Changes for Round 4 vs. GWS

[Satyriconhome 10,736]

DUH! I know Magner is ineligible!

... The point about Magner is more that its ridiculous that he is just a rookie when he had given more effort than 3/4 of the team... Melbourne and Nathan Jones needs it. Poor decision by the football department IMO to keep him a rookie. This has probably been stated before, if it has... thats fantastic :-)

If we hadn't have kept Magner as a rookie it would have meant one of Evans or Nicholson being dellisted to free a spot on the list, which one would you like to nominate, I always find it interesting/laughable when a player players and is labelled 'limited' as was Magner then we have people pleading for his inclusion.....give Evans a game or two to get up to speed and you will be pleasantly surprised

[Good Times Grimes 2,396]

If he is down on confidence and the coach wont play him at casey, he should play against the GWS and be given very simple but explicit task for whatever position he is played in. If the guy is down in the dumps from his grandfathers passing and then being the poster boy for all things wrong at the Dees, I dont think having him sit out of a game against the Giants will help him find form or help him develop character. This would be a poor coaching decision, which coupled with what seems to be a lot of other poor decisions (from the outside looking in) this would lead me to believe Neeld might not really know wtf hes doing.

While you raise some good points, think about the message it sends to the rest of the team. Watts is one of my favourite players (I have #4 on my jumper), but he has not performed well at all this season. If Neeld drops him and he doesn't even play for Casey, what are guys like Strauss & Kent supposed to think, when they've been trying their hearts out and performing well?

[DEMON FROM WITHIN 46]

The only players who should definately stay in the team against GWS are: Jones, Matt Jones, Terlich, Slyvia, Clark, Evans, Grimes, Howe, Viney, Trengrove, Davey & Bail as they have showed at least something in the games thus far.

Players who have showed nothing are : Watts, Frawley, Garland, Jamar, Sellar, Pederson, Rodan, Byrnes, Gillies, Dunn

Very common theme, senior players are not playing with effort or conviction, reason why - not playing for coach they hate him and his coaching style and game plan

[Grand New Flag 3,227]

For the very few that haven't omitted Toumpas for this week, have a listen to Neeld's presser. He pretty much said he will be playing VFL next week. There's no way known he'll play.

For the record I remember watching Pendles early on and thinking he was rubbish because he looked lost and caught with the ball everytime he got the pill. Now pendles is one of the best players to watch in the AFL. Not saying he will end up like pendles but I see a similar looking player with the Toump, give the kid time...he'll be alright

I agree, I remember watching Pendles in his first season and Toumpas does remind me of him. Pendles was equally lost. Difference is that there were senior players and seasoned coaches able to develop Pendles. I fear he will not develop as he should under the current management.

[deepete 27]

If we hadn't have kept Magner as a rookie it would have meant one of Evans or Nicholson being dellisted to free a spot on the list, which one would you like to nominate, I always find it interesting/laughable when a player players and is labelled 'limited' as was Magner then we have people pleading for his inclusion.....give Evans a game or two to get up to speed and you will be pleasantly surprised

Perhaps I do not fully understand how the rookie elevation works. I was under the impression that he couldve been elevated if there was a spot in the team.

While you raise some good points, think about the message it sends to the rest of the team. Watts is one of my favourite players (I have #4 on my jumper), but he has not performed well at all this season. If Neeld drops him and he doesn't even play for Casey, what are guys like Strauss & Kent supposed to think, when they've been trying their hearts out and performing well?

I respect what your saying there and normally would agree with that train of thought. However, in this case Watts wouldnt be the first player I would be dropping (or the second... third... fourth etc) and I think that sends a really weak message to a team of under performers who need to be made absolutely accountable for their [censored] poor efforts. The GWS game would purely be a confidence builder for young Jack, then play him at Casey next few weeks, while the dee's play Brisbane and Carlton.

[PJ_12345 1,098]

neeld , please put watts on the wing and leave him there for a couple of months. perhaps rotate him in the forward pocket . he could be a great link man out of defence. the match committee are making decisions without foresight. very reactionary. its killing us. now they are stuck with what to do with him as they feel they need to make a statement but a game against gws is the best opportunity for someone like watts to get some confidence.

I'd be stoked if Watts was given a full game on the wing

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,704]

I think Jamar would be a lot better with proper backup and a better midfield. So I'd play Gawn as well. They should be rested for significant periods up forward to allow the mids more opportunities to rotate through the bench and to stretch the GWS backline.

