19 hours ago, CBDees said:

We play better as underdogs. The odds don't worry me and I am going on Sunday expecting a strong win!

Not sure if it's fact, but my mate said we started favourite five times last year and lost four of those games.

5 minutes ago, Wrecker45 said:

The ping pong needs to go to Frost this week. Two tall opposition forwards killed us last year. Daniher and Cloke. Guess what we went in short against Essendon this year and Daniher killed us again. We need to play Frost as a defensive forward but have him as a backup incase collingwoods ball movement is good and Cloke starts out marking Dunn and Macdonald.

Their inclusion of Mason Cox conserns me. If they have grundy and cox both rotating forward/rucks when we have dunn and Tmac occupied on Cloke and Moore. We will be in all sorts height wise. 

12 minutes ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

Their inclusion of Mason Cox conserns me. If they have grundy and cox both rotating forward/rucks when we have dunn and Tmac occupied on Cloke and Moore. We will be in all sorts height wise. 

Maybe, but Maxy will kill Cox - in all areas. This should give us a huge advantage at stoppages

10 minutes ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

Their inclusion of Mason Cox conserns me. If they have grundy and cox both rotating forward/rucks when we have dunn and Tmac occupied on Cloke and Moore. We will be in all sorts height wise. 

It's really hard to plan for Cox. He's a project player, and there's no point in including, say, Pedersen in the team (along with Frost) just to counter what he might do, which means taking the risk that he just might have a huge influence in his first game, which is highly unlikely to happen.

 

 

It is highly unlikely, isn't it??????

Garlett doesn't look like he's going to come up......sigh.....   Guess it's likely that Brayshaw and Hunt are the ins.  I was quietly confident on this game a few days back but the Pies ins and our outs leave me thinking it looms as a significant task to get over them.  We must hit them hard early and snuff out any resurgence in confidence to be a chance.  I think the betting odds are in part reflective of the relative strength of the line-up changes for both teams.

That Roos has said repeatedly we are building a game style designed to win finals on the MCG, gives me confidence that we won't be overrun and our contested ball work, Max Gawn, high press, will all work to our favour. 

Edited April 15, 20169 yr by PaulRB

17 minutes ago, Copuchas said:

Garlett doesn't look like he's going to come up......sigh.....   Guess it's likely that Brayshaw and Hunt are the ins.  I was quietly confident on this game a few days back but the Pies ins and our outs leave me thinking it looms as a significant task to get over them.  We must hit them hard early and snuff out any resurgence in confidence to be a chance.  I think the betting odds are in part reflective of the relative strength of the line-up changes for both teams.

Source?

1 minute ago, binman said:

Source?

Ben Guthrie's tweeter account.

Jeff Garlett testing his ankle at training. Left the track early and is in real doubt for the game against the Pies. pic.twitter.com/O75IvChxDm

— Ben Guthrie (@BenGuthrie_) April 15, 2016

1 minute ago, Devil is in the Detail said:

Ben Guthrie's tweeter account.

Jeff Garlett testing his ankle at training. Left the track early and is in real doubt for the game against the Pies. pic.twitter.com/O75IvChxDm

— Ben Guthrie (@BenGuthrie_) April 15, 2016

Ta

3 minutes ago, binman said:

Source?

see AFL website http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-04-15/speedy-demon-jeff-garlett-in-doubt-for-pies-clash

47 minutes ago, Akum said:

It's really hard to plan for Cox. He's a project player, and there's no point in including, say, Pedersen in the team (along with Frost) just to counter what he might do, which means taking the risk that he just might have a huge influence in his first game, which is highly unlikely to happen.

 

 

It is highly unlikely, isn't it??????

Yeah this is true. We cant ignore him though even if he doesnt take a mark in the 50 or kick a goal the extra tall option may spread us a bit thin. Although if Cox does start to play well and we a forced to put Frost back who then plays well? might make them finally give up on this frost as a forward nonsense

53 minutes ago, binman said:

Maybe, but Maxy will kill Cox - in all areas. This should give us a huge advantage at stoppages

Oh yeah stoppages Max will monster him but its the 3rd tall playing forward (even if that is grundy) that we dont have a defender for. 

On 4/15/2016 at 0:25 PM, ArtificialWisdom said:

Oh yeah stoppages Max will monster him but its the 3rd tall playing forward (even if that is grundy) that we dont have a defender for. 

