Changes vs Eagles

[Fat Tony 5,272]

The ball is always wet in Darwin and we need to go small with runners.

Hogan and Garland are automatic ins and JKH should come in given the likely conditions.

Outs should be Spencer, Dawes and Riley.

Toumpas to be sub.

Watts/Howe to second ruck.

[Maldonboy38 6,406]

Minimal changes.

We have rarely gone into a game this year with our best spine available - in round 14 we can. Hogan, Dawes, N Jones, MacDonald and Dunn is a very powerful spine and gives us strong competitiveness in all areas of the ground. I am convinv=ced we play our best footy with our best spine in place.

Also, dropping Spencer sounds easy but Roos wants a 50/50 in every aerial contest inside forward 50. Spencer, Howe and Dawes may not grab big stats but they should compete in the air allowing mids and smalls to crumb.

The Eagles are playing a zone game to defend all spaces - what they do not do well is consistent, one-on-one contested footy all over the park for 120 minutes, where each of their players has an opponent standing next to them.

IN: Hogan

OUT: Bail

[gOLLy 401]

Out : Toumpas (squibbing is not to be accepted) Bail

In : Garland, Hogan

Edited June 23, 2015 by gOLLy

[DeeSpencer 26,083]

Conflicting battles between 2 rucks and the Darwin conditions.

Hogan and Garland should come back if fit. JKH has to be at least in consideration for the sub at minimum. Fitzpatrick is an interesting match up to give us the 2nd ruck and to give us the extra tall defender, as good as Garland can be at times I don't like the match up of him on Sinclair or Darling.

I believe our best team would actually be:

FB: Jetta Dunn Garland

HB: Cross McDonald Lumumba

C: Toumpas Jones Watts

HF: Brayshaw Dawes M Jones

FF: Garlett Hogan Howe

Foll: Gawn Vince Viney

Int: Tyson JKH Stretch/Fitzy

S: ANB

Out: Bail, Spencer, Riley +/- Stretch

In: Garland, Hogan, JKH +/- Fitzy

But I almost expect Roos will just go for Hogan, Garland in - Bail, Riley out and I can respect that. Rewarding Spencer for his good form and having the 2 rucks certainly wouldn't hurt. I'm not sure can play 3 talls and Howe in the same forward line but I guess if it happens we will find that out as well. It would certainly test the Eagles backline but at the same time they'd run all over us if we weren't holding marks.

[bing181 9,328]

But I almost expect Roos will just go for Hogan, Garland in - Bail, Riley out and I can respect that.

Imagine you're pretty close, Bail and Riley probably bring the least, neither do enough damage on a consistent basis.

Dawes won't be dropped. He played a key role in Geelong in getting the forward structures right, keeping the forward line open, and getting ball to ground for our smalls. Goal assists for a third of our score isn't to be sneezed at.

Maybe:

- Fitzpatrick for Spencer ... Fitzpatrick would be better than Dawes as second ruck, and can also do double duties down back. Was best for Casey on the weekend.

- JKH for ANB if they really feel that JKH deserves a place. In spite of the 3 goals, feel that ANB is still a bit of the pace in general play.

[Nasher 33,617]

Toumpas (squibbing is not to be accepted)

?!

[Young Dee 1,303]

Imagine you're pretty close, Bail and Riley probably bring the least, neither do enough damage on a consistent basis.

Dawes won't be dropped. He played a key role in Geelong in getting the forward structures right, keeping the forward line open, and getting ball to ground for our smalls. Goal assists for a third of our score isn't to be sneezed at.

Maybe:

- Fitzpatrick for Spencer ... Fitzpatrick would be better than Dawes as second ruck, and can also do double duties down back. Was best for Casey on the weekend.

- JKH for ANB if they really feel that JKH deserves a place. In spite of the 3 goals, feel that ANB is still a bit of the pace in general play.

Good call - that's a possibility

Ins: Hogan, Fitzy

Outs: Spencer, Riley

Fitzy not as good as Spencer in the ruck however can play forward/back

JKH could also come in for bail

Edited June 23, 2015 by Young Dee

[Nasher 33,617]

In: Hogan, Garland

Out: Bail, Riley

It's not remotely like for like, but it's two top 22 players for the bottom two players in our side. I wouldn't like to see Spencer dropped - Max made the comment that he was relieved when Spencer was named as it would mean he wouldn't get run off his legs; surely this also applies in Darwin against NicNat. I would hate to see Gawn flagging in the last quarter as he pretty much always has whenever he's rucked the whole game. I also want to see if the combination works in general or if it was just good luck/a once off.

