Joel Macdonald is fitting in beautifully ATM. I can see him taking that defensive role that Bruce sometimes plays.

Thought he payed a great game today.

Joel Macdonald is fitting in beautifully ATM. I can see him taking that defensive role that Bruce sometimes plays.

Thought he payed a great game today.

Agree. He continually selected the right options and hit the targets. Loved his work.

Reminds me of when we got Ingerson from the Crows all those years ago.

Real general downm back, tough as nails and attacks when he gets it.

Rivers will need an injury to one of our backs to get a game at the moment.

Rivers was always that injured player that had a spot waiting for him. Until now! Macdonald is not flashy, he just goes out and gets the job done.

Rivers is a required player but he is going to have to work very hard to get a spot in that back 6.

Rivers up forward maybe??

MacDonald looks like to have settled in, and so far he has been a major player for the dees in 2010.

Reminds me of when we got Ingerson from the Crows all those years ago.

Real general downm back, tough as nails and attacks when he gets it.

Rivers will need an injury to one of our backs to get a game at the moment.

Joel was very good today. I agree on Riv, there is no spot for him in the back half ATM

I'd love to have Rivers replace Bruce down back, and have Bruce playing from the forwardline, where his sometimes poor decision making and disposals won't be so disastrous

On Mac2, he has been a revelation and Luke Ball can get stuffed! B)

Reminds me of when we got Ingerson from the Crows all those years ago.

Real general downm back, tough as nails and attacks when he gets it.

Rivers will need an injury to one of our backs to get a game at the moment.

IMO we'll need Rivers next week to block the space that, The Fev & J Brown demand to operate in.

Bruce Isn't the one for that.

I'd love to have Rivers replace Bruce down back, and have Bruce playing from the forwardline, where his sometimes poor decision making and disposals won't be so disastrous

On Mac2, he has been a revelation and Luke Ball can get stuffed! B)

Yeah Bruce looks like the game is passing him bye?? I have loved him as a player for many years but something is not right for him maybe a stint in the VFL? Back to the topic of Joel Mac, he is far from flashy, nor is he quick but he has a terrific footy brain and makes great decisions fitting in well with the younger quicker players running off him

IMO we'll need Rivers next week to block the space that, The Fev & J Brown demand to operate in.

Bruce Isn't the one for that.

Who goes out for the Rivers floating role with no clear match up?

Surely not Bruce, after 29 possessions with 90% efficiency (The Hun). Apparently the game is passing him by.

Barring injury I cant see Rivers in as I think they will pick an unchanged team. However they may consider a viable 2nd ruck option for Jamar at the expense of Dunn.

Barring injury I cant see Rivers in as I think they will pick an unchanged team. However they may consider a viable 2nd ruck option for Jamar at the expense of Dunn.

I think Dunn played a very solid game Today, i can see your point but he would be stiff to not stay in the side.

I look forward to see how Bailey works the team this week. Go Demons. B)

Without sounding like a bruce basher, would love to see him dropped and rivers in. Bruce was terrible today, a relic of our depressing past. Rivers back to let JoMac run loose and give his old team a bath.

Who goes out for the Rivers floating role with no clear match up?

Surely not Bruce, after 29 possessions with 90% efficiency (The Hun). Apparently the game is passing him by.

Barring injury I cant see Rivers in as I think they will pick an unchanged team. However they may consider a viable 2nd ruck option for Jamar at the expense of Dunn.

Tribunal decision pending on Beamer, I'd still like to see Martin in for Dunn.

It's farcical to have Dunn competing in the ruck, when we have Martin kicking goals and rucking in the VFL. I don't see what we lose if we swap Dunn with Martin, but I've been banging on about this for 3 weeks and I've failed every time, so I give up!

Next week is the week of the backline. I wouldn't drop Bruce, but by god we need somebody more defensive than him down there to help Warnock and Frawley take on Fevola and Brown. In an ideal world you'd have Rivers returning to his glory days as a loose man in defense, allowing Garland and Mac2 to cover their other forwards and hopefully set up the play as well. Otherwise I fear that we'll be so conscious of the Fevola-Brown duo (as we should), that our defenders will be worried to leave their direct opponent to attack the game, instead always looking to block the hole and double team those two.

Edited April 18, 201015 yr by Jaded

Running back with the flight today showed he's a very gutsy player too. I reckon he's a great pickup and will help our backline develop even further.

Tribunal decision pending on Beamer, I'd still like to see Martin in for Dunn.

It's farcical to have Dunn competing in the ruck, when we have Martin kicking goals and rucking in the VFL. I don't see what we lose if we swap Dunn with Martin, but I've been banging on about this for 3 weeks and I've failed every time, so I give up!

.

You obviously weren't at the preseason Melbourne V WC game at Casey. Martin was horrible. He jumped at shadows and didn't look like taking a mark up forward. He may have kicked a few in the VFL but goals alone can be deceptive of his performance. Martin would not have given as much as Dunn up forward and through the middle in these last 3 weeks.

One thing we have to be careful of next week in changing our style too much to counter Brisbane's talls. Against Collingwood they had plenty of talls but we backed Newton/Dunn as second rucks, and Bruce/Joel MacDonald to play tall and we should have won the game. We might not be able to afford to give up our runners that have been so effective in executing the pressure on the opposition.

