Changes vs Eagles

[hemingway 7,631]

I have long been a critic of Dawes and don't think he is in our best 22 going forward.

My biggest criticisms have been:

- he can't mark,

- doesn't kick enough goals

- can't use his body to out-position opponents

- doesn't lead to good places

However, Roos in one simple play made those criticisms redundant and found a role to use him effectively!

Roos must have told him to Not To Try to Mark...Not kick for goal...Just bring it to ground!!

If that his role and he sticks to it I think he should stay in the team.

Brilliant move by Roos.

I reckon you are right about this. Well at least the bit about making a contest and bringing it to ground. Despite his deficiencies, I like Dawes in the side. He does lead up the ground, does provide a target and takes defenders with him. I also like his defensive skills and aggression at the opponent.

[Mad_Melbourne 877]

I'm 100% certain that Dawes will play, as will Garland, but that doesn't change my opinion that they are detrimental to our structure. Everyone's perception of Dawes is that he is a beast. The reality is that Lonergan beat him for strength both times they had a one-on-one marking contest. Most of his rare possessions are gained by leading to the flanks, which is something that a mid/half forward can do just as affectively. If Dawes could ruck, he stays in the team, but the Gawn/Spencer combo will be important against Nik Nat, who is a dominent tap ruckman. Gawn/Spencer also kicked 2 between them plus crashed the packs to create spillage. Howe has kicked 6 goals in the past 3 games, which is more than Dawes has kicked all year. For mine is a straight swap, Hogan for Dawes.

Most peoples perception of Dawes is that he does not fit into the side, but this is wrong. He played a pivotal role in our win against Geelong and there is no reason he should be dropped for the next week and would be ridiculous to do it.

My perception of Dawes is that he is a competitive beast, not that he is a beast, but rather thrives on competition. He will bring the ball down on most occassions, and he will fight for the ball while it is on the ground. He may not have kicked many goals but he was involved in several score involvements as well as a 3 or so direct assists. Whilst I am sure he would have liked to hit the score board a bit more he was a major cog in the forward line that functioned so well.

His leading patterns and leadership are second to none in our forward half and the way our forward line was able to create space to isolate the one on ones was partially due to him. There were several times where he sacrificed his game to run to space and create space for team mates to move into, whilst drawing a defender.

[Deeoldfart 8,065]

Team selection vs the Eagles will probably the most difficult so far in 2015 for our Match Committee, and it's certainly making for a fascinating and enjoyable discussion on here. I can see merit in almost every point of view that has been raised.

For mine, I would bring in Hogan and Garland for Bail and Riley, but like others, it would not be without some trepidation about team balance and lack of mobility in our forward half, particularly in the likely Darwin conditions. The (obvious) answer would be for our tall forwards to crash every pack and either mark the incoming ball or (more likely) create a spillage for the smaller forwards and mids, who would need to be in the right place at the foot of every pack, and make the most of scoring opportunities. With Garlett and the good goal-kicking form of ANB against Geelong, we might just be able to kick a winning score. But, of course, our defence will need to hold up (which I think they can) and we will need to at least halve the stoppages, which is why having both Gawn and Spencer in the side is important imo.

[Webber 10,538]

Most peoples perception of Dawes is that he does not fit into the side, but this is wrong. He played a pivotal role in our win against Geelong and there is no reason he should be dropped for the next week and would be ridiculous to do it.

My perception of Dawes is that he is a competitive beast, not that he is a beast, but rather thrives on competition. He will bring the ball down on most occassions, and he will fight for the ball while it is on the ground. He may not have kicked many goals but he was involved in several score involvements as well as a 3 or so direct assists. Whilst I am sure he would have liked to hit the score board a bit more he was a major cog in the forward line that functioned so well.

His leading patterns and leadership are second to none in our forward half and the way our forward line was able to create space to isolate the one on ones was partially due to him. There were several times where he sacrificed his game to run to space and create space for team mates to move into, whilst drawing a defender.

Nailed it, M-M. He's a serious victim of Demonland Expectation Bias (DEB). Will be playing every week if fit.

[Webber 10,538]

In : Hogan (obviously), Garland (most consistent defender this season), JKH (better than Bail/Riley).

Out : Spencer (unfortunate), Bail, Riley.

[Fat Tony 5,272]

Every time we have played in Darwin the conditions have been hot and wet. Dawes and Spencer were ok on the weekend but we will not be playing in perfect conditions again. We need runners to keep our pressure up around the ball.

