Jump to content

  • Latest Podcast: Josh Mahoney Interview



rjay

Changes v Port

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, MurDoc516 said:

I'd like Petty in just because he has everything physically and could become a great player. Yes he will make mistakes, but i think much like we did with Oscar we should just get games into him.

 

I think Tyson is a key in. Got smashed in the middle and i hate when we start putting Harmes, ANB, Vince and Spargo in the middle instead of just letting the actual in and under mids do their job. I understand they need a rest which is why Brayshaw, Petracca and Tyson should be the rotation options.

 

Out's for me.. I think Bernie isn't offering a whole lot atm. Maybe his experience will be handy if we add Petty into the mix. Can't just go for young blood all over the pitch. I wouldn't be against letting Petracca go down to the 2's because i think he hasn't been great, but i think dropping him in a big game is risky. Apart from yesterday i think Trac usually shines in a big game. People saying Pedo and Lewis are cooked are just overreacting. Pedo was 10x better in a contest than Jesse, but is getting slated because?

 

IN: Petty, Tyson (would've maybe included Hunt)

 

OUT: Vince, Pedo (Feel bad for Ped. He just didn't have a great day and make do on his chance)

 

11 hours ago, Pennant St Dee said:

Give Trac a couple of 5/10 min bursts in the middle like De Goey in the first quarter. Show him the tape of De Goey and start him there put the challenge to him, time to make a statement kid

I must have been at a different game on Monday. I don't recall seeing either Vince or Spargo playing in the midfield. And Petracca certainly did.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Demon17 said:

Did anyone else notice in the 2nd 1/4 at a centre bounce about the 10 minute markish Jack V  gesticulating to T Mac  and pointing to the goals which looked like a bake to TMAc about why he didn't kick forward instead of passing off. Waiting for the re-bounce after the scrum Tmac gave it back to jack.

Was interesting. 

Yep, it's why I think Goodwin's biggest rookie coach mistake was to make Jack captain too early.

I love a lot of what he brings but to me he needed to mature as a player without the pressure of being a captain.

I still stand by that but that horse has bolted. The FD are going to have to rein him in a bit.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, ProDee said:

Tyson is a must in.  We've been down on clearances and his inside work is underrated.

Yep, and he has a great record against Port.

...but we must use him on the inside in place of either Viney or Jones and not leave him out on a wing.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Yep, and he has a great record against Port.

...but we must use him on the inside in place of either Viney or Jones and not leave him out on a wing.

An issue is, Viney can’t play anywhere else, he’s not versatile. Jones is a poor leader who just seems to run around in circles or against the play for cheap handballs out the back. 

The midfield must be Oliver, Brayshaw, Viney. I was hoping Petracca would be by now that burst of speed out of the centre but he’s just so lazy. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, SFebey said:

Jones is a poor leader who just seems to run around in circles or against the play for cheap handballs out the back.

You must be watching a different Jones to me.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I've tried hard not to post since Monday's loss, allowing for some time to view the game on TV, (having been there live) and to watch closely on what went on at the coal face which is where the game was lost. 

First off, it's clear as day that Buckley went to town on the first quarter of the bulldogs game and would have shown his players and said, "look what happens when you pressure Melbourne to this level". Props to him, we couldn't handle it at all and they maintained that level of intensity for the entirety of the game which was impressive.

Why were or levels of intensity and pressure not at theirs given its what we've built our entire brand on? 

Buckley also exposed us in a couple of areas within the midfield. Having a contested heavy, one dimensional midfield group who are all natural ball chasers/inside players can be a double edged sword. When we're on, playing with intensity and most importantly are 'clean' in the contest, we look really good. If the opposition put pressure us at the coal face and nullify Gawn's taps then we look slow and reactionary given the types of players we have playing as half forwards and wings. 

As an example, if you watch Harmes closely in patches when he's on the wing, you'll see how hard he finds it to sit back from the contest and trust that a team mate would win the ball. Some of his efforts when he decided to chase the ball were very poor as he had no impact and it allowed for his opponent to sit back on the outside and become an option in space. Too many times this happened, and Collingwood had a much better spread of midfielders both inside and outside. Sometimes I wonder what instruction is given to players like Harmes and Brayshaw when they play on the wing and or if they're listening? Both players played their under age years as inside mids with Harmes having rests forward. 

Unfortunately at this stage, if the opposition get on top in that area, we don't really seem to have another plan due to our personnel through through the midfield. I noticed Goodwin tried to throw Hogan in there again and for me, that's just clutching at straws as he is not a midfielder and cannot play that position effectively. Watch some of his efforts and you'll see. 

Whilst there are other areas of the ground we can tinker with, like the Vince and Lewis in the same backline conundrum, I thought I'd concentrate on the midfield as it's our strength. 

