1 hour ago, Wells 11 said:

I agree re this being a game they think they could win. With all the ex players there and teh big march etc yjeu will be right up for this contest. Im hoping we will be too. I m not sure Gawn and Viney and Hogan are easy to shut down but wont be just the bummers that will try to do that this year. Hopefully we've got some plans in place..especially re hogan. 

Ryan Crowley will go to Viney. If anybody can shut him down, Crowley can.

Leuey will do what Hickey of St Kilda did in preseason and just jump into Gawn whatever chance he gets.

And Mitch Brown will go the full Silvagni octopus on Hogan.

And none of these will get any help from the umpires whatsoever.

On 3/31/2016 at 11:29 PM, dazzledavey36 said:

Fairly quick side? Don't know if you noticed but GWS outside run killed us while we beat them in the contested area.

We aren't a quick side yet. 

GWS will do that to a lot of teams this year, but we are starting to put together our own list of players who can run and carry the ball at pace, and a good number of those have been named this weekend

Dunn not being picked, Matt Jones playing, who'd have thought it last year?

Hope Lumumba does alright. He started last season on a good note. Surely with that Essendon backline, 100 points minimum. If we lose all hell will break loose again, even though it's only round 2, yet if we beat this depleted team we're 2-0 and on top of the world. But take note, we have lost to an Essendon top up side before

Really smart selection decisions. 

We were too task up forward last week and Frost out with Brayshaw in balances that. Brayshaw into the center rotation and Harmes and Kent pick up the forward rotation minutes. 

H adds extra run down back and can push mid as well.  OMac was quiet anyway and isn't needed for back ups. 

Pedo can still swing back if we need another tall and the forward line week still function. 

 

I can't remember the last time we genuinely had players capable of being considered "best 22" kept out of the side due to form of the 22. Yeah our injury list is low but we have at least 7 players capable of stepping into the current 22 Dunn, Grimes, Dawes, Trengove, Petracca, Stretch, ANB, plus Frost and Omac.

We should win easily. Reality is that the Bombers are fielding half a VFL team. 

Better teams should beat the Bombers by 100 plus points. That is the standard we have to set.

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Akum said:

Ryan Crowley will go to Viney. If anybody can shut him down, Crowley can.

Leuey will do what Hickey of St Kilda did in preseason and just jump into Gawn whatever chance he gets.

And Mitch Brown will go the full Silvagni octopus on Hogan.

And none of these will get any help from the umpires whatsoever.

I don't mind Crowley shutting Viney down, I think we can cope with that with the midfield depth we have at the moment. The other 3 points I must admit aren't things I'd thought of in my match-up assessment, but you're spot on. I think we'll be on the end of an almighty flogging from the umpires - until the last quarter square-ups obviously. That has changed my thinking slightly, perhaps not a massive blowout after all. But surely we're still superior enough to get the win?

Last week I said that it would be won in the midfield and that we needed a coaching team that was alert, flexible and responsive. Coming back from 3+ goals down in the last quarter with some structural changes and good on field leadership showed me that we are developing very well and that we are being coached well. This week we need exactly the same. The threat is that we will go to sleep a bit because of the hype around the Drug Cheats team. Coulda beens, has beens and who the hell are they?  there is also the supporters of the Drug Cheats team. I refer to them thus as I believe that, while none of the current players have been found guilty of ingesting performance enhancing drugs, I believe that the Club, and people within the club made the decisions that lead to the players taking the drugs.

 

Enough about that, there is a footy game to be won and we have a very handy team that will be trying to do this on Saturday. 

Back line for the second week without Dunn. 

B: Neville Jetta, Tom McDonald, Heritier Lumumba
HB: Matt Jones, Colin Garland, Christian Salem

Lumumba in and OMac out. That is an improvement in my mind. Omac will improve but needs to do so in the Casey side once his ankle is right. TMac to Daniher and shuffle the rest around to find effective matchup. A few can rotate back there as HBF and Pedersen and even Watts can go back there i an emergency.