[rpfc 28,779]

General question: for the people who post "Out: Dawes", are you saying what you'd do, or what you think our coaches are going to do? Because I'm quite confident that there's absolutely no way on Earth Roos and co are going to drop Dawes. It's just wishful thinking.

I'm a fan of what Dawes brings but I can see the ruckmen pushing him out after last week. Personally, Spencer brings less than Gawn and the second ruck needs to do more than Spencer does while not in the ruck. Dawes should be banging down the door of the Match Committee and recanting his desire to not be second ruck - we really need a forward to do that and Dawes is the best suited candidate not named Hogan...

With that said; I would drop Spencer and Riley for Hogan and Garland.

Spencer and Gawn are gunning for the same job. I don't think they can play together week-in, week-out.

[P-man 13,366]

The best performance of the year with two clear best 22 players to come in, both KPPs. It's a head scratcher.

I'm wary of seeing the ruck combination jeopardised, but it worked against a pretty weak opposition in that department so Spencer might be the unlucky one to make way for Hoges. Whether Gawn has the juice to run out a game in Darwin against an in form NicNat is a big question mark. But going too tall is also a danger with a slippery ball.

I can't see Roos dropping Dawes and honestly, I thought he competed pretty well on the weekend.

Bail probably the weakest performer so he makes way for Garlo.

Out: Spencer, Bail

In: Hogan, Garland

[barneymfc 152]

The definite in is Hogan, the possible ins are Fitzpatrick and Garland

The definite out will be Spencer and then I am not sure.

I think we need Fitzy, he can play on their resting ruckman (Sinclair) and also pinch hit in the ruck for us as well. But it will be at the expense of a midfielder, possibly Riley.

Then I am not sure about Garland, I want him in, but it is hard to drop people after a win, Bail could make way for him, which would move Cross into a more midfield defensive role.

why drop spencer played well against cats,we need his size and strengh against their big blokes fitzy gets pushed off the ball to easy

[Little Richard 6,265]

Going by Sunday, I'd prefer to keep Spencer in the side over Dawes considering the impact he had in the ruck and even up forward.

He and Gawn take more marks than Dawes anyway, who wasn't that great on the weekend.

So for mine, it's Hogan in for Dawes and JKH for Bail. Garland a maybe.

[barneymfc 152]

Going by Sunday, I'd prefer to keep Spencer in the side over Dawes considering the impact he had in the ruck and even up forward.

He and Gawn take more marks than Dawes anyway, who wasn't that great on the weekend.

So for mine, it's Hogan in for Dawes and JKH for Bail. Garland a maybe.

would rather keep jkh and garland fresh for the next week against ess darwin will take a lot out of the smalls

[rpfc 28,779]

Going by Sunday, I'd prefer to keep Spencer in the side over Dawes considering the impact he had in the ruck and even up forward.

He and Gawn take more marks than Dawes anyway, who wasn't that great on the weekend.

So for mine, it's Hogan in for Dawes and JKH for Bail. Garland a maybe.

Don't overestimate the 2 or 3 marks that 'Concrete' hands is missing.

He is a forward, Spencer is not. And that is the primary job of the second ruck.

And Dawes had 6 score involvements from 8 touches. Garlett, Gawn, Watts, and Brayshaw also had 6 each. Jones and Vince had 10 and 8 respectively. For comparison, Spencer had 3 from his 6 touches and 25 HOs. To round out the forward line; Howe had 2 Score Involvements, ANB had 4.

[parch_37 38]

If Spencer or Gawn had to play on Lonergan on the weekend, they would have been no good forward of the ball either. Dawes needs to play as he does command a defender who will show some respect.. Yes he isn't the greatest option, but between him and Hogan they take the oppositions best talls.

[Little Richard 6,265]

Don't overestimate the 2 or 3 marks that 'Concrete' hands is missing.

He is a forward, Spencer is not. And that is the primary job of the second ruck.

And Dawes had 6 score involvements from 8 touches. Garlett, Gawn, Watts, and Brayshaw also had 6 each. Jones and Vince had 10 and 8 respectively. For comparison, Spencer had 3 from his 6 touches and 25 HOs. To round out the forward line; Howe had 2 Score Involvements, ANB had 4.

So Hogan in the forward line and two rucks, vs Dawes in the forward line with Hogan and Gawn in the ruck?

I'd prefer to have an advantage in the middle than across the half forward line, especially after seeing them click on Sunday... the midfield really reaped the rewards. Dawes is more easily covered than Spencer would be, in my opinion and that is where I'd rather have the advantage.

But they may decide to go smaller in Darwin on account of the conditions.

