) Battles first year at CHB would have to be one of the best responses to being switched back as a junior at AFL level in a long time. He is hard at it but somehow manages not to give away too many free kicks, quick enough, reads it and marks well and kicks sensibly.

Just wondering everyones thoughts - once Carlisle returns - do we have a reading on whether Battle will be used in defense in Marshs current position? Or will Battle be switched up forward until King is ready? It would be great if we were in a position where Battle could be used as an Adam Hunter style swing man depending on matchups each week.

I've said it a few times now, but Bruce just isn't much chop. If a club like the Bulldogs who need some bigs come sniffing around, we should offload him.

It appears so, only thing going against him atm is a cluttered forward line, he needs to be able to lead at it and turn and kick like Gehrig used to

[spert]

Carlise will be a bonus to get back, but maybe playing deep forward for starters. Battle has goal sense, but is also doing great job down back, so it's a handy problem to have.

[bigcarl]

I see in the paper today where Richo says at 5-5 we have a platform to push for the finals.

That would be foreign territory for him and quite a feather in his cap.

However, I fear that a forward line that can manage only nine goals against the bottom-placed club is not going to trouble other teams we’ll need to beat to make the eight.

We are simply not getting reward for effort. And it’s not as if this is a new problem.

There are problems with our system (We need to open the forward line up. A LOT. That should be a big priority, Plus delivery isn’t always what it could be).

I think we need to look at personnel as well. Who you have in front of the ball matters.

I’d play Carlisle forward when he returns and use him as second ruck. I think he could add a lot in that role. He’s a very smart footballer and extremely mobile for a guy his size.

Plus, we wouldn’t lose a lot in defence. Battle has been very good there and our inexperienced back six has, for the most part, acquitted itself well for the whole season.

[Beno88]

Battle's ball use was supreme yesterday. When most St Kilda players bombed long and wide to a contest, or turned it over, Battle continued to choose attacking options and hit his targets. He is ranked 11th in the comp for disposal efficiency. In a game that is increasingly filled with athletes and role players, Battle is just a genuine footballer.

He has to be due for a rising star nod, especially when you consider that among eligible rising star players he is ranked...

1st for total marks.
1st for rebound 50s per game.
2nd for total contested marks.
2nd for total intercepts.
2nd for total kicks.
3rd for effective disposals per game.

Leave him down back.

[stkfc1]

I really liked the way Battle went about it up forward last year with his hardness and lead up marking and I was actually envisaging him and Marshall being our future key forward set up (pre Max King). This was mostly due to poor Paddy not being able to get on the park.

However, (perhaps less recognised by the wider football community) Battles first year at CHB would have to be one of the best responses to being switched back as a junior at AFL level in a long time. He is hard at it but somehow manages not to give away too many free kicks, quick enough, reads it and marks well and kicks sensibly.

Just wondering everyones thoughts - once Carlisle returns - do we have a reading on whether Battle will be used in defense in Marshs current position? Or will Battle be switched up forward until King is ready? It would be great if we were in a position where Battle could be used as an Adam Hunter style swing man depending on matchups each week.

I've said it a few times now, but Bruce just isn't much chop. If a club like the Bulldogs who need some bigs come sniffing around, we should offload him.

Bruce isnt the problem. The problem is that Bruce should be the 2nd forward and Members the third. Not 1st and 2nd like it is at the moment. Put another genuine tall foward down there and watch Bruce and Members get off the chain.

[SaintPav]

Play Carlisle in the forward line.

I like it. I like it a lot.

[DJ Higgins]

Battle isn't wasted in the back but will be better served playing forward. All the attributes mentioned are great for either end but what we picked him for was his accuracy at goal kicking. We were inaccurate again yesterday and against a better team, eg pies, we are made to pay.

In saying that Carlisle needs to return first so until then battle should keep shoring up the back line.

[tedtheodorelogan2018]

Keep Battle in the backline. He is just a bloody good player there. His decision making and field kicking is excellent. Plus his marking, intercepting and spoils are good too. Same as Wilkie.

We have been crying out for a couple of players like Wilkie and Battle for years.

[Scollop]

Ask Jake to play forward and if he cries just play him wherever he wants

[bigcarl]

Ask Jake to play forward and if he cries just play him wherever he wants

Lol

[degruch]

Keep Battle in the backline. He is just a bloody good player there. His decision making and field kicking is excellent. Plus his marking, intercepting and spoils are good too. Same as Wilkie.

We have been crying out for a couple of players like Wilkie and Battle for years.

True, but his near miss with that roost from just outside 50m got me excited...doesn't often happen with our playbook.

[Scollop]

Keep Battle in the backline. He is just a bloody good player there. His decision making and field kicking is excellent. Plus his marking, intercepting and spoils are good too. Same as Wilkie.

We have been crying out for a couple of players like Wilkie and Battle for years.

True, but his near miss with that roost from just outside 50m got me excited...doesn't often happen with our playbook.

That was a mighty kick on the run from Josh.

One thing is for certain. We have more injuries to key players in the backline, and right now Josh is filling a hole and doing a marvellous job. When the opposition get tackled by Josh they know they've been tackled.