Notwithstanding the above, I think we are too top heavy and therefore slow. So I'd send both Sellar and Pedersen back to Casey.

While I think Jack Watts should have played with Casey on the weekend, the lack of a game does not rule him out for this week. If the issue with Jack is his mental toughness, that can be worked on during the other 166 hours in the week, not just the two hours of game time. So, I'd bring him back in.

If McKenzie is fit he should come in. I suspect if Dunn is fit, he'll come in although I'd rather play Strauss.

For the other outs, Toumpas clearly isn't ready. he plays like a deer in the headlights. There's no shame in that for a youngster and in time he'll pick up the pace of the game.

Jetta did little on the weekend. While I appreciate he may lack confidence because of the revolving door of opportunities, he was tried, forward, back and middle and didn't seem to know what to do in any of those positions. If Neeld decides to send Frawley a message with a ticket to the twos, I won't object and Jetta stays.

So, Ins: Gawn, Watts, McKenzie and Dunn (or preferably Strauss)

Outs: Sellar, Pedersen, Toumpas and Jetta.

[Good Times Grimes 2,396]

Perhaps I do not fully understand how the rookie elevation works. I was under the impression that he couldve been elevated if there was a spot in the team.

I respect what your saying there and normally would agree with that train of thought. However, in this case Watts wouldnt be the first player I would be dropping (or the second... third... fourth etc) and I think that sends a really weak message to a team of under performers who need to be made absolutely accountable for their [censored] poor efforts. The GWS game would purely be a confidence builder for young Jack, then play him at Casey next few weeks, while the dee's play Brisbane and Carlton.

He can only be elevated in the event of a long term injury, or mid-season.

I think it is pointless giving Watts a game if you're going to drop him to Casey the next week, even if he plays well. What would that accomplish? In my opinion, if he hasn't earned a game, he plays for Casey. End of story. That being said, I wouldn't be surprised to see him play this week... but I definitely wouldn't agree with the decision, regardless of how well he plays, it's the principle!

[Dr. Mubutu 831]

IN: Gawn, Kent, McKenzie, Strauss, Watts

OUT: Sellar, Pedersen, Byrnes, Garland, Toumpas

Backs: Jetta, Frawley, Terlich, McDonald, Strauss

Mids: Grimes, Trengove, Sylvia, N Jones, Viney, Tapscott, McKenzie, Evans, M Jones, Watts, Bail (sub)

Rucks: Gawn, Jamar

Forwards: Clark, Kent, Davey, Howe

[DemonWA 3,932]

Out: Garland, Pederson, Toumpas

In: Watts, Kent, Blease

Jetta Frawley Sellar

Grimes McDonald Terlich

Bail M Jones Evans

Sylvia Watts Tapscott

Howe Clark Davey

Ruck: Jamar, N Jones, Viney

IC: Byrnes, Trengove, Kent

Sub: Blease

[dee-luded 2,959]

Strauss time...

when can we slot Magner in somehow?

[DeeZee 7,364]

I will be very disappointed if Gawn and Kent dont come in.

Even more disappointed if they bring back Gillies as Josh Mahoney suggested.

[dee-luded 2,959]

I will be very disappointed if Gawn and Kent dont come in.

Even more disappointed if they bring back Gillies as Josh Mahoney suggested.

I wouldn't mind Gawn in this week, but don't want Jamar out, so I'm not sure which tall should come out yet?

To me the bigger weaknesses are in our running mid sized players.

I think Strauss has to come in to help with our rebound & he has been working hard on being responsible for his direct opponent as well as the rebound.

Also we desperately need a strong bodied in-under ball extractor who can win big numbers.

...as always its not just a matter of who ideally we'd like to see in.

[dee-luded 2,959]

I will be very disappointed if Gawn and Kent dont come in.

Even more disappointed if they bring back Gillies as Josh Mahoney suggested.

IMO more than anything, we have to promote the most dedicated workers & disciplined of our list, ahead of any bludgers. we have to overcome this rancid culture that has impaled this Footy Club on its own Trident.

this to me, is Way more important than points on the ladder. get the process right so we can stop failing to develop our Kids.

[PaulRB 6,352]

Agree, I liked the five inclusions for the WC game for their work ethic (at least in the first half). I'd like to see Gawn in, as it would aid Jamar and the midfield and allow us to have a tall forward option if Clark is needed down back (which he shouldn't be VS GWS)...

