Jump to content





  •  
Oliver Sholem

Changes for next week v Geelong

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Nope. The team balance is better without him especially on the quick Etihad deck and his kicking was horrendous. 

So was Oliver's, better drop him too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Nope. The team balance is better without him especially on the quick Etihad deck and his kicking was horrendous. 

He had a shocker or two early on, but got better as the game went on, and is a walk up start. To say we are better served with Brayshaw on the ball is an odd call, as Brayshaw struggled big time today. But agree to disagree I guess.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

So was Oliver's, better drop him too

Clarry tried a few high risk options, I can live with that.

Aside from missing each targets under minimal pressure (Brayshaw, Jones both inside 50) he routinely bombed the ball from a clearance to a Carlton player with no demon around. I've never seen Clarry kick blindly.

Viney does it, but he has speed around the ball and burst in his game to help balance the midfield. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Forest Demon said:

He had a shocker or two early on, but got better as the game went on, and is a walk up start. To say we are better served with Brayshaw on the ball is an odd call, as Brayshaw struggled big time today. But agree to disagree I guess.

Brayshaw struggled in the half forward death valley zone with our mids overusing it. I'm judging Gus on his game last week where he saw a lot more midfield time and was really important after quarter time.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Frost needs to be back in this team, preferably at the expense of Oscar "Turning Circle of Matthew Bate" McDonald but that seems unlikely.

Don't know how you can call this Clint, i've seen the turning circle of Matthew Bate, OMac's is TBD. OMac simply gets the ball, takes 10 minutes to decide what to do with it (he is very slow in the head) and then proceeds to run into the open arms of the opposition.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, big_red_fire_engine said:

Melksham hits targets. Will play all year if his form is as per the first two rounds.

I was there today and saw him miss a few targets but he want Robinson Cruscoe that is for sure. I would not be saying he is a player who hits targets, myself. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't be too quick to pull the trigger on Hannan as others have suggested. He played very well and looked like he suited our game plan last week. Given that the whole team was restricted in the way we want to play in today's game, w should be careful in assessing our needs against Geelong.

That said, I would not be surprised if Kent comes in at his expense.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Earl Hood said:

I was there today and saw him miss a few targets but he want Robinson Cruscoe that is for sure. I would not be saying he is a player who hits targets, myself. 

That's either tautology or bad grammar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ins: Kent and Vince. I also want Frost in but this is were we start to run into problems... who goes out? 

Outs:
ANB - another underwhelming performance as a small forward, Kent would be unlucky to be kept out by him.
Hannan - what, really?? yeah I know, he's shown a lot. But I felt Harmes was very good today. Hannan will get more chances through the year, but Harmes came in for vince and should hold his spot on todays performance.

Vulnerable:
Brayshaw - Oh boy, this guy has so much talent but he seems to have good games, bad games and nothing in between. Today needed to be at least an average game, but instead he made strange decisions and looked like he ran a marathon before the first bounce, couldn't get out of a jog. Simple things like taking that mark in the last quarter takes a poor game and makes it seem so much better. Given his talent i suspect he will be given another opportunity. Players like ANB don't have the same luxury. Whether Gus plays or not next week... he needs to lift.

Suspensions? 
I believe both Hogan and Lewis will get fines (idk if Lewis' record will cost him a week) but in the event they get a week then I would think Pedo comes in for Hogan (literally the only reason he is on the list) and it would just be Vince returning to play Lewis' role 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Lewis is suspended, Vince takes his spot. If Lewis is not suspended, I'd drop Melksham - adding little at the moment and is around the same spot on the ground we'd be playing Vince.

ANB and Hannan were good enough last week to get another game next week.

If Hogan is suspended, I'd play Pedersen over Spencer. Spencer's not a forward but would have to spend 80%+ of the game down there. I'd rather that person be Pedersen than Spencer.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think Melksham needs to come out for Vince, not only did he turn it over a number of times (he wasn't on he's own there though) but a couple of times he didn't go hard enough for marks. He didn't shirk the contest, just waited for the ball to come to him rather than going to it, directly cost us a goal in the second

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gus was poor today. Interesting to see how how Simon deals with it. Hopefully keeps him in. 

Hogan out. 

Bernie in

maybe kent for Hannan or Gus 

maybe Wagner for harmes if we need a backman 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The potential suspensions of Hogan and Lewis will determine ins and outs. But I am not going to complain. This is Lewis at his best at unsociable football, and he has always played on the very edge. Vince does the same thing. It flirts with danger but also produces results. Hogan will likely get a week,  but the bloke he tapped needs to take up knitting - it is a contact game and he went down quicker than Cale Morton when he ran away. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any update on how Hibberd is tracking? He'll make our back six look a lot stronger, although I thought that Harmes was good today in the backline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That game was a bit of a clanger fest. We really did our best to screw it all up and ruin our season, but forgot how in the last quarter.

If we dropped players as quickly as some people are saying we should drop Hannan, then Salem wouldn't have been out there today and we most likely would have lost.

Anyway, Bugg allegedly our best at Casey, Kent available again, and Vince presumably to come back in.

It does put some position-specific pressure on Brayshaw, Nibbler, Chomper (Hannan) and Milkshake.

It is also tangible proof that we now have a team that needs to do more than just 'ok' to stay in the firsts. Pardon me while I swoon.

