Here's an idea. Lets think out side the box and have Sellar as the sub!

Bring him on at 3/4 time to ruck if we haven't had an injury take of Fitzy or Gawn. If we have had an injury he can go to CHB and release a defender into the middle.

It's not a tactic for every week but as a once off idea it could work.

You want a running player as a sub. But if he comes in to CHB or Ruck then he's a running player

Gawn to ruck 2/3 of each quarter, and Fitzy to ruck one third. Fitzy to rotate through the forward 50 also. Please, please, please don't play either of Pederseon or Sellar. They can be great in VFL, but rarely play more than 1 decent game in the AFL.

Great to see Grimes in.

I wonder if Strauss will take the place of Byrnes?

Strauss in for Byrnes, hopefully.

Want Strauss in as well.

I really liked his game last week. Ran and delivered particularly well.

I would have thought that they'd have Sellar in for Tippett, he has the height and strength.

All he needs now is a clue and I'd have him in as well.

You want a running player as a sub. But if he comes in to CHB or Ruck then he's a running player

That doesn't make him a mobile player.

All he needs now is a clue and I'd have him in as well.

He doesn't play too badly down back, he seems to be able to spoil and he can mark, if required, it's up forward he has a problem, he gets the yips when he tries to mark in the forward line.

I think he's better than a lot give him credit for, which wouldn't be hard because he gets no credit at all on here.

I would have thought that they'd have Sellar in for Tippett, he has the height and strength.

All he needs now is a clue and I'd have him in as well.

But does he have enough pace to go with his height and strength? I'd say he doesn't. Pedersen does - but doesn't have enough height. So, I'd play McDonald on Tippett, Frawley on Reid, Dunn on Mumford/Pyke and Garland on Bolton. And prey for rain on Sunday.

And while I'm predicting match-ups, I suggest Nicholson will tag Hannebery.

It's been a very quiet selection week, the last couple of weeks they have announced changes prior to selection ie x will play or y will return from injury.

Re the match my biggest concern is the stoppages and clearances. I believe swabs lead the competition on hit ours and clearances, two areas we style in and the area where the dogs killed us in the fourth quarter last week.

How do we cover this? We looked near when keeper the ball in hand and cover attacking and our defenders are quality. Swans also don't usually contend with the size of the G.

I'd be planning to counter attack with lots of uncontested possession, avoid stoppages as much as possibly. Not necessarily conceding clearances but I'd be setting up defensively in the midfield and back half when there are stoppages, basically assume we will lose them and get ready to defend the ball coming in and to rebound back up the ground. To do this we're going to need to start defensively and then run very hard offensively.

What does everyone else think?

Hawthorn would wish the Swans "don't usually contend with the size of the MCG" ( only in Grand Finals when it counts ??) As much as I would love it , this will not be one of their don't contend with the MCG weeks..$15.00 if you want to back the Dees... ..Worth $50.?? (tongue in cheek)

dees by 10 goals! get around em

But does he have enough pace to go with his height and strength? I'd say he doesn't. Pedersen does - but doesn't have enough height. So, I'd play McDonald on Tippett, Frawley on Reid, Dunn on Mumford/Pyke and Garland on Bolton. And prey for rain on Sunday.

And while I'm predicting match-ups, I suggest Nicholson will tag Hannebery.

I wouldn't be praying for rain after the Swans Wet weather demolition of Carlton last week..I would be praying they are very flat and take us far too easily.. THEN we will maybe be half a chance... GO DEES !!

He doesn't play too badly down back, he seems to be able to spoil and he can mark, if required, it's up forward he has a problem, he gets the yips when he tries to mark in the forward line.

I think he's better than a lot give him credit for, which wouldn't be hard because he gets no credit at all on here.

Bit like what most of our boys get on here ...

Hawthorn would wish the Swans "don't usually contend with the size of the MCG" ( only in Grand Finals when it counts ??) As much as I would love it , this will not be one of their don't contend with the MCG weeks..$15.00 if you want to back the Dees... ..Worth $50.?? (tongue in cheek)

They have played 2 games at the G this year for one win and one loss.

Their recent record at the ground is:

WWLLLLLWLLLLLDLLLWLW

Of their last 12 games there were two wins (the grand final last year and Collingwood this year) and a draw (us).

They have only won 3 of their last 18 games at the MCG.

compare that to the SCG:

LWLWWWWLWWWWWLWLWDWW

They have won 14 of their past 20 and only lost 2 of their past 12 at the SCG

Regardless of how crap we are, last years premiers obviously have struggled to adapt to the MCG at times. Why? Well it makes sense that ground size would be the significant factor as it is much different length and width than the SCG.

Rubbish the concept all you like but the stats are pretty compelling - regardless of the result this weekend, Sydney have struggled at the MCG. And if we didn't try to use that to our advantage in our planning I'd be very disappointed.

Edited July 5, 201312 yr by deanox

I wouldn't be praying for rain after the Swans Wet weather demolition of Carlton last week..I would be praying they are very flat and take us far too easily.. THEN we will maybe be half a chance... GO DEES !!

Perhaps I was sub-consciously thinking too negatively hoping that wet weather might reduce the losing margin.

But does he have enough pace to go with his height and strength? I'd say he doesn't. Pedersen does - but doesn't have enough height. So, I'd play McDonald on Tippett, Frawley on Reid, Dunn on Mumford/Pyke and Garland on Bolton ...

OK, but if any of those match-ups goes pear-shaped (and the obvious risk is Dunn, just because he doesn't match up well on any of these), we'll need a really solid contingency plan.

The things we could try are:

* Switching these 4 around - might work, might not.

* Switching someone from attack into defence; the only option is Watts, maybe Howe - don't like the odds.

* Have Sellar on the bench.

We'll also need Sellar to give chop-outs to Gawn & Fitzy in the ruck. I'm no fan of Sellar, but this is exactly the circumstance that we got him for in the first place - for when we look like getting caught out for height, esp in defence.

And I think Sellar's a far better option than Pedersen.

Strauss can compose symphonies, end of story!
Sellar? poor mans "Juice"
Pederson, poor mans poor man who knows rich man!!!!

Tippett? Put Dunne on him with one instruction!!!

^{In - Grimes}

^{Out - Blease}

^{Nice to finally see some stability.}

^{In - Grimes}

^{Out - Blease}

^{Nice to finally see some stability.}

Effectively a "No Change", it'll do as one anyway.

How long has it been.

Wow one change and its a good one. For the first time in a while ive been happy with this weeks team

Wow one change and its a good one. For the first time in a while ive been happy with this weeks team

I have mentioned a few times this year that I look at the named side and evaluate a 'NQR factor' that is the number of players not (or not yet) up to AFL standard. At times it has been a horrendous count of as much as 14 or 15. This week, judging by last week's performance only, this week it is only 9, with the majority of those the very young players (we have 60 game ave). Add to that 5 or so players out injured and the J-HOG at Casey, things are looking better.

Edited July 5, 201312 yr by Curry & Beer

They have played 2 games at the G this year for one win and one loss.

Their recent record at the ground is:

WWLLLLLWLLLLLDLLLWLW

Of their last 12 games there were two wins (the grand final last year and Collingwood this year) and a draw (us).

They have only won 3 of their last 18 games at the MCG.

compare that to the SCG:

LWLWWWWLWWWWWLWLWDWW

They have won 14 of their past 20 and only lost 2 of their past 12 at the SCG

Regardless of how crap we are, last years premiers obviously have struggled to adapt to the MCG at times. Why? Well it makes sense that ground size would be the significant factor as it is much different length and width than the SCG.

Rubbish the concept all you like but the stats are pretty compelling - regardless of the result this weekend, Sydney have struggled at the MCG. And if we didn't try to use that to our advantage in our planning I'd be very disappointed.

Rubbish nothing it's enough to convince me to change my tip.

Go Dees.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/sydney-swans-a-tall-order-for-lowly-melbourne-demons/story-fni5f3kt-1226675096428?from=herald+sun_rss

How has the editor released this for publishing? Terrible article.

Hawthorn would wish the Swans "don't usually contend with the size of the MCG" ( only in Grand Finals when it counts ??) As much as I would love it , this will not be one of their don't contend with the MCG weeks..$15.00 if you want to back the Dees... ..Worth $50.?? (tongue in cheek)

Im thinkin maybe the swannies a little flat after last week, the game at the G and they may take us a little lightly....the line magin of +60.5 may be worth a flutter.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/sydney-swans-a-tall-order-for-lowly-melbourne-demons/story-fni5f3kt-1226675096428?from=herald+sun_rss

How has the editor released this for publishing? Terrible article.

Look who it was written by.

You are right though, it is a terrible article.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/sydney-swans-a-tall-order-for-lowly-melbourne-demons/story-fni5f3kt-1226675096428?from=herald+sun_rss

How has the editor released this for publishing? Terrible article.

It's the HUN. That says enough.

Nonetheless, that's one of the most biased pieces of writing there's been in a while.