I can't see Roos dropping Dawes. He went out of his way to highlight the efforts of he and Howe at bring the smalls in to the game.

I also can't see the JKH for <anyone> swap happening myself. I'm a fan, but I don't see him as such an important player as to drop another player who played well in a great team win.

[Jaded No More 68,974]

Epic LOLs at anyone who thinks Hogan and Garland aren't automatic ins.

In: HOGAN, Garland, JHK, Fizpatrick

Out: Bail, Riley, Stretch, Spencer

I think everyone who gets dropped this week is stiff, but we are about to meet the 2nd best team in the comp on form. We are not leaving players which are clearly in our best 22 out because we won. We need to keep getting better, and the game will step up again versus West Coast who are in amazing form.

We need 2 rucks, but I'm personally unsure what we get from Spencer when he isn't rucking as he can't defend. Plus we don't want to be too tall and immobile. Already Dawes is like a horse in quick sand.

Hogan no brainer, Garland no brainer, JHK a perfect replacement for Bail and a serious upgrade.

Matt Jones did a wonderful job on the weekend, and he stays. We need that speed off half forward and he can play the shut down role to stop West Coast from counter attacking.

Stretch might need a bit of a break. It's the only reason I dropped him, and I feel terrible about it.

Edited June 23, 2015 by Jaded

[What 18,810]

Epic LOLs at anyone who thinks Hogan and Garland aren't automatic ins.

In: HOGAN, Garland, JHK, Fizpatrick

Out: Bail, Riley, Stretch, Spencer

I think everyone who gets dropped this week is stiff, but we are about to meet the 2nd best team in the comp on form. We are not leaving players which are clearly in our best 22 out because we won. We need to keep getting better, and the game will step up again versus West Coast who are in amazing form.

We need 2 rucks, but I'm personally unsure what we get from Spencer when he isn't rucking as he can't defend. Plus we don't want to be too tall and immobile. Already Dawes is like a horse in quick sand.

Hogan no brainer, Garland no brainer, JHK a perfect replacement for Bail and a serious upgrade.

Matt Jones did a wonderful job on the weekend, and he stays. We need that speed off half forward and he can play the shut down role to stop West Coast from counter attacking.

Stretch might need a bit of a break. It's the only reason I dropped him, and I feel terrible about it.

Dont think dropping JKH for Stretch is needed.

Im a JKH fan but Stretch had a better game vs the Cats on the weekend than any game JKH has had this season. Not to mention he kicked one of the sealing goals in the last and hit Howe on the chest for another.

[Roger Mellie 4,103]

Did I miss something or did Nicnat suddenly get a tank?

Isn't that why WCE always have two rucks?

We have to have two rucks for this game, particularly in Darwin.

So they are Gawn and Spencer, Gawn and Jamar or Gawn and Fitzy.

Hogan is a big a given as you'll ever see and I would've thought Garland, a regular given - in good form before the hand injury.

So for me:

In: Hogan and Garland

Spencer stays or one of Fitz/Jamar comes in (Roos unlikely to tinker too much on this one)

Great team effort on Sunday but if you have to burrow to find the players that were slightly less that 'brilliant,' it would be Toump, MacDonald, Bail, Riley.

Toump is on an upward trajectory and can do without the loss in confidence so he stays (with fingers and toes crossed).

Macdonald is a key so he stays and is played back into form (theoretically)

Bail had an OK game (played his role well) marred by the usual rubbish disposal

Riley didn't do much as the sub, but last time in that role, he went into the middle and smashed bodies. Against Geelong he didn't get the chance. Against WCE, he probably won't either, thereby diminishing his value as a sub (although it wouldn't stop him smashing eagles outside the centre square).

Therefore, by process of elimination:

In Hogan, Garland

Out Bail, Riley

Or,

In Hogan, Garland Fitz/Jamar

Out: Bail, Riley, Spence

[RalphiusMaximus 6,088]

Minimal changes. Hogan to come in is about all I see. You don't reward an effort like Sunday's by dropping the players who made it happen. That's not the culture they're trying to build.

[picket fence 17,530]

CHEEZUS Minimal changes One only required

IN HOGAN (IF FIT

OUT BAIL

END OF STORY!

[Demons rising 52]

If you read the headline from the official m f c website

Hogan and garland set for Darwin return

They are in !

[Jaded No More 68,974]

How can anyone think that Garland isn't an automtic in?!

Have you seen West Coast's forward line? Did you watch Bail struggle in defence?

You all cray!