Forwards have lost Frost, and, Like Omac, I think there is good upside to Frost in time,

HF: Jack Watts, Cam Pedersen, James Harmes
F: Dean Kent, Jesse Hogan, Jeff Garlett

Good blend of different talent in that group to my mind. Pedersen and Hogan need a bit more coordination in how they work together and Harmes needs to improve a bit from last week. he can do so. he was effective last week. I am not worried about Hogan scoring. just his presence in the team opens up opportunities for others around him. Who will play on Watts? in his present form he looks like he can play any type of game he wants to. Put a tall on him and he will run him all over the ground. put a smaller player on him and he will outmark. 

Midfield has a bunch of good hard bodies willing to work hard.

C: Bernie Vince, Jack Viney, Aaron vandenBerg
Foll: Max Gawn, Nathan Jones, Dom Tyson
I/C: Angus Brayshaw, Clayton Oliver, Tom Bugg, Ben Kennedy

Lots of run and talent there and they are looking as if they are starting to work as a unit. they are playing for each other and by my count with the others in the team, there are 15 or so players that can run in the midfield. given the interchange rules and the way teams are playing, this is important to enable the run to continue through out the game. Gawn with Pedersen as a 5min backup works for me but we need to ensure that if max goes forward we have a system in place for that to work effectively.

A couple of ways this game can go. If we are not sharp and 'on' for this game from the first bounce we may find ourselves in a close dogfight. If we do hit it and hit it hard from the outset we could be in for a big winning margin. If it is the second case I want to see us being ruthless. First quarter important.

Dees by 45 points min.

I want to see vandenBerg get more of a run through the middle. At one stage last week we had Jones, Viney and Kennedy at a centre bounce, shortest midfield ever.

Also hope Vanders can mark the ball this week, was pretty fumble last week.

9 hours ago, small but forward said:

Melbourne round two team
B: Neville Jetta, Tom McDonald, Heritier Lumumba
HB: Matt Jones, Colin Garland, Christian Salem

 

FMD that's a quick backline. 

It will need to be a lot taller next week when we take on Waite, Petrie and Ben Brown.

it will be a good test for our mids to see if they can help Viney shake a tag from Crowley, i personally think inside mids like that will always be virtually impossible to totally stop and Essendon know their depth is so much less than ours it's basically pointless to play crowley as a tagger

I'm interested to see who actually plays in the back six. Matt Jones was selected on the half-back line last week but played the whole game on the wing, and very well. Instead, Vince played the first three quarters at half-back and then swapped with N Jones, very successfully, in the last. I suspect Vince will again start half-back and will share the kicking in duties with Salem, like last week.

Frost didn't have a good game last week but I'm still a little surprised to see him dropped given O Mac's absence. We are taking a big risk playing only one genuine tall defender.

8 hours ago, Peter Griffen said:

GWS will do that to a lot of teams this year, but we are starting to put together our own list of players who can run and carry the ball at pace, and a good number of those have been named this weekend

But those players you mentioned aren't run and carry types. Brayshaw and Oliver are inside types who will just continue to feed it out. Kent Garlett and Watts will provide forward half pressure with their speed but they are not natural run and carry types like the traditional Andrew Gaffs and Josh Kelly types which we severely lack.

Lumumba provides that run and carry off half back. I fear some teams will cut us up on the rebound alot more just like GWS did on the weekend. 

 

2 hours ago, Clint Bizkit said:

I want to see vandenBerg get more of a run through the middle. At one stage last week we had Jones, Viney and Kennedy at a centre bounce, shortest midfield ever.

At one stagr they threw Vandenberg in the midfield i think in the third and he started to get his hands on the ball and get it moving forward.

He was a natural midfielder at the NEAFL level so i agree with you in that his sheer size and hardness would be a huge plus in our on ball line up.

Someone (at AFL.com.au) hasn't done their homework.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-04-01/the-round-two-bogeymen-who-will-haunt-your-side-this-week

3 minutes ago, mrtwister said:

Someone (at AFL.com.au) hasn't done their homework.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-04-01/the-round-two-bogeymen-who-will-haunt-your-side-this-week

I never thought I'd see Ty Vickery as anyone's bogeyman either...unless it was because kids found him terrifying.

5 minutes ago, mrtwister said:

Someone (at AFL.com.au) hasn't done their homework.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-04-01/the-round-two-bogeymen-who-will-haunt-your-side-this-week

That's very poor.

The fact is, if we can't convert more inside 50's into shots on goal/goals then we will find ourselves in a dog fight.