The thing about these sorts of guys is that someone like Lynden Dunn or Tmac or even H is going to be far more experienced, he might take a mark but they'll be instructed to run off and attack because he will be exposed.

Just now, Peter Griffen said:

The thing about these sorts of guys is that someone like Lynden Dunn or Tmac or even H is going to be far more experienced, he might take a mark but they'll be instructed to run off and attack because he will be exposed.

Yeah, maybe im too used to us being beaten that im more worried about stopping them than taking advantage of them. Will ball in hand we probably are at an advantage with them having an extra big slow 2m guy on the field 

9 minutes ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

Oh yeah stoppages Max will monster him but its the 3rd tall playing forward (even if that is grundy) that we dont have a defender for. 

Often it is a more adaptable/mid sized tall who can play this role, but i dont see us bringing in an extra tall defender for this specific reason, in fact it would actually be quite stupid.

It would completely slow down our backline and ball movement but the reliance of one v one matchups is a thing of the past, especially when considering a first gamer who whilst has a decent athletic ability will unlikely continually be foun in one v one contests and the third man up will often be able to cause spoils if our backline is working efficiently. Moore, Cloke and Cox/Grundy are less dangerous than Petrie, Brown/Goldstein and Waite so we will not need to add an extra tall to the mix.

H will play third tall and provide run, Dunn hopefully to Cloke and T-Mac to Moore. Simple as that

48 minutes ago, binman said:

Ta

Yeah Training injuries really pizz me of. He probably did it doing one of those stupid light foots through the ladder on the ground or one of the other equally stupid twist and turn drills you see them do!

Edited April 15, 20169 yr by picket fence

48 minutes ago, picket fence said:

Yeah Training injuries really pizz me of. He probably did it doing one of those stupid light foots through the ladder on the ground or one of the other equally stupid twist and turn drills you see them do!

Probably, let's assume!

5 hours ago, picket fence said:

Yeah Training injuries really pizz me of. He probably did it doing one of those stupid light foots through the ladder on the ground or one of the other equally stupid twist and turn drills you see them do!

Why do they do that run through the ladder thing? When is that ever going to be a skill they need in a game of football? 

Like oh,  there's a ladder on the ground on the forward 50 arc,  good thing I just did this in training.. What's it for?

2 minutes ago, Jesse Christ said:

Like oh,  there's a ladder on the ground on the forward 50 arc,  good thing I just did this in training.. What's it for?

maybe they should stand it up and climb the bloody thing for a change.

On 14 April 2016 at 3:16 PM, Devil is in the Detail said:

This is good news for us. But I agree, shows the respect people have for MFC.

Rather, it shows how little respect MFC have earned.  Dropping 'should win' games time and time again must stop.

10 hours ago, Mad_Melbourne said:

Often it is a more adaptable/mid sized tall who can play this role, but i dont see us bringing in an extra tall defender for this specific reason, in fact it would actually be quite stupid.

It would completely slow down our backline and ball movement but the reliance of one v one matchups is a thing of the past, especially when considering a first gamer who whilst has a decent athletic ability will unlikely continually be foun in one v one contests and the third man up will often be able to cause spoils if our backline is working efficiently. Moore, Cloke and Cox/Grundy are less dangerous than Petrie, Brown/Goldstein and Waite so we will not need to add an extra tall to the mix.

H will play third tall and provide run, Dunn hopefully to Cloke and T-Mac to Moore. Simple as that

Hellloooooooooooooooo Cameron Pedersen.

Mason not playing.

Would love to find a replacement for Matty. Works hard to get into space well and does find it but his decision making afterwards is super slow old school and the disposal well...mostly up the line or to a contested lead etc. Rarely hits up a man short or longer. If he's going to play like this maybe play him in on a flank and tell him to play on quickly to the hot spot or teach him how to short pass to a lead (like a bullett) ...and do it quickly!

Otherwise time to look elsewhere if he can't correct the old school old melb faults.

DE last week running around 63%

Vince also played well but has a fault here also ....bombing too often.

DE of 53%

Realise he often has more pressure but still think there's room for improvement if he can lower his eyes when possible.

Team ave DE last week was 69%

 

Edited April 15, 20169 yr by Rusty Nails

Im predicting  a late change for the Pies as young Moore has supposedly been playing sore and banged up

In - Cox

Out - Moore (rest)