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

My thought process here is that we always struggle the week after Darwin, so with holding off on bringing Hogan, Garland and Kennedy-Harris back for a week, it means we should have three fresh players to bring in the following week.

My head agrees with your sensible long term approach, but my heart says to chuck everything we can at this match, because if we somehow won it, we'd have started a bonfire and the footy world would shirt its collective dacks

[Henrietta Lumbago 331]

CHEEZUS Minimal changes One only required

IN HOGAN (IF FIT

OUT BAIL

END OF STORY!

Picket...I agree mate, the combination of Gawn and Spencer playing together means that our midfield will at least be competitive and they might be able to work down Natinui and Sinclair.

If we can compete in the middle, then Dawes, Hogan, Garlett will cause the eagles some probs

[titan_uranus 25,045]

Part of me just wants to bring Hogan in for one of Riley or Bail - West Coast's key defensive stocks are thin due to the injuries to McKenzie and Brown, so maybe having a forward line of Hogan, Dawes, Howe and the resting ruckman could work for us (especially if Dawes is able to get on his bike like he did on Sunday and Howe makes a contest of everything that goes near him).

I'm worried about being too tall in that situation though, which requires one of the talls to be dropped. I don't see an easy solution to that conundrum though. Dawes provided important structure and a presence at CHF which makes us a much better side. We also can't rely on Gawn and Spencer to be clunking marks and kicking goals when forward against better opposition in West Coast. But, if we drop Spencer we take Gawn's relief out and simultaneously force Dawes into the ruck, which against West Coast is a recipe for disaster.

Leaving the talls in and ensuring they run as hard as they can might be the best option, though I'm not convinced at all.

As for other changes, unlike Jaded I'm not sold on Garland as an automatic inclusion, but I think he matches up well on someone like LeCras and I think we'll see him. Could be included in place of Riley/Bail, or the other one if one is dropped for Hogan. But if we do that (i.e. drop Riley and Bail for Hogan and Garland), Garland's going to have to play small and be prepared to run off his opponent.

Edit: the other interesting thing to keep in mind is that we go from playing West Coast, big on ruckmen and tall forwards, to playing Essendon, who at the moment are the opposite, with Bellchambers dropped, Carlisle out of form, and generally a smaller side.

Edited June 23, 2015 by titan_uranus

[What 18,810]

Naitanui and Sinclair vs Gawn and Spencer

This will happen and it will be great to watch.

Backing our boys all the way.

[Henrietta Lumbago 331]

Part of me just wants to bring Hogan in for one of Riley or Bail - West Coast's key defensive stocks are thin due to the injuries to McKenzie and Brown, so maybe having a forward line of Hogan, Dawes, Howe and the resting ruckman could work for us (especially if Dawes is able to get on his bike like he did on Sunday and Howe makes a contest of everything that goes near him).

I'm worried about being too tall in that situation though, which requires one of the talls to be dropped. I don't see an easy solution to that conundrum though. Dawes provided important structure and a presence at CHF which makes us a much better side. We also can't rely on Gawn and Spencer to be clunking marks and kicking goals when forward against better opposition in West Coast. But, if we drop Spencer we take Gawn's relief out and simultaneously force Dawes into the ruck, which against West Coast is a recipe for disaster.

Leaving the talls in and ensuring they run as hard as they can might be the best option, though I'm not convinced at all.

As for other changes, unlike Jaded I'm not sold on Garland as an automatic inclusion, but I think he matches up well on someone like LeCras and I think we'll see him. Could be included in place of Riley/Bail, or the other one if one is dropped for Hogan. But if we do that (i.e. drop Riley and Bail for Hogan and Garland), Garland's going to have to play small and be prepared to run off his opponent.

Edit: the other interesting thing to keep in mind is that we go from playing West Coast, big on ruckmen and tall forwards, to playing Essendon, who at the moment are the opposite, with Bellchambers dropped, Carlisle out of form, and generally a smaller side.

One of the many reasons we beat Geelong was because we exposed their weeknesses..firstly we need to neutralize naitnui and his ruck/hit out dominance so our mids can be competitive if not beat the West Coasts mids and we need to expose their backline.. a forward line of Dawes, Hogan, Gawn/Spencer and smalls Garlett and ANB/JKH should be a handfull.

We need to play a loose man in the backline and try not to let them get many easy fast entries inside 50, so the ball is kicked in long and high where possibly Howe can get a free run at it.

Howe to the backline.

[DeeSpencer 26,083]

One of the many reasons we beat Geelong was because we exposed their weeknesses..firstly we need to neutralize naitnui and his ruck/hit out dominance so our mids can be competitive if not beat the West Coasts mids and we need to expose their backline.. a forward line of Dawes, Hogan, Gawn/Spencer and smalls Garlett and ANB/JKH should be a handfull.

