MATCH PREVIEW AND TEAM SELECTION - Round 9

[Akum 2,660]

The other point about Bail & M. Jones ...

If we ask, say, Viney & Brayshaw to play negative games on Pittard & Broadbent (or Krakouer) & chase them up & down the wing all day, we lose what they contribute in an attacking sense.

As Bail & Jones contribute very little in an attacking sense, we lose nothing by them playing defensive.

So this is one time when an ... um ... 'ordinary' player is preferred because they're 'ordinary'!!

[watchtheeyes 1,417]

If I recall correctly, that's where he was named last week as well.

Edit: Yep, just checked the round 8 match preview thread and he was named in the same pocket.

Switch Howe with Fitz and I reckon you have it!

[Akum 2,660]

I work with someone who knows Ollie Wines really really well and spoke to him after last weeks match. He was furious after last weeks game that others did not do their job....I reckon if we hit them early they will lose faith... They are brittle. .They actually are not that different to us.. the difference is confidence. If we have it..... we can win.

PS Ollie loves life at Port... The Toump will do us proud and be in our Premiership team.... Different players, both great.

PPS At their interview Neeld asked him who do you reckon is the best player (at Melbourne's pick). Ollie said Toump.

The Toump will be fine.

Go Dees

Good post.

And you've nailed it about the confidence. We need our playmakers to really "take the game on" ...

... even if they make mistakes !!!!

[Bitter but optimistic 22,218]

I am really confident we will win this...getting the same feeling like I did before GC and Richmond...

Best you put your hands on your head then Henrietta.

[FireOath 290]

Us in a nailbiter, jack watts goal after the siren

Goal from a set shot?

Let's hope he doesn't play on after the siren...

[dees189227 12,364]

awesome to see jack back. Think we have really missed him in the midfield. Also good to have Jetta back.

[jackaub 1,402]

Good post.

And you've nailed it about the confidence. We need our playmakers to really "take the game on" ...

... even if they make mistakes !!!!

Crap post people have been saying we have not taken the game on for 3 weeks we did last week, there is no certainty that we will do it again

I just hope we do Go DEEEEEs

[jackaub 1,402]

And what about Planks for hands still a sore Calf?

[picket fence 17,020]

I expected the two ins but the two outs surprise me!!

[censored] outs!! Total [censored]

Riley 10 mostly contested possesions!

F*rrrrrk

I hope the fringees that play ( Bail, Jones, Toumpas) play bloody well!

[daisycutter 29,600]

[censored] outs!! Total [censored]

Riley 10 mostly contested possesions!

F*rrrrrk

I hope the fringees that play ( Bail, Jones, Toumpas) play bloody well!

bet you don't

[Hellaintabadplacetobe 4,294]

I'd say

McDonald - Westhoff

Dunn - Schulz

Jetta - Wingard

Garland - Monfries

Port have bought in Paul Stewart so maybe Fitzy goes to him

McDonald has to go to Schulz, He is far more dangerous than Westhoff currently. Dunn gets Westhoff I'd reckon, agree with the others.

[Wadda We Sing 10,685]

Interestingly the betting on this match has been suspended for last half an hour, not sure if that means anything....

[McQueen 17,864]

People pay big money for that.

I think it may have gone over some people's heads.

[Scoop Junior 3,435]

In my opinion both Riley and Newton had better games than Bail and Matt Jones last week (even though I acknowledge their defensive roles on Johannisen and Murphy respectively).

So while I was a bit surprised both remained in the side, I think it must be a horses for courses decision.

People have correctly pointed out that Port are a quick side and a hard running side, so to counter that you need good runners in your side. But another factor is where we are playing - not only will it be mid 20s but from memory it was quite a big ground. You have to have players that can cover the ground over four quarters.

So while I think Riley and Newton were more deserving of a game, they are both slow and don't cover the ground particularly well. This to me seems the motivation for the selection.

[dazzledavey36 54,146]

[censored] outs!! Total [censored]

Riley 10 mostly contested possesions!

F*rrrrrk

I hope the fringees that play ( Bail, Jones, Toumpas) play bloody well!

The only joy i see Riley getting dropped is seeing this reaction. Edited May 28, 2015 by dazzledavey36

[Wiseblood 24,637]

In my opinion both Riley and Newton had better games than Bail and Matt Jones last week (even though I acknowledge their defensive roles on Johannisen and Murphy respectively).