Bringing Tyson in is not an answer for me. Unless you're taking one of our starting mids out which there's no need yet imo. We need to get back to starting the game with real intensity and being clean with that first possession. Pederson whilst strong in the air, doesn't provide the same defensive pressure as Smith or Weideman. I would bring Smith back in. 

Other than that, keep the same side. The only way we beat Port over there is by playing to our strength and smashing them at the coal face. Oh, and Petracca needs to start in the middle. Needs a rocket. 

 

 

Edited by stevethemanjordan
  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@stevethemanjordan - I know you are not a Tyson fan and I don't have issue with that in and of itself - but our midfield just got pantsed for the second time in two weeks with the games best ruckman. If the bloke who got 35 touches and 7 clearances and looked polished and better than everyone else in the twos doesn't come in - I have a real problem with how and why we select players at match committee...

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

@stevethemanjordan - I know you are not a Tyson fan and I don't have issue with that in and of itself - but our midfield just got pantsed for the second time in two weeks with the games best ruckman. If the bloke who got 35 touches and 7 clearances and looked polished and better than everyone else in the twos doesn't come in - I have a real problem with how and why we select players at match committee...

Yeh, clearly he was dominant. 

My question has always been around where he plays in our 22. I'm assuming Goody knows now that he's not a wingman. So if that's the case and he's been playing in the guts at Casey, who does he come in for against Port? 

One of Viney, Jones or Oliver? No thanks. 

If he replaces Harmes, the problem remains. Harmes only pinch hits in the midfield. Tyson has no positional versatility. He is like Viney in that sense but no where near as important. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Yeh, clearly he was dominant. 

My question has always been around where he plays in our 22. I'm assuming Goody knows now that he's not a wingman. So if that's the case and he's been playing in the guts at Casey, who does he come in for against Port? 

One of Viney, Jones or Oliver? No thanks. 

If he replaces Harmes, the problem remains. Harmes only pinch hits in the midfield. Tyson has no positional versatility. He is like Viney in that sense but no where near as important. 

I know the argument and I am as adamant as you are about the type of player we have to target in the summer but right now Tyson looks like providing something more than a Harmes/ANB/Hannan on the fringes of that midfield and they need to be held accountable when they play poorly.

Personally, I would throw Tyson in there and turn the game into a 'little' bit of a one-on-one sh!tfight until we get our mojo back with Gawn. No trying to be too pretty with our clearances out the back and to the side and just get it forward to our outstanding tall forwards to scare the hell out of that Port backline. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cannot fathom how Tyson, the slowest inside mid of all our inside mids, would possibly help counter the spread and acceleration of better-balanced opposition midfields. 

I'd bring JKH in before I brought Tyson in. He's not up to it either, but at least he's different. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Watts Jurrah Dunn? said:

Cannot fathom how Tyson, the slowest inside mid of all our inside mids, would possibly help counter the spread and acceleration of better-balanced opposition midfields. 

He's smarter around the ball than Viney and Jones.

Collingwood, apart from Treloar don't exactly have an overly quick midfield. They used their numbers around the ball where we used ours at the ball.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Watts Jurrah Dunn? said:

Cannot fathom how Tyson, the slowest inside mid of all our inside mids, would possibly help counter the spread and acceleration of better-balanced opposition midfields. 

I'd bring JKH in before I brought Tyson in. He's not up to it either, but at least he's different. 

I'm not Tyson fan but we simply couldn't get our hands on the ball last weekend.

Collingwood went lower and harder than us. I'm not sure if Tyson will help with this but we need to try something.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/11/2018 at 9:30 PM, Jibroni said:

Whats the obsession with resting Spargo? His first half was fine and the week off can only help.

Pedo, Vince and Hannan likely omissions.

Wondering about Spargo, and if he really does need a rest. For just over two quarters against the Filth, he was in everything nearby and made some good clearances due to his pace, his ball handling, his endeavour and his inside handball. Gutsy little fellow playing in the big league with some poise, that can only continue. I'd reckon he is quite OK in the side at present; he made quite a good showing given limited opportunities across the game but those which came his way were well applied - even though he was let-down by teammates further up the ground. Petracca and his role needs to be stabilised; he is down on form and largely covers for other players not holding their own. Although well tagged, the same could be said for Oliver and ANB in this most recent game. Vince and Jordan need a rest, definitely, and there are those capable of filling those roles competitively. Viney ain't quite Viney at the present moment, rather unsurprisingly, and it appears that he could do with some more conditioning through a stint or two to come in a direct roving role that might provide him with some refamiliarity to the 'see ball, get ball, deliver ball' mantra that he has previously displayed. Chunk needs some gametime relief as his recovery is starting to test him and his intent. Gawn may well begin to incorporate more than just tap-downs in his immediate vicinity - whilst winning the tap on most occasions, there ain't no room for teammates to get in there to get something more positive started in terms of disposal and teamwork. I'd now stick with the improved OMac - he had a bad day - and it appeared that Hibbo fell a little too heavily in an early contested spoil to reduce his effectiveness across the game. He would not normally leave Jetta to outmark/spoil an in-form giant like Cox singlehanded. Lots of lessons to be reviewed, lost of alternatives to be suggested and digested to suit a more competitive team effort than the QB clash. Hated the game but there is quite an amount of appraisal that can extracted on this journey forward. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there has been some really good analysis here, and some serious questions about midfield and half back in particular.  When Trac is in a scoring chain, it is usually successful.  However, is he getting it enough?

