Like the minority on here, I can't believe people have mentioned Jones or Bartram to tag him. Goodes - 194cm, 90kg. Jones 180cm, 82kg. Bartram 181cm, 82kg. If Bailey used either of those 2 to tag Goodes, he should be immediately sacked - and I love Bails! We'd be better off putting Scully on him - at least we know he'd run over the top of him. Some people

Goodes WILL play a majority of the game on the ball. Yes, sure, we will see him in their forward line a fair bit, but that'll be when he is either having a break, or if he has followed the ball down there. I wouldn't even waste my time playing Garland on him should he go for a rest - put Joel Mac on him if anyone.

He has spent most of the preseason playing up forward and with Bradshaw injured I think he'll stay there.

Like last year, they'll play him there until it is clear he does his best damage on ball and his forward displays can't compare with his influence when in the midfield.

No chance of Bartram or Jones -- they would get abused.

Lynden Dunn is the perfect man to play on Goodes. Matches him with height, weight and has a pretty good motor. If the ball is in Melbourne's forward line, he will make Goodes accountable becuase he knows how to kick a goal. Morton would be playing on him again if he were playing. I can understand why some people would say that Goodes gave him a hiding, but I believe Cale handled himself quite well, and would only improve next time around.

I do like the idea of giving Trengove a taste too, think it will be good for that kid.

100% agree with this paragraph. All of it.

I thought Morton was good, but for select moments of Goodes brilliance that few could have stopped.

He has spent most of the preseason playing up forward and with Bradshaw injured I think he'll stay there.

Like last year, they'll play him there until it is clear he does his best damage on ball and his forward displays can't compare with his influence when in the midfield.

No chance of Bartram or Jones -- they would get abused.

To be honest, I haven't seen any Sydney preseason games. Maybe Goodes will play a more forward role this year based on the fact that he played there in the last few weeks. Maybe Goodes was easing back in to 2011 and by playing forward, they were still able to get game time in to him to make him cherry ripe for Round 1 in the guts.

If he starts at Full Forward, Garland would then become the obvious choice (with Rivers zoning off like he does so well). I think it would be an early victory for Melbourne if he is deep forward. I wouldn't think it will take long for him to move in to the guts if we manage to start like we did against them last time.

I still think a majority of his time will be spent on the ball - just my opinion.

He won't be at FF, more of a far-roaming CHF.

I should have added that if he is in the forward line, Garland would take him, but I think after Morton that Dunn is our best match up for Goodes anywhere else on the ground.

My memory tells me that Goodes started last season at CHF, just as I think he will this year, but they missed his influence in the middle so much that by the latter half of the season he was back on ball.

Snigger all you like, but in a MATCH I've never been impressed by his speed and/or agility, draft camp tests and running races might make things seem better, but during A GAME OF FOOTY I've never thought anything other than he seems to lumber a bit. To suggest he could run with Goodes all day is ridiculous, especially seeing he might not even get a game that day.

Have you seen him in many games? I know I saw him perform a passage a play which sums up his football ability in a few seconds. He led from the goalsquare, easily leaving his man behind. Dropped the uncontested mark at about 40 m directly in front. Ran on and picked up his own spill at around 50 beating both his own man and two others who were closing in from the sides. Performed a sharp u-turn at high speed, again leaving them in the dust. Ran in to the open goal. Almost kicked it out on the full. Came away with a point. I was standing on the fence at the 50m mark and was astounded by two things. Firstly, his raw pace and ability to turn so sharply at that speed. Secondly, his ability to miss a virtually unmissable goal.

I'm more than happy to talk about Martin's speed for someone his size in the Stef Martin thread, but here we're talking about matching up on Goodes yeah? Hey, he might do the trick as the man to take him inside 50, but I would think he'd be at least the 22nd in line to match up on him that day.

His speed is the factor you chose to question when you tried to shoot down the suggestion. Now that it's established that he is in fact bloody quick you want to veto any further mention of it? Poor form old chap.

I note with interest your attempt to diminish this by repeated use of the phrase "for someone his size." The fact is that he is fast for someone of any size. Please refer again to the footage of the Grand Final Sprint. You may note that while Stef is almost 2m tall, his opponents are not so, and indeed the winner is a shrimp.

I have no doubt that he would lower his colours to Goodes, but his pace is not in any way the reason for this, nor his agility. It is a simple fact that Goodes is a dual brownlow medalist and there are few players in the league who can match him when he fires. The same is true for any player we put on him. It's not a matter of finding someone who can beat him, but rather someone who can limit the damage he does.

I think there might be another job for Martin. I keep reading on this site about who might be the second ruckman playing forward for us because of the substitute rule. But where is the commentary about who will play on the opposition's second ruckman if he plays forward? If it's Mumford or Pyke, Martin is the only one I can see with the height to play on that player. So, I reckon Martin might play defender whenever Sydney rests a ruckman forward. If they don't, I suspect Martin will go forward to stretch Sydney's defence. That doesn't answer the question about who plays on Goodes, but perhaps takes Martin out of the equation. (And it won't be Bartram, Jones or Bail who plays on Goodes. They're all too short. And I can't see it being Dunn, either. He's the right size but has successfully been turned into a defensive forward. My guess - and it's only an uneducated punt - is Garland. He has been successful on at least one other tall, fast forward in Franklin.)

