Changes next week v the Roos

[Deespicable 2,565]

I can't imagine Roosy and selectors discussing too many players and strategies this week.

North have a lot of hardworking honest toilers, so I think Riley might get another chance.

The two key match-ups for mine are Harvey - this will probably be Jetta's biggest test to date - and Atley's run off the backline and I imagine Roosy will want Bail picking him up.

North usually clobber us physically, but it's nice to have three strong bodies in Dawes, Pedo and Frawley against Firrito, Hansen and Thompson.

Swallow, Ziebell, Cunnington will be a tough ask for Jones, Tyson and Vince.

So for me there's no change, unless they decide they want Terlich for insurance in case Boomer takes out Jetta.

If that's the case, Riley would surely have to be the one to make room.

[dazzledavey36 49,327]

Is it true Riley was playing as a small forward?

[Mad_Melbourne 872]

i dont think there will necessarily be any changes, although i could see terlich coming into the side to play as a small defender due to the small option that are the make up of the north melbourne fwd line.

Out: Riley

in: Terlich

that said i could understand if riley stays in the side aswell,

Big week four our backline, often it is the smaller forwards and mids that kick goals on us, harvey, bastinac, thomas, nahas and leigh adams can all kick goals, so hopefully we can stop this.

[Deespicable 2,565]

Sorry I had forgotten about Thomas in my assessment - I think Jetta's more likely to mark him than Harvey.

That would leave Grimes to take Harvey, although Garland's pace could make him a good option on Boomer and he'd have a clear marking advantage on Harvs lead-ups and is less likely to be pushed (tunnelled) under the contest as Boomer is prone to do.

I reckon Nahas will be dropped this week and possibly one of Black or Tarrant.

[rjay 24,046]

I cant believe anyone would say Salem out.

He made 2 crucial smothers and kicked the winning goal. No. Just no.

Great tackle on Goddard who thought he could break the kid in half running with a full head...very unlucky not to get the free for that one.

[JV7 2,339]

Reckon it's time michie got another crack. Has put together 3-4 good weeks in the 2s and you see when players are made to earn there spot with consistent good form ala Kent last night they can come in and have an impact. And people calling for Bail to be dropped is ridiculous, he didn't have a big night in possession terms but his forward pressure is enormous in roosys game plan, no way he"ll be dropped.

IN: Michie

OUT: Riley

Edited June 16, 2014 by JV7

[pitmaster 3,099]

Can't drop Riley.

He is the only senior player on the list never to have played in a losing side.

He is our totem. Big magic.

[DeeSpencer 23,478]

Reckon it's time michie got another crack. Has put together 3-4 good weeks in the 2s and you see when players are made to earn there spot with consistent good form ala Kent last night they can come in and have an impact. And people calling for Bail to be dropped is ridiculous, he didn't have a big night in possession terms but his forward pressure is enormous in roosys game plan, no way he"ll be dropped.

IN: Michie

OUT: Riley

We need Bail, similar to Matt Jones no one else has the run, speed and fitness to do what he does. But freaking hell he was awful in the first half yesterday. His work rate was there but always running to the wrong spots!!! Time and time again chasing no one!

[JV7 2,339]

We need Bail, similar to Matt Jones no one else has the run, speed and fitness to do what he does. But freaking hell he was awful in the first half yesterday. His work rate was there but always running to the wrong spots!!! Time and time again chasing no one!

Can't say I noticed him not chasing anyone so can't question you on that. He was in the top 10 a few weeks back for pressure acts in the comp( number 1 at the dees) up until that point in time. Think he has enough credits in the bank so far this year to be given the benefit of the doubt on one bad game. No doubt in my mind he'll be playing this week

Edited June 16, 2014 by JV7

[Lil_red_fire_engine 10,330]

I would expect no changes, however we should not discount why we were in that position at half time. I think we needed an extra runner and I dont think Riley works as a forward. I would look at Riley out for one of Toumpas, Michie or JKH.

[monoccular 16,394]

Maybe Riley out but only if someone -appropriate swap - is really banging down the door at Casey.

Salem did a lot more than kicking that goal. How many smothers? One percenters??

Edited June 16, 2014 by monoccular

[Maldonboy38 6,034]

Roos has elevated Casey players who have displayed consistent form in two way running, with an emphasis on the defensive. Riley, Kent, McKenzie and Nicholson are probably those who fit this category over the last few weeks. So if anyone comes in I reckon it will be Nicholson but I just can't see that happening.

I am looking for Blease to get a go, but the Casey player review keeps highlighting his mental lapses in defensive mess-ups so I can't see him getting a run too quickly.

North Melbourne are big bodied and fit but Roos has said on multiple occasions he isn't doing too much planning around the other team. Rather, he concentrates on what we are doing so he is more than likely to bring a player in to correct a team weakness or team balance.