It seems like these areas of the field were the major problem - although there were two other massive glaring issues on the weekend.  1) our entry into forward 50 was rarely to advantage.  Too many times we squandered kicks to 'hot spots', rather than seeing the players and their movements and delivering it to advantage.  This made many of our entries easy to mark/repel. 2) the lack of switch - were we forced so far off our game plan that we reverted to down the line all day?

I thought we were a long way from our best, and we still amassed 91 points.  The problem is we gave up too many the other way.

I hope they are using the break to think about how we respond.  The finals will be all about manic pressure.  If we cant find a way to absorb and overcome it, we really will just make up the numbers if we get there.  It seems like our best is great, but the gap to everything else we do is pretty big.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The more I think about the Port game i think their big men might have an advantage.

 

Ryder is an exceptional Ruckman, gets around the ground very very well

Westhoff is such a good player. very hard to match up on when in form and he is in form

Dixon is a beast, and Oscar cannot play on him. S

Its imperative we get the back 6  mix right,.

 

Frost in for Pedo

Garlett in for Hannan. 

 

Edited by Demon3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bring Frost in to beat his man no more no less, I don't care if the BUFFOON doesn't get a touch. KISS principal!!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Demon17 said:

Sitting near the bench on Monday I was close up to a couple of good things Spargo did, getting into trouble, getting out, and seemingly keeping a cool head. That small passage of play sold me in the kid. Although he's been playing like that earlier also.

Like the kid but didn't think he kept his cool when he had a couple of chances on goal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, rjay said:

There's a reason the trust isn't there 'Skuit' and I've mentioned it before.

Jack doesn't give the ball off, he tries to do too much. Jones can be similar.

Our best, most cohesive starting midfield 3 at the moment are Oliver, Trac & Brayshaw.

Jack can only move into that grouping when he learns to be a team player.

We're not the team of old that needs to rely on one mans effort to pull us out of the s...

Oliver isn't without blame. His handballs can be too hot potato and too short. Little 1m gives that don't achieve much. There's been a bit of that since he broke his hand. Viney tries too much but Oliver probably tries too little! I'd like to see him draw opponents a bit better so the guy who he's giving it to has more time, and of course he does need to kick more in some situations.

A ruckman who is better at ground level would help as well but that's the reality of Gawn. He's never going to be amazing after the hit outs, so you have to maximise your return from the hits. Grundy's ability to bear hug him before the ball was thrown up certainly didn't help his cause.

And the game plan was a factor as well. 5 forwards and a man off the square failed badly. It didn't seem to provide any protection to halt their clearances and it put us on the backfoot either over handballing or kicking it to a spare defender. If we are to use this tactic again I think  we need to change the personnel. ANB doesn't have the smarts, speed or skills to be the off the back of the square guy. I'd probably use Nath Jones in that role and have Petracca in at more centre bounces that way. After the bounce Jones goes on ball and Tracc forward. Or use Brayshaw off the square and maybe Hannan or ANB on a wing until they swap at the next stoppage.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Oliver isn't without blame.

Oliver is 20 and by far our best mid, but of course he's not without his faults.

I think he's drawing opponents pretty well when they have him in a tackle and he's giving off over the top.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, stevethemanjordan said:

I've tried hard not to post since Monday's loss, allowing for some time to view the game on TV, (having been there live) and to watch closely on what went on at the coal face which is where the game was lost. 

First off, it's clear as day that Buckley went to town on the first quarter of the bulldogs game and would have shown his players and said, "look what happens when you pressure Melbourne to this level". Props to him, we couldn't handle it at all and they maintained that level of intensity for the entirety of the game which was impressive.

Why were or levels of intensity and pressure not at theirs given its what we've built our entire brand on? 

Buckley also exposed us in a couple of areas within the midfield. Having a contested heavy, one dimensional midfield group who are all natural ball chasers/inside players can be a double edged sword. When we're on, playing with intensity and most importantly are 'clean' in the contest, we look really good. If the opposition put pressure us at the coal face and nullify Gawn's taps then we look slow and reactionary given the types of players we have playing as half forwards and wings. 