Banking on Martin to stop a player like Goodes is asking too much and not worth the risk.

Don't mind the idea of giving Dunn the shut-down role all day. Don't know if he has the engine and I also

think he adds another dimension to our forward line. He takes a tall defender away as he is around 192 cm.

Takes pressure off Watts and Jurrah.

If I were Bailey I would be giving Grimes first crack if he plays forward and when he rotates through the middle I would assign the job to Sylvia. Grimes is rarely beaten in the air and has good pace. Sylvia has the strength and size to match it in one on one contests with Goodes and it might help Col too. Testing himself against Goodes would be great for him.

My two cents.

Round 1 can't come soon enough.

Carn the dee's.

Have you seen him in many games? I know I saw him perform a passage a play which sums up his football ability in a few seconds. He led from the goalsquare, easily leaving his man behind. Dropped the uncontested mark at about 40 m directly in front. Ran on and picked up his own spill at around 50 beating both his own man and two others who were closing in from the sides. Performed a sharp u-turn at high speed, again leaving them in the dust. Ran in to the open goal. Almost kicked it out on the full. Came away with a point. I was standing on the fence at the 50m mark and was astounded by two things. Firstly, his raw pace and ability to turn so sharply at that speed. Secondly, his ability to miss a virtually unmissable goal.

Yup, seen every game he's played, haven't missed an MFC game either in person, TV, or replay for as long as I can remember... Just in my opinion I never perceived him as quick or agile, talented yes, good size yes, but from what I have seen during games he seems a little bit of a stumbler. Maybe I should rephrase it to controlled speed, maybe what I've seen is better explained as quick but not able to stay under control while maintaining speed.

His speed is the factor you chose to question when you tried to shoot down the suggestion. Now that it's established that he is in fact bloody quick you want to veto any further mention of it? Poor form old chap.

I note with interest your attempt to diminish this by repeated use of the phrase "for someone his size." The fact is that he is fast for someone of any size. Please refer again to the footage of the Grand Final Sprint. You may note that while Stef is almost 2m tall, his opponents are not so, and indeed the winner is a shrimp.

I have no doubt that he would lower his colours to Goodes, but his pace is not in any way the reason for this, nor his agility. It is a simple fact that Goodes is a dual brownlow medalist and there are few players in the league who can match him when he fires. The same is true for any player we put on him. It's not a matter of finding someone who can beat him, but rather someone who can limit the damage he does.

So he's bloody quick now? Geez this guy gets faster by the second, it's getting a bit like Jerry Seinfeld's high school race...

You may "note with interest" that the only reason I was mentioning "quick for someone his size" is because it was repeatedly being thrown at me and I found it irrelevant to a match up on Goodes (which I believe is what this thread is about, and why I was trying to direct the long Stef Martin discussion to a more appropriate thread).

FFS who cares about the GF sprint? Possibly the most meaningless footy related event held every year.

I'll still state, that during a game, Goodes would leave Martin MILES behind if they lined up next to each other. EWe'll find out Round 1 hey.

I have just gone through our list.

There is no one who even comes close to his ability.

Best we can hope for is someone to fall over in front of him and obstruct the path to the ball a few times.

Its out there but what about Jack Watts???

Tall enough, fast enough... not sure he has the tank but it would bring him into the game....???

Its out there but what about Jack Watts???

Tall enough, fast enough... not sure he has the tank but it would bring him into the game....???

No please I promised myself I was not going to talk about that person for two weeks well 13 days!

no wonder bails elevated newton, saw this thread, saw there was no ideal match up we had proposed, and it just came to him, juice will do it, juice will step up to the plate, juice will take on goodes

no wonder bails elevated newton, saw this thread, saw there was no ideal match up we had proposed, and it just came to him, juice will do it, juice will step up to the plate, juice will take on goodes

Don't scoff at it, according to other posters all we need is someone about the same height as him and it's a perfect matchup...

no wonder bails elevated newton, saw this thread, saw there was no ideal match up we had proposed, and it just came to him, juice will do it, juice will step up to the plate, juice will take on goodes

Oh Please MM it is difficult to put newton and

In fact I cannot Put Goodes in the same sentence.

Whatever Juice's talents are he is not a defender.

Oh Please MM it is difficult to put newton and

In fact I cannot Put Goodes in the same sentence.

Whatever Juice's talents are he is not a defender.

it really did pain me to suggest something so ridiculous, but i did think it was good for a laugh

Play Watts on him, tall,fast,agile.

Garland or Jack Watts.

I hope they play Jack back - his a good kick and his basketball sensibilities should work well for him in a backline that will be under fwd pressure and confined spaces.

He is also good at holding the ball, absorbing pressure and then putting team mates into space to create run from the backline.