Tribunal decision pending on Beamer, I'd still like to see Martin in for Dunn.

It's farcical to have Dunn competing in the ruck, when we have Martin kicking goals and rucking in the VFL. I don't see what we lose if we swap Dunn with Martin,

About 9 marks and 3 hitouts. Thats 3 more hitouts than I saw Martin get last time I saw him play in the ruck

3 goals in consecutive weeks is not exactly banging the door down. Dunn is not the greatest player but he was good today and performed his role well enough.

In saying this I would bring in Martin next week as it is too much to ask of Jamar I think, just not at the expense of Dunn.

Edited April 18, 201015 yr by big_red_fire_engine

Who goes out for the Rivers floating role with no clear match up?

Surely not Bruce, after 29 possessions with 90% efficiency (The Hun). Apparently the game is passing him by.

Barring injury I cant see Rivers in as I think they will pick an unchanged team. However they may consider a viable 2nd ruck option for Jamar at the expense of Dunn.

I believe we'll see a lot of changes to the makeup of the side this year of development.

Yes, you got me! I was deeluding to that exact point of moving bruce out of the back half. He has a habit of using his disposals with bad timing, either too rushed putting teammates under the hammer, or too slow telegraphing the play to the oppos' defense, again putting teamates under the pump. Today I saw him Not take the kick option that was there in defense, he turned the play backwards to feed off a hand ball to a teammate who had the kick. = slow transference of the ball to our forwards. He didn't want to take the kick. It looked like he didn't trust his kicking ability.

Yes I think Rivers (If fit) comes in for Bruce, Garland can take a small/med' forward & Frawley/Warnock can take who suits the talls with Rivers riding shotgun.

If you like & Dunn happens to play forward again, then Bruce can tag a midfielder, Rich or Black, or Travis. I think he's going to miss a week soon enough.

Ps: I'd have Junior on the list for 2011 anyway, he provides fantastic leadership & is in peak condition thus far.

Edited April 18, 201015 yr by dee-luded

Tribunal decision pending on Beamer, I'd still like to see Martin in for Dunn.

It's farcical to have Dunn competing in the ruck, when we have Martin kicking goals and rucking in the VFL. I don't see what we lose if we swap Dunn with Martin, but I've been banging on about this for 3 weeks and I've failed every time, so I give up!

Next week is the week of the backline. I wouldn't drop Bruce, but by god we need somebody more defensive than him down there to help Warnock and Frawley take on Fevola and Brown. In an ideal world you'd have Rivers returning to his glory days as a loose man in defense, allowing Garland and Mac2 to cover their other forwards and hopefully set up the play as well. Otherwise I fear that we'll be so conscious of the Fevola-Brown duo (as we should), that our defenders will be worried to leave their direct opponent to attack the game, instead always looking to block the hole and double team those two.

I don't think Newton was dropped. Apparently he was seen hobbling about @ the 'G'. It's possible he is sore & needed a week off. He would still be in my mix for next week.

Martin is learning the trade @ Forward & seerms to have done OK this week. He could also provide nice options back & forward this week.

I think we match up well against the Lions side, as long as we control their Tall forwards. We can match their mids if we go in full strength. Our problem is again kicking enough score against a strong opposition.

PS: I think we need support for the Russian, who looked tired today to me.

About 9 marks and 3 hitouts. Thats 3 more hitouts than I saw Martin get last time I saw him play in the ruck

3 goals in consecutive weeks is not exactly banging the door down. Dunn is not the greatest player but he was good today and performed his role well enough.

In saying this I would bring in Martin next week as it is too much to ask of Jamar I think, just not at the expense of Dunn.

Martin will play next week.

I'd love to have Rivers replace Bruce down back

Agreed.

Surely not Bruce, after 29 possessions with 90% efficiency (The Hun). Apparently the game is passing him by.

I looked at his "Clanger" column on the AFL stats = 0.

Does anyone think that is right ?

I don't know what game the stats men were at. I saw quite a few turnovers and ineffective disposals by hand and foot from Bruce, some of which resulted in turnovers/goals.

I looked at his "Clanger" column on the AFL stats = 0.

Does anyone think that is right ?

I don't know what game the stats men were at. I saw quite a few turnovers and ineffective disposals by hand and foot from Bruce, some of which resulted in turnovers/goals.

He does hit Targets often. He puts them into bad situations & if we take the ball clear, it's usually a very awkward forward thrust, one pressured situation after the previous.

One thing I really like about MacDonald is that he reads the ball in the air pretty well.

I'm sure he'll be really determined to play well against Brisbane, given the way they dropped and then delisted him.

He does hit Targets often. He puts them into bad situations

This sort of thing is the main problem with stats - it paints disposals as black or white when they're far from it. Even kicking to a one-on-one, there's a big difference between kicking it to your teammate's advantage or making it difficult for him.

I looked at his "Clanger" column on the AFL stats = 0.

Does anyone think that is right ?

I don't know what game the stats men were at. I saw quite a few turnovers and ineffective disposals by hand and foot from Bruce, some of which resulted in turnovers/goals.

Probably it is right. If he hand passes to a teammate who is in a bad position or is about to get tackled, it still counts as a successful pass so long as he hits them. He has no problem with accuracy, it's just his nasty habit of selling people into trouble that gets people worked up.