So while I was a bit surprised both remained in the side, I think it must be a horses for courses decision.

People have correctly pointed out that Port are a quick side and a hard running side, so to counter that you need good runners in your side. But another factor is where we are playing - not only will it be mid 20s but from memory it was quite a big ground. You have to have players that can cover the ground over four quarters.

So while I think Riley and Newton were more deserving of a game, they are both slow and don't cover the ground particularly well. This to me seems the motivation for the selection.

Good point Scoop. One knock on both Riley and Newton is that they don't have the capacity to really run out a game. Bail and M. Jones are fitter and and have that sort of run and carry that will benefit the side in Alice Springs.

That's not a knock necessarily in either Riley or Newton but I get the feeling Roos has selected them for a very specific role. They aren't best 22 players and, I dare say, if Kent and JKH were both fit they would be playing in their roles, but if they are doing the job Roos asks of them then they play while the spots are up for grabs.

[P-man 13,366]

Resounding message is if you play your role you're in a good place to keep your spot.

I personally wouldn't have kept Bail over Newton, but Bail did his job on JJ last week and restricted the Dogs' run, so you can understand the logic.

Edited May 28, 2015 by P-man

[DeeSpencer 25,412]

Riley was a good sub. But the sub this week will come down to one of 5 - Viney, M Jones, Bail, Brayshaw or Riley. If Viney is back in the starting team then I want another running player (Bail, M Jones or Brayshaw) as sub. If Viney is the sub well then he pushes out Riley.

Newton is unlucky, but again, once Viney and Jetta take their spots then Lumumba goes back to a wing and then Newton is the unlucky guy. Unless the plan was to play Viney forward I can understand the change.

The only thing I think should happen is that Fitzy should have a rest. I know he was great last week but with Ryder out I don't think there's a match up for him. At the same time if we want the extra height I guess we may as well get him consistently in the team but I worry he'll play on someone like Paul Steward who we don't need a tall for and we will lose run and skill.

Anyway:

Back 6: Fitzy, Dunn, McDonald, Garland, Jetta, Grimes

Inside mids: Jones, Vince, vanders, Viney

Ruck: Spencer

Outside mids: Toumpas, Lumumba

Inside/outside/versatile: Cross

Forwards: Hogan, Pedersen, Howe, Watts, Garlett, Brayshaw, Bail, M Jones

There's some flexibility in the line up. I wonder if we have the skill level to win against Port if they are on but we at least have defenders who can defend, mids who can win the ball and some forwards who can find the goals. I'm hoping we back up the high level of effort we showed against the Dogs as a minimum.

[rjay 24,842]

Interestingly the betting on this match has been suspended for last half an hour, not sure if that means anything....

It means there are rumours of key players being out....

Anyone hear any rumours?

[Adam The God 30,103]

Anyone think fitzy could be a late out now that Ryder isn't playing ? There isn't an obvious match up for him. He was excellent last week so would be hard to leave him out but the game style Port plays we would be better with another mid

They may just keep him in and play him forward to exploit Port for height up.

[Je Roos Salem 661]

Very bad luck for Riley. Guessing it's just a positional thing with Viney coming back in but I wanted to see him again, even if just as sub.

[olisik 4,060]

The only joy i see Riley getting dropped is seeing this reaction.

Congratulatione mate.

Riley deserves to be named.

[jumbo returns 6,737]

Looks reasonable to me. Westhoff generally plays well against us and was the difference last season.

Every fkn game! Honestly, he plays himself as a loose man in defence and no-one picks him up!

If this happens again, I'll go spare!!

[Henrietta Lumbago 331]

Very bad luck for Riley. Guessing it's just a positional thing with Viney coming back in but I wanted to see him again, even if just as sub.

This game won't be as tightly contested compared to last week, which really suited Riley. This will be more of an outsiders game, suprised about Newton.

[titan_uranus 24,964]

Bail and Jones are much better runners than Riley and Newton, and in a horses for courses situation, where Port's run off half-back is just as crucial, if not more, to their success as it is for the Dogs, I understand the decision.

Unless they both improve their offensive game this week, there's no guarantee they'll hold their spots (especially with Tyson hopefully ready) against Collingwood the week after, though.

I thought Riley did as well as could be asked of a sub last week and I don't like the fact that he was dropped for his efforts but I understand it. I hope he gets his next chance on QBD.

Edited May 28, 2015 by titan_uranus