I have absolutely no concerns over our side at the contest, but it's what happens after we win the ball that continues to concern. We simply don't have the footskills accross the board to be really damaging going forward but our players can definitely be smarter and I think that's what I'm most looking forward to seeing.

As a poster previously said, we're kidding ourselves if we think the answer isbanging it long to a pack situation where Hogan is a one in 10 chance of marking it. Last week we were ranked 18th for inside 50 conversions and we nearly lost the game because of it.

'4-quarter effort' can mean a variety of things. I don't think our effort at the contest dropped off last week. We were always on top. But our 'effort' going forward wasn't where it needs to be. Effort includes smarts, discipline and decision making. 

That particular side of our game remains a work in progress and will improve over time when we start adding some class and outside run. But this weekend is the perfect game to try and execute this side of our game and if we do it well we should have them on toast.

14 hours ago, jnrmac said:

There is no match up for Dunn

Ambrose.

10 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Ambrose.

He's been playing as a key defender. If he does go forward, he's 193 cm, 92kg and Garland should be fine to cover him. 

Edited March 31, 20169 yr by Scythe

16 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Ambrose.

I would have thought Garland has him. I don't think they were ever going to drop Garland for Dunn.

Some stats for each team that may be of interest to some. Stats taken from the teams as listed.

MFC            EFC       Average Age 24.0 25.0       Average Games 72.4 85.5                   Back Line           Ave Age 25.5 25.2       Ave Games 97.7 43.2                   Fol (includes wing)           Ave Age 24.8 26.0       Ave Games 88.5 123.3                   Fwd           Ave Age 23.8 23.5       Ave Games 60.3 56.3                   Int           Ave Age 20.5 25.8       Ave Games 28.5 136.3                   Melbourne           Games        Back            Fol          Fwd            Int         total 0-50 1 3 3 3 10 51-100 3 1 1 1 6 101-150 1 0 2 0 3 151-200 0 1 0 0 1 200+ 1 1 0 0 2           22 EFC           Games        Back             Fol         Fwd            Int         total 0-50 4 2 5 2 13 51-100 1 0 0 0 1 101-150 1 2 0 0 3 151-200 0 1 1 0 2 200+ 0 1 0 2 3           22

 

Edited March 31, 20169 yr by Chris
added detail

1 hour ago, stevethemanjordan said:

The fact is, if we can't convert more inside 50's into shots on goal/goals then we will find ourselves in a dog fight.

I have absolutely no concerns over our side at the contest, but it's what happens after we win the ball that continues to concern. We simply don't have the footskills accross the board to be really damaging going forward but our players can definitely be smarter and I think that's what I'm most looking forward to seeing.

As a poster previously said, we're kidding ourselves if we think the answer isbanging it long to a pack situation where Hogan is a one in 10 chance of marking it. Last week we were ranked 18th for inside 50 conversions and we nearly lost the game because of it.

'4-quarter effort' can mean a variety of things. I don't think our effort at the contest dropped off last week. We were always on top. But our 'effort' going forward wasn't where it needs to be. Effort includes smarts, discipline and decision making. 

That particular side of our game remains a work in progress and will improve over time when we start adding some class and outside run. But this weekend is the perfect game to try and execute this side of our game and if we do it well we should have them on toast.

That's an interesting stat - we were last in the league for I50 conversions, yet we were still able to win. Shows how far we've come in terms of how often we can get the ball into our forward line.

If we can lift that rate then we will not only belt the Bombers tomorrow arvo but certainly win more games than we did last year as well.

12 hours ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

Exactly, play the ball, don't go looking for the cheap stuff but opportunities will arise   and we must take them. No we can't get ahead of ourselves but this game should be over by half time at the latest, we need to fine tune our physicality and hardness at the footy is readiness of North Melbourne. 

Yes...  we have to start to develop the non choir boys attitude, out on the park.   It is meant to be a physical game.  That doesn't mean you aim for the head,  that is cheap & a bit soft.  hit body's hard,  & hurt them.

It is meant to sort out the rugged from the others.   This is why we play contact sort. 

 

All the while having our minds on supplying our forward players with plenty of opportunities to score.

 

I was surprised they dropped Bird and Simpkin. Both senior bodies with experience who could give the kids a chop out.

I mean they have named Parish as rover and he has to come up against the likes of Jones Viney Oliver Brayshaw and Vandenberg......