As an example, if you watch Harmes closely in patches when he's on the wing, you'll see how hard he finds it to sit back from the contest and trust that a team mate would win the ball. Some of his efforts when he decided to chase the ball were very poor as he had no impact and it allowed for his opponent to sit back on the outside and become an option in space. Too many times this happened, and Collingwood had a much better spread of midfielders both inside and outside. Sometimes I wonder what instruction is given to players like Harmes and Brayshaw when they play on the wing and or if they're listening? Both players played their under age years as inside mids with Harmes having rests forward. 

Unfortunately at this stage, if the opposition get on top in that area, we don't really seem to have another plan due to our personnel through through the midfield. I noticed Goodwin tried to throw Hogan in there again and for me, that's just clutching at straws as he is not a midfielder and cannot play that position effectively. Watch some of his efforts and you'll see. 

Whilst there are other areas of the ground we can tinker with, like the Vince and Lewis in the same backline conundrum, I thought I'd concentrate on the midfield as it's our strength. 

Bringing Tyson in is not an answer for me. Unless you're taking one of our starting mids out which there's no need yet imo. We need to get back to starting the game with real intensity and being clean with that first possession. Pederson whilst strong in the air, doesn't provide the same defensive pressure as Smith or Weideman. I would bring Smith back in. 

Other than that, keep the same side. The only way we beat Port over there is by playing to our strength and smashing them at the coal face. Oh, and Petracca needs to start in the middle. Needs a rocket. 

 

 

The best way to get Tyson in would be to drop Hannan, keep Tommy Mc and Hogan forward all game, move Petracca deeper when forward and rotate a mix of Jones, Viney, Brayshaw, Harmes and Fritsch all through the forward line. Tyson could play about a 50/50 mix of on ball (with Oliver, Jones, Viney, Gus and Tracc) and wing (with Fritsch, Harmes and Gus). 

Tyson certainly isn't a natural wingmen but it's not like he's the worst of all time in that role. Positioning and defensively he's ok and he moves to get the ball as a wingmen pretty well. The lack of pace and poor footskills certainly hurts but if the minutes are minimised it might not be a critical problem.

I'm not convinced we should pick him nor do I think he's going to suddenly change the clearance count, but if we do pick him I think he could help.

My favourite Tyson attribute might be his safe hands overhead after a short/medium kick in traffic comes his way. Combined with his good work rate he could unlock the ball movement that went missing on Monday. The midfield all looked so flat against the Pies. None of them were looking for the switch or 45 in to the corridor. Tyson is often working hard to make that happen.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, rjay said:

Oliver is 20 and by far our best mid, but of course he's not without his faults.

I think he's drawing opponents pretty well when they have him in a tackle and he's giving off over the top.

Sure but his give offs are often short little get out of trouble handballs. I'd like to see him work on the Sam Mitchell style that almost invites the tackler in but can still get a strong handball away. Richmond last year, Hawthorn and Collingwood this year, teams are pushing us back because we are inviting it. I think the coaches are too blame as much as anyone but Clarry should get the ball going forward more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

I'd like to see him draw opponents a bit better so the guy who he's giving it to has more time, and of course he does need to kick more in some situations.

Concerning Clarrie, these area relevant points for a bloke with so much skill. He surely could draw opponents more  - when circumstances permit - to assist the create clearer midfield pathways for his teammates. Often the midfield is a jumble of players from both teams, even just outside the play hotspots. There is adequate skill all around him when this occurs so he can tend to leave the occasional clearance to someone else - where the Dees possibly expect to clear the ball eeffectively with one possession, not two or three. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back on changes:

Todd Marshall in for Port makes me even more keen for Petty to get a run. 2nd year key forward (and a handy one at that) is a fair match up for a first year key defender.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Like the kid but didn't think he kept his cool when he had a couple of chances on goal.

He's doing OK. Our overall form was poor against the Filth, so his efforts were doubly appreciated. He is not a show-off, nor is he hungry like some of the great small men have been for many sides. I suspect that when experience grows and he is needed in goal 'chances', he will be there for that purpose with some of the great single-mindedness that will be required. In real opportunities so far, he is well above the return seen in other players both now and in the past. I did think that Spargo was a valuable contributor to positive play against the Filth and would expect this contribution to escalate with greater game experience. Three cheers for the fella!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Back on changes:

Todd Marshall in for Port makes me even more keen for Petty to get a run. 2nd year key forward (and a handy one at that) is a fair match up for a first year key defender.

We have to have something new, something unexpected, something that is building the team and its experience. This may well be one of these 'needs' to be employed at this stage of the season. Petty is generating considerable interest based upon his current and improving form - we need his bulk, too - so why not give him a chance to gain from the opportunity? Our remediation is not just about one or two players, it is about an improved mindset for hard faught footballing success and Petty, including others, might well be potential drivers of such betterment.

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

×