We need to play a loose man in the backline and try not to let them get many easy fast entries inside 50, so the ball is kicked in long and high where possibly Howe can get a free run at it.

Howe to the backline.

Just a tip but a 5 man forward line with a loose man behind the ball will not be conducive to stopping WC getting easy fast entries. They'll waltz the ball out of their backline and straight in to the forwards if we start a loose.

We are better off starting the 6 forwards. Using Dawes and others as lead up forwards to hopefully take McGovern (and Hurn, Yeo and Shepherd) away from his intercept marking to then isolate the dangerous forwards deep.

Stopping West Coast forwards will be a handfull and we will need good defending once the ball goes in to our backline and composed rebounding and of course we will need to win the midfield battle which will be much harder than against the Cats. But moving the ball with composure and putting on some scoreboard pressure as we did against the Cats might be the biggest challenge.

[rjay 25,093]

Dawes won't be dropped. He played a key role in Geelong in getting the forward structures right, keeping the forward line open, and getting ball to ground for our smalls. Goal assists for a third of our score isn't to be sneezed at.

I'm worried about being too tall in that situation though, which requires one of the talls to be dropped. I don't see an easy solution to that conundrum though. Dawes provided important structure and a presence at CHF which makes us a much better side. We also can't rely on Gawn and Spencer to be clunking marks and kicking goals when forward against better opposition in West Coast. But, if we drop Spencer we take Gawn's relief out and simultaneously force Dawes into the ruck, which against West Coast is a recipe for disaster.

Leaving the talls in and ensuring they run as hard as they can might be the best option, though I'm not convinced at all.

One of the many reasons we beat Geelong was because we exposed their weeknesses..firstly we need to neutralize naitnui and his ruck/hit out dominance so our mids can be competitive if not beat the West Coasts mids and we need to expose their backline.. a forward line of Dawes, Hogan, Gawn/Spencer and smalls Garlett and ANB/JKH should be a handfull.

We need to play a loose man in the backline and try not to let them get many easy fast entries inside 50, so the ball is kicked in long and high where possibly Howe can get a free run at it.

Howe to the backline.

To me if we're talking forward structure, who gives better forward structure Dawes or Hogan? that's the choice.

We keep the structure with Hogan plus he provides goal kicking and possessions as well as hitting the packs hard.

Be worried 'Titan', if we carry all the talls in we will be too slow.

If we can nail WC in the midfield we will put enough pressure on their defence to kick a winning score. They rely on team defence and the pressure from the mids, they are very easy to score against if we move it in quickly.

...and for anyone thinking of replacing ANB with JKH, forget about it. ANB will be the better player and probably gives us more now.

Edited June 23, 2015 by rjay

[Henrietta Lumbago 331]

Just a tip but a 5 man forward line with a loose man behind the ball will not be conducive to stopping WC getting easy fast entries. They'll waltz the ball out of their backline and straight in to the forwards if we start a loose.

We are better off starting the 6 forwards. Using Dawes and others as lead up forwards to hopefully take McGovern (and Hurn, Yeo and Shepherd) away from his intercept marking to then isolate the dangerous forwards deep.

Stopping West Coast forwards will be a handfull and we will need good defending once the ball goes in to our backline and composed rebounding and of course we will need to win the midfield battle which will be much harder than against the Cats. But moving the ball with composure and putting on some scoreboard pressure as we did against the Cats might be the biggest challenge.

Yeah ok so putting Howe as a loose defender leaves us exposed to the Oxley situation again, Im still not against putting Howe down back...although Mcdonald will take Kennedy, Dunn will take Lecras and Garland will take Darling..

[Henrietta Lumbago 331]

To me if we're talking forward structure, who gives better forward structure Dawes or Hogan? that's the choice.

We keep the structure with Hogan plus he provides goal kicking and possessions as well as hitting the packs hard.

Be worried 'Titan', if we carry all the talls in we will be too slow.

If we can nail WC in the midfield we will put enough pressure on their defence to kick a winning score. They rely on team defence and the pressure from the mids, they are very easy to score against if we move it in quickly.

...and for anyone thinking of replacing ANB with JKH, forget about it. ANB will be the better player and probably gives us more now.

Playing tall forwards may expose their backline we will still have the smalls of Garlett and ANB or JKH on the ground.

[Rod Grinter Riot Squad 5,654]

Find it staggering that people are proposing 3 or 4 changes after the best team performance in many years