Battle defends well and plays hard in the backline. If Josh was told to zone off and just look for the intercept mark he'd be good at that too but he plays closer to his opponent and I like that.

Will be an interesting call by the coaches

[St Chris]

Happy to keep Battle’s role nice and simple at this point, and leave him picking up the 2nd key tall (with Brown taking the No. 1) as he gains more experience down back and learns the craft. He’ll still take intercept marks because he naturally makes good position in the contest, but the threat is he gets lost a bit and can’t influence enough contests if he drifts without purpose.

Let Carlisle be the McGovern-type interceptor, with Marsh and Wilkie battling for the 4th spot, with Wilkie significantly ahead at this stage.

[Scollop]

Happy to keep Battle’s role nice and simple at this point, and leave him picking up the 2nd key tall (with Brown taking the No. 1) as he gains more experience down back and learns the craft. He’ll still take intercept marks because he naturally makes good position in the contest, but the threat is he gets lost a bit and can’t influence enough contests if he drifts without purpose.

Let Carlisle be the McGovern-type interceptor, with Marsh and Wilkie battling for the 4th spot, with Wilkie significantly ahead at this stage.

That's a pretty easy gig for Jake but I reckon if you are backman you need to be accountable and other teams aren't going to let St Kilda dictate terms and let Jakey run around loose.

I thought Marsh was good against Carlton. That means if Marsh is in the team that we'd have 4 talls in the backline, assuming Jake, Johno and Josh all play back (with Nathan Brown FB). What happens when we come up against teams with a mosquito fleet forward line?

[darylcowie]

I see in the paper today where Richo says at 5-5 we have a platform to push for the finals.

That would be foreign territory for him and quite a feather in his cap.

However, I fear that a forward line that can manage only nine goals against the bottom-placed club is not going to trouble other teams we’ll need to beat to make the eight.

We are simply not getting reward for effort. And it’s not as if this is a new problem.

There are problems with our system (We need to open the forward line up. A LOT. That should be a big priority, Plus delivery isn’t always what it could be).

I think we need to look at personnel as well. Who you have in front of the ball matters.


I’d play Carlisle forward when he returns and use him as second ruck. I think he could add a lot in that role. He’s a very smart footballer and extremely mobile for a guy his size.

Plus, we wouldn’t lose a lot in defence. Battle has been very good there and our inexperienced back six has, for the most part, acquitted itself well for the whole season.

This poster has nailed it re the Carlisle/Battle debate, I've long thought Carlisle is an ideal second ruck (something that Montagna suggested was intended for him when he was first recruited) and that will ease rather than increase pressure on him to perform once he returns from injury, not to mention fast track his aerobic fitness.

While I actually question his mobility for his size as he can be easily be turned inside out by mobile forwards, his great hands will be even more useful up forward than in defence, where Battle is doing a very solid job at CHB.

[WellardSaint]

Battle isn't wasted in the back but will be better served playing forward. All the attributes mentioned are great for either end but what we picked him for was his accuracy at goal kicking. We were inaccurate again yesterday and against a better team, eg pies, we are made to pay.

In saying that Carlisle needs to return first so until then battle should keep shoring up the back line.

exactly how I feel.
In his games last year in the forward line, geez he made things happen, he was so creative and clever.
Waste of his talents, parking him down back, especially after Jake returns.
Battle is a born forward, and they asked him to learn to be a defender only to cover for Robbo and Jake.

[groupie1]

I'd suggest Brown is the casualty for Carlisle, so our tall backs are Carlisle at FB; Wilkie at CHB; and Battle as the third/intercept marker. We want the ball in his hands coming out. The real Josh Battle question will only need to be answered if Dylan Roberton returns next year.

[minneapolis]

I would like to see Battle played as a ruck rover. Let Carlisle, Wilkie, Clavarino and Marsh play the tall backs.

Also put Savage in the forward line as a really good kick for goal.

[mad saint guy]

I'd suggest Brown is the casualty for Carlisle, so our tall backs are Carlisle at FB; Wilkie at CHB; and Battle as the third/intercept marker. We want the ball in his hands coming out. The real Josh Battle question will only need to be answered if Dylan Roberton returns next year.

Absolutely this. If Roberton comes back, Battle goes forward. Marsh is another possible factor - I think he has looked very good in defence and I'd be comfortable with Carlisle, Wilkie and Marsh taking the tall forwards with Battle forward if Robbo doesn't make it back.

[bigcarl]

Ask Jake to play forward and if he cries just play him wherever he wants

Oh yeah, that’s right. The tail wags the dog at St Kilda.

[supersaints2]

Not sure that playing a non ruckman straight into second ruck after back surgery is such a great idea, with too much re-injury risk

If it were my back I wouldn't want to be getting it smashed in the ruck, at least until next season

[bigcarl]

Not sure that playing a non ruckman straight into second ruck after back surgery is such a great idea, with too much re-injury risk

If it were my back I wouldn't want to be getting it smashed in the ruck, at least until next season

You’re not suggesting the club will bring him back less than fully fit? I don’t want him back until he is fully fit, meaning he can play any position.