The game started on the wrong foot, bringing in Rivers who is purely negative tall defender these days, for McKenzie, a running midfielder.

The last 2 weeks we have had: Out: Bail, McKenzie In: Martin Rivers

I think we need more run, more midfielders who can win clearances and more contested possessions around the midfield.

We cannot have Rivers, Warnock, Garland, Frawley and MacDonald all in our defence. That's 1 too many defensive guys, who aren't giving enough run.

I personally would only play 3, maximum 4 of those.

For next week i'd go

IN: Bail, McKenzie, Cheney, Gysberts (4 runners)

OUT: MacDonald, Rivers, Martin, Dunn

I agree. Crap decision to bring in Rivers.

Apparently McKenzie had "general soreness", which i read as "we are a bit scared of Norths talls, and Rivers was BOG for Casey last week, was only dropped due to injury and is in our leadership group. So we will shaft the young rookie and bring in Riv".

Why mess with what was a performing and settled back six?

Horses for courses this week. Their 3 Ruckman/forward combo tear us up all the time.

Sylvinator I agree but think you have gone one change too many.

Out Rivers, Petterd(inj), Martin

In Bail, Cheney, McKenzie

Edited May 1, 201015 yr by big_red_fire_engine

Jamar, Martin, Warnock, Rivers.

4 guys (some understandably; Jamar) who add nothing to 90% of general play. It's hard to play a running game with them all in the side.

The game started on the wrong foot, bringing in Rivers who is purely negative tall defender these days, for McKenzie, a running midfielder.

The last 2 weeks we have had: Out: Bail, McKenzie In: Martin Rivers

I think we need more run, more midfielders who can win clearances and more contested possessions around the midfield.

We cannot have Rivers, Warnock, Garland, Frawley and MacDonald all in our defence. That's 1 too many defensive guys, who aren't giving enough run.

I personally would only play 3, maximum 4 of those.

For next week i'd go

IN: Bail, McKenzie, Cheney, Gysberts (4 runners)

OUT: MacDonald, Rivers, Martin, Dunn

agree with this, although id replace macdonald with Petterd (inj). Dunn made critical errors all day and Martin played at VFL pace.

North really choked our defensive run by using a heavy forward flood. Really frustrating.

Sylvinator I agree but think you have gone one change too many.

Out Rivers, Petterd(inj), Martin

In Bail, Cheney, McKenzie

On Casey site it was noted that Bail is getting over a bad corky so doubt he is going to come up for next game.

he did not play this week because he was getting over the corky which forced him out last week. He will not miss three weeks with a corky and I would hope he ius straight back in.

MacDonald's best is good but his worst is really bad, two games against Hawthorn and North have been shockers, both high pressure games. Martin seems to be all at sea and I'm not convinced he has enough experience to play at this level.

We were carved up for pace today and our decision making was appalling.

MacDonald's best is good but his worst is really bad, two games against Hawthorn and North have been shockers, both high pressure games. Martin seems to be all at sea and I'm not convinced he has enough experience to play at this level.

We were carved up for pace today and our decision making was appalling.

OUT: Rivers, Martin, Petterd if the injury is bad

IN: Cheney, McKenzie, Bail if fit

I think pace was a problem but mostly because our run was restricted and funnelled into traps.

It wasn't through lack of runners, but lack of finding a way through and choosing the right option when we had less of them.

I'll let my beer settle down first. Dirty on Sylvia.

Juice???

Bailey was smashed in the box this week. North worked out not only that we run, but also that we like running through the middle and that we get our goals by running onto balls over our head. He covered them both. Bailey also selected extremely poorly by bringing in Rivers instead of an on-baller. We should have backed Garlan, Rivers, Warnock (who had a shocker!). The other thing was, he took was too long to put Sylvia in the middle - should have happened in the 2nd.

Edited May 1, 201015 yr by Choko

Bailey was smashed in the box this week. North worked out not only that we run, but also that we like running through the middle and that we get our goals by running onto balls over our head. He covered them both. Bailey also selected extremely poorly by bringing in Rivers instead of an on-baller. We should have cacked Garlan, Rivers, Warnock (who had a shocker!). The other thing was, he took was too long to put Sylvia in the middle - should have happened in the 2nd.

While I wouldn't go to the extremes of using words such as "smashed" and "extremely poorly I think your points are valid.

The Roos zoning of our defence was very good early and the players carried it out with discipline and we couldn't counter it. They protected the corridor and we couldn't get or running game going. So many North scroring opportunities came from turnovers caused by thier pressure on the space.

The fact that we had 2 less running players than we had 2 weeks ago compounded our inability to get some link up from defence.

Teams are going to try and shut us down and force us to go wide, that's the reality.

The quicker we learn to counteract that, the better.

This is why Scully is so exciting. He can beat the flood with his pace and his laser-beam handballs, and I think Bail is another one who is very well suited to that type of condition because he is quick and strong in the packs.

Obviously he didn't play due to injury, but if we knew McKenzie was in doubt we should have had a more appropriate designated emergency player. The decision to include a tall for a running, defensive midfielder was poor and left us short on rotations and leg speed.

Doggies are a small team, so I would hope to see a lot more runners come in next week at the expense of the 700 defenders we suddenly seem to have.

Juice???

Sorry! Not based on his performance at Southport yesterday...

in: mckenzie, bail, gysberts

out: petterd (inj), martin, rivers

Bailey was smashed in the box this week. North worked out not only that we run, but also that we like running through the middle and that we get our goals by running onto balls over our head. He covered them both. Bailey also selected extremely poorly by bringing in Rivers instead of an on-baller. We should have backed Garlan, Rivers, Warnock (who had a shocker!). The other thing was, he took was too long to put Sylvia in the middle - should have happened in the 2nd.

A few things took too long (in hindsight) .the writing was on the wall in the first 1/4 that north were smothering us through the middle.We came out in the 3rd 1/4 with obvious instructions to spread and run more which worked great, but these changes needed to be implemented earlier,by 1/2 time the margin was too great.

0

The Dogs won't go as defensive as North did. But we need to learn to adapt to teams who decide to clog the centre corridor as North did. Bailey must help our youngsters deal with tactics like that. It's never going to be always going in our favour.

I feel the FD crapped themselves and panicked re: the North talls, and thought that since McKenzie was (possibly) line-ball with his corky, that we'd be better off with Rivers. A half-baked McKenzie (if indeed he was sore) would have been better than Rivers was yesterday. We treated North's talls like they included Brown, Bradshaw, Franklin and Pavlich all at once. They're Hale, Goldstein, McIntosh and Edwards. Nothing exceptional there. We should have backed Frawley, Warnock, Garland and MacDonald in to do the job. If McKenzie had to be rested, someone with run should have taken his spot.

MacDonald's best is good but his worst is really bad, two games against Hawthorn and North have been shockers, both high pressure games. Martin seems to be all at sea and I'm not convinced he has enough experience to play at this level.

We were carved up for pace today and our decision making was appalling.

I agree Robbie. He just looks completely lost out there at times. Have watched him a couple of times run one way, then the other, and back again. Doesnt come instinctively for him and needs more development in terms of 'footy smarts' for Casey I think. I like him though, and think he has potential.