[brey9186 102]

Out Byrnes in Kent

Out pedersen in gawn (sellar down back on resting ruck man)

Out toumpas in blease/watts (who wants it more at training)

Out jetta in strauss (sorry nev but need some class down back still)

Gawn and Jamar to rotate obv, leaving Clark as permanent forward.

Let Kent and davey play 40m out and hit the packs, everyone else getting the ball in the middle

[Jonesbag 487]

'Why isnt Magner in the team'

The next person to say this should be banned for life.

Sick of reading this each week.

FWIW

In: Gawn Blease Watts Kent

Out: Jamar Seller Toumpas Bail

[DeeSpencer 25,510]

Out: Garland, Pedersen, Toumpas, Davey

In: Strauss, Gawn, McKenzie, Kent

[Ted Lasso 19,355]

B N Jetta Pederson Garland

HB Grimes McDonald Terlich

C Watts M jones Bail

HF Tapscott Frawley Trengove

F Howe Clark Davey

R Jamar Viney N jones

I/c Blease Gawn Sylvia

Sub evans

why not throw things around abit, tell jack watts to back himself to do more damage than his opponent can the other way, his size alone drifting forward should scare his opponent into watching him closely and if he floats back and intercepts bonus, his strength is he reads the play well and he's athletic, lets throw him on a wing and see how he goes,

with patton out mcdonald can play on cameron and frawley could be tried in the forward line, tall strong body who could come into the middle from centre half forward

[CBDees 3,167]

IN: Gawn, Kent, McKenzie, Strauss, Watts

OUT: Sellar, Pedersen, Byrnes, Garland, Toumpas

Backs: Jetta, Frawley, Terlich, McDonald, Strauss

Mids: Grimes, Trengove, Sylvia, N Jones, Viney, Tapscott, McKenzie, Evans, M Jones, Watts, Bail (sub)

Rucks: Gawn, Jamar

Forwards: Clark, Kent, Davey, Howe

I think that Dr Mubutu has nearly nailed it above. Now after exchanging Sellar for Jetta and placing them into positions:

IN: Gawn, Kent, McKenzie, Strauss, Watts

OUT: Pederson, Jetta, Byrnes, Garland, Toumpas

B: Frawley, McDonald, Terlich

HB: Watts, Sellar, Strauss

C: Grimes, Viney, Trengove

HF: Howe, Clark, Tapscott

F: Davey, Jamar, Kent

Rucks: Gawn, N. Jones, Sylvia

Inter: McKenzie, Evans, M Jones, Bail (sub)

p.s. I hope the report about bringing Gillies back was wrong. Who would you drop for him?

[Fitz Fitzpatrick 886]

i noticed Dawes has gone back out to 3-4 weeks on the injury list.

[rolly 149]

Play gawn at full fwd...well over 200cm and led the tackle count in vfl rnd 2.

Would be a much better pinch hitter in the ruck than pedersen

[Dinosaur Rover 197]

True more hit outs but Cox had something like 20 more possessions - 25 vs 5 for Jamar as I recall. Surely if you werent getting the ball running around by yourself you would just tag up on Cox?

FWIW Jamar in the Hun ranking was equal third for the team with 92 points. He had a team high 6 tackles for the day. He had more hit outs than Cox but Cox was way more effective. This would be a reflection of the quality of our midfield. This is further highligthed by an underdone (for a mid) Clark having to go in as a mid at times. I doubt very much that Jamar will be dropped from the team at this stage. Gawn is athletic, competitive and can pinch hit up forward. It may be tempting to bring him in the coming weeks to play relief ruck and forward he would be hard to match up playing forward. Jamar showed yesterday that relief forward is no longer his go. Pederson is at risk of losing his place. Hopefully McKenzie returns if not perhaps Kent may get a game. Toumpass needs some time at Casey.

I think we will only see 2 non compulsory changes for GWS. As Bail was able to come back on he should be right for nex week. He will improve as he gets more games.

[CBDees 3,167]

Play gawn at full fwd...well over 200cm and led the tackle count in vfl rnd 2.

Would be a much better pinch hitter in the ruck than pedersen

I fully support the idea of rotating Gawn and Jamar between ruck and full forward on Sunday (and for the next 3-4 weeks if it proves successful). Hopefully by then we will have determined who is our best ruck prospect before we try Dawes at full forward.

[Benson 254]

i noticed Dawes has gone back out to 3-4 weeks on the injury list.

Mission indicated that Dawes should be ready to play next week.

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/video/2013-04-16/david-misson-injury-report-round-4