Just now, Wiseblood said:

You're putting Redpath in the same sentence as Lynch, then?

And by the way, what is your solution to Redpath if Garland isn't it? 

No, I'm comparing Redpath to Wright.

Frost needs to be played as a defender (even with his poor form as a forward) because Dunn is too fat and stupid and Garland just isn't big enough.

2 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

You're putting Redpath in the same sentence as Lynch, then?

And by the way, what is your solution to Redpath if Garland isn't it? 

He said it's giving him nightmares, he's not suggesting we have Geoff Southby on the list.

It gives me nightmares too.  Have you seen Garland play ?  Cross all fingers and toes.

Just now, Clint Bizkit said:

No, I'm comparing Redpath to Wright.

Frost needs to be played as a defender (even with his poor form as a forward) because Dunn is too fat and stupid and Garland just isn't big enough.

He needs to be played there, but he isn't.  So we have to deal with it.

Garland played Wright well last night (outside of his horrid handpass) and wasn't beaten by him in a one on one contest.  There is no reason to think he can't do the same this week as well.

 

Unless forced, no changes. They worked as a whole team and they should get consecutive games to put that into practice. They had the highest scoring quarter since 2004. I want to see more of that.

Again, don't like raining on parades but I hope people realise part of the reason we were able to do so much scoreboard damage after half-time was because of the following:

Rosa and Sexton both played no part in the game after mid-way into the second quarter which hugely affected their rotations.

Prestia and Miller were also unable to play at 100 percent because of injuries. Miller was almost hobbling around with his ankle.

That's a significant chunk of their midfield and I know there'd be supporters using that as an excuse as to why we'd been so comprehensively beaten had we been at the receiving end. 

Perspective. Plenty of positives obviously. Even contribution of effort and buy-in. Great tackling pressure and ferocity at the ball. But clearly plenty to work on.

For one, our ability to continually keep teams in the game due to turnovers in our back-half remains a concern and if it happens too often against a team like the dogs we are absolutely no chance. Salem is still so important to that back group simply because of his decision making and kicking skills. So surely he comes in.

Having Dunn and Garland coming in and out of the team at their age concerns me majorly. We can't seem to get any sort of rhythm going with our two KP defenders and I reckon it makes the entire back six look wobbly. I consistently see bad decision making and dumb positioning. Hard to drop Garland as he didn't really get to see enough of the ball down there. Checked his man as blokes of his experience should do and played tight. Handball in the first quarter just baffled me. Still don't understand how someone who has played for that long continues to make errors like that. If it were a one off it would be fine. He seems to have a habit of doing something like that every game.

Salem a definite in and Michie unlucky.

If Dunn tears it up today, I'd rather see him back in over Garland.

Edited May 8, 20169 yr by stevethemanjordan

3 hours ago, bandicoot said:

The dogs play a similar style to the saints. We need to have learned from last weeks game. 

The big X factor however is the G'. The dogs lost 2 from 3 at the ground last year.

Our game style suits the G' better than the dogs. Their fast paced game takes its toll at the G' which is better suited to our contested grinding game. 

The ground