[rjay 25,093]

I'm a fan of what Dawes brings but I can see the ruckmen pushing him out after last week. Personally, Spencer brings less than Gawn and the second ruck needs to do more than Spencer does while not in the ruck. Dawes should be banging down the door of the Match Committee and recanting his desire to not be second ruck - we really need a forward to do that and Dawes is the best suited candidate not named Hogan...

With that said; I would drop Spencer and Riley for Hogan and Garland.

Spencer and Gawn are gunning for the same job. I don't think they can play together week-in, week-out.

If he could take the ruck 'rpfc' then he would be a lot more valuable, this is what we need.

...but because he can't we either go in unbalanced with 1 too many talls, we leave Max to do the ruck work without backup or Dawes misses out.

[rpfc 28,779]

So Hogan in the forward line and two rucks, vs Dawes in the forward line with Hogan and Gawn in the ruck?

I'd prefer to have an advantage in the middle than across the half forward line, especially after seeing them click on Sunday... the midfield really reaped the rewards. Dawes is more easily covered than Spencer would be, in my opinion and that is where I'd rather have the advantage.

But they may decide to go smaller in Darwin on account of the conditions.

I would tell Dawes to suck it up and second ruck. I agree that Darwin may require a smaller group. Who would ruck in that team is up in the air at the moment - none of Watts, Howe, Hogan, or Dawes are ideal.

If he could take the ruck 'rpfc' then he would be a lot more valuable, this is what we need.

...but because he can't we either go in unbalanced with 1 too many talls, we leave Max to do the ruck work without backup or Dawes misses out.

He "can't" or he 'doesn't want to'? Gawn cannot ruck for two hours unassisted. Spencer is useful up to a point in the forward line. Hogan is best left as a forward and too valuable to leave in the ruck to be cut in half. Watts will be cut in half if left in there long enough, Howe the same.

The back-up ruck should be a 25 minute job for a capable forward to complete a few minutes at a time.

I don't think we have an ideal scenario but the sharing duties of Gawn and Spencer will create an issue, IMO, where we get sub-standard forward play out of Spencer because he needs the ruck to be effective and Gawn is more effective than him.

Edited June 24, 2015 by rpfc

[P-man 13,366]

Watts v NicNat competing in the ruck. It's a pundit's wet dream.

[ManDee 7,222]

Outs - Spencer Bail/Riley

In - Fitzpatrick Garland

Tough on Spencer but Fitzy has more tools is better below his knees can play back, forward or ruck.

[AllMyTeamsAreWank 564]

Outs - Spencer Bail/Riley

In - Fitzpatrick Garland

Tough on Spencer but Fitzy has more tools is better below his knees can play back, forward or ruck.

What about Hogan?

[Ethan Tremblay 30,970]

Outs - Spencer Bail/Riley

In - Fitzpatrick Garland

Tough on Spencer but Fitzy has more tools is better below his knees can play back, forward or ruck.

Not keen on bringing in Hogan?

[ManDee 7,222]

What about Hogan?

Not keen on bringing in Hogan?

Too excited, how did I forget the Hulkster?

Outs - Spencer Bail & Riley

In - Fitzpatrick Garland Hogan

Thanks guys.

[Little Richard 6,265]

Too excited, how did I forget the Hulkster?

Outs - Spencer Bail & Riley

In - Fitzpatrick Garland Hogan

Thanks guys.

Not too bad, but could be a bit too top heavy for Darwin.

[Ethan Tremblay 30,970]

Garland, Hogan and JKH in.

Bail, M Jones and Riley out.

Keep Spencer in. No need at all to swap him with Fitzy. 3 changes is enough.

Edited June 24, 2015 by Ethan Tremblay

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

I hate the bye

10 more days

[mo64 5,881]

Garland, Hogan and JKH in.

Bail, M Jones and Riley out.

Keep Spencer in. No need at all to swap him with Fitzy. 3 changes is enough.

I've been a massive critic of Matt Jones, but the fact that him and ANB kicked 5 between them opposed to Enright and Taylor was a huge reason why we won. He keeps his place as a lockdown forward.

As for Dawes, he probably had his best game for the year against the Cats, but the reason why we won was because we dominated the hitouts and the clearances. We need 2 legitimate ruckmen against Nic Nat. Cast your mind back to the GWS game. Jamar was able to compete for half a game, but Mumford was able to get on top, and we got slaughtered. So regardless of how many selfless acts Dawes does, if we get beaten badly in the ruck, we have no chance against West Coast.