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, chook fowler said:

Oscar has had no goals kicked on him for 2 weeks in a row. He's going well- we would be stuffed without Tom.

Lol.

How does that work when we play a zone defence?

I guess you must have missed the free kicks against and non-effective spoils he attempted last week that resulted directly in goals to St Kilda?

It honestly amazes me at how easily pleased some supporters are when it comes to judging an individual's performance.

Agree with Deespencer re: Tyson. Posters love a statistic around here. I wish those who continue to blindly defend players would actually watch the replay and tell me how many of his 30-odd possessions were meaningful. And that doesn't include little 15 metre kicks to a leading player on his own. They're expected at this level. I rate Tyson really highly when he's up and going. But when his skills and decision making are down, he is truly awful. And for whatever reason, delusional supporters don't like hearing that. The ball was pinging all over the place today due to errors, but if people genuinely think Tyson had a real influence on today's result, they don't really understand football.

There's a reason why GWS were happy enough to let Tyson go knowing the players they had in their midfield group. And now that we've got some genuine talent in ours, I think Dom's lack of attribute diversity is becoming more and more obvious.

Edited by stevethemanjordan
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chook fowler said:

Oscar has had no goals kicked on him for 2 weeks in a row. He's going well- we would be stuffed without Tom.

Omac and Tmac alternated on Roo last week who kicked 4. I like that Omac is improving and developing at a decent rate, but let's not forget he turns over consistently and often is isolated as the weakest link, as Goodwin insinuated last week. Short term pain for longer term gain. I'd certainly keep playing him as I see his positive development. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Red and Blue realist said:

Think Melksham needs to come out for Vince, not only did he turn it over a number of times (he wasn't on he's own there though) but a couple of times he didn't go hard enough for marks. He didn't shirk the contest, just waited for the ball to come to him rather than going to it, directly cost us a goal in the second

IIRC, the knock on Melksham has always been his disposal.

I know a few Essendrug fans who were surprised/delighted that we took him off their hands on a deal worth @ $400k for 3 years (?) when he was seen as a 'turnover merchant' of the highest order.

Still, maybe Goodwin sees something in him that is worth persevering with.

Straight swap for Bernie for mine.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, McQueen said:

I wouldn't be too quick to pull the trigger on Hannan as others have suggested. He played very well and looked like he suited our game plan last week. Given that the whole team was restricted in the way we want to play in today's game, w should be careful in assessing our needs against Geelong.

That said, I would not be surprised if Kent comes in at his expense.

He might've taken mark of  the year if Weeds didn't grab it first as well!

Couldn't see him dropped. He lifted his pressure rate and started to find the ball when the game was on the line. 
And if Hogan is out we'll need scoring power in the forward line. Kent has to replace one of the midfielder/half forward types I think, Gus or ANB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Lol.

How does that work when we play a zone defence?

I guess you must have missed the free kicks against and non-effective spoils he attempted last week that resulted directly in goals to St Kilda?

It honestly amazes me at how easily pleased some supporters are when it comes to judging an individual's performance.

Agree with Deespencer re: Tyson. Posters love a statistic around here. I wish those who continue to blindly defend players would actually watch the replay and tell me how many of his 30-odd possessions were meaningful. And that doesn't include little 15 metre kicks to a leading player on his own. They're expected at this level. I rate Tyson really highly when he's up and going. But when his skills and decision making are down, he is truly awful. And for whatever reason, delusional supporters don't like hearing that. The ball was pinging all over the place today due to errors, but if people genuinely think Tyson had a real influence on today's result, they don't really understand football.

 

Tyson was rubbish until three quarter time but his fourth quarter was a major improvement, much better with the ball in hand and more influential at stoppages.

His defensive work was good all day, though.

If the game had ended at three quarter time he'd have been the first one dropped but it didn't, and with his trajectory being one of improvement, I'd be comfortable retaining him for next week.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

Tyson was rubbish until three quarter time but his fourth quarter was a major improvement, much better with the ball in hand and more influential at stoppages.

His defensive work was good all day, though.

If the game had ended at three quarter time he'd have been the first one dropped but it didn't, and with his trajectory being one of improvement, I'd be comfortable retaining him for next week.

Shame there's no sub rule.

He often comes in to the game late. Sadly on days like this instead of the positives that he must have a good tank I'm worried it's a negative in that he just can't move or process decisions fast enough until the game has opened up.

Wouldn't mind seeing him at half forward for the first half of games more. If they both stay in the side I'd rather a more even share of midfield time between Tyson and Brayshaw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jesus Hoganshaw said:

Seeya later Dom Clangerson

Is it only on Demonland that supporters call for the guy who was arguably our best player to be dropped?

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, bing181 said:

Is it only on Demonland that supporters call for the guy who was arguably our best player to be dropped?

You can argue it all you like, mate. Doesn't make it true.

It was like watching Melbourne of old seeing Dom kick it out on the full, to 1-on-3s or that god-awful clearance when he got a perfect tap from Gawn, threw it immediately on his boot and it went 30 metres straight to a Carlton player. If he's getting our highest possessions in the future and disposing of it in the manner he was today, we are in real trouble.

As my non-Demons supporting mate said, we were lucky we were playing Carlton today.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×