Unless there is an injury I can't see the need for a change. The team is well balanced, steady and when we do actually attack we look ok.

[Undeeterred 2,883]

None.

You just don't make changes after a win like that unless somebody has broken their leg or something.

And those suggesting Bail will be dropped - laughable.

[Nasher 33,166]

Out: Bail

In: Mitchie

Our coaches love Bail, because he runs hard and leads the way for pressure acts. He is second only to Cross in tackles.

Anyone who puts his name up as a candidate for omission is putting their understanding of how this team operates on display I reckon.

[Moonshadow 16,408]

No change unless there is an injury. Roos likes stability. Riley needs the AFL game time.

[McQueen 17,864]

I reckon as much as Roos demands a series of solid performances at Casey, conversely he needs to see at least two ordinary performances in the ones before the axe falls.

Salem had a stinker against the Pies but Roos kept him in, albeit as the Sub.

Riley will get another chance this week before Michie or others come into consideration IMO but I reckon he'll need to catch the eye. I'd settle for no disposals and knocking Harvey into next year.

Edited June 16, 2014 by McQueen

[spirit of norm smith 13,408]

Out: our pathetic 1st half

in: more of the attack like our 2nd half.

Let's not forget. inside 50s were 69 to 38. It was a great comeback win but doesnt paste over some errors

For me, Bail out & Michie in. You need strong bodies against the Kangas.

[Undeeterred 2,883]

I reckon as much as Roos demands a series of solid performances at Casey, conversely he needs to see at least two ordinary performances in the ones before the axe falls.

Salem had a stinker against the Pies but Roos kept him in, albeit as the Sub.

Riley will get another chance this week before Michie or others come into consideration IMO but I reckon he'll need to catch the eye. I'd settle for no disposals and knocking Harvey into the next year universe.

Fixed.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,533]

Riley was really, really poor. That he was subbed out half way through the third quarter rather than with only 5 minutes to go suggests the coaches thought so, too. Will Roos give him a chance to redeem himself? He's the only player I can see that might be replaced. If so, it's either for Gawn or JKH, depending on structural needs. I would have thought JKH would be the better option.

[Barney Rubble 1,576]

No change.

I don't believe Roos likes to change winning sides unless there is an injury.

He likes to keep a stable team, that learns to play with each other.

They are really getting confidence in each other, they can anticipate when the other will get the ball.

This allows them to spread more easily.

[PJ_12345 1,098]

I reckon as much as Roos demands a series of solid performances at Casey, conversely he needs to see at least two ordinary performances in the ones before the axe falls.

Salem had a stinker against the Pies but Roos kept him in, albeit as the Sub.

Riley will get another chance this week before Michie or others come into consideration IMO but I reckon he'll need to catch the eye. I'd settle for no disposals and knocking Harvey into next year.

To be honest I think Salem's performance was more a reality check for Roos.

Salem is good, but doesn't have the tank to last a whole game - not many first year players do, and Roos did say when Salem was drafted that it would be unlikely that he would play a game.

I don't expect much more from him and I think everyone was getting a bit ahead of themselves with their expectations.

Salem is good and will be great, but best left as a gun sub at the moment.

[nutbean 8,837]

No change.

I don't believe Roos likes to change winning sides unless there is an injury.

He likes to keep a stable team, that learns to play with each other.

They are really getting confidence in each other, they can anticipate when the other will get the ball.

This allows them to spread more easily.

Trademark Roos - its not even changing a winning side. I think he will forgive a quite game or two as opposed to not forgiving playing against team rules or your role.

[P-man 13,277]

No change.

A major, major kick up the backside over that first half though. Dare I say it, Neeld-esque. Lucky I no longer have a glass coffee table or I'd have spent the second half picking shards out of the carpet.

[Nasher 33,166]

Riley was really, really poor. That he was subbed out half way through the third quarter rather than with only 5 minutes to go suggests the coaches thought so, too. Will Roos give him a chance to redeem himself? He's the only player I can see that might be replaced. If so, it's either for Gawn or JKH, depending on structural needs. I would have thought JKH would be the better option.

I'll qualify by saying I haven't seen the first half yet (and may not bother) - but the thing about Riley is that he earned his place through consistently good performances at Casey. It wouldn't surprise me if the coaches backed him. It doesn't seem right to me to make a player play (say) three first rate games in the VFL in a row, then only get one at AFL level to prove himself.

Then again, if he was that bad, maybe he will be dropped. I'm definitely low on confidence after my last few efforts at picking the changes!

[nutbean 8,837]

Then again, if he was that bad, maybe he will be dropped. I'm definitely low on confidence after my last few efforts at picking the changes!

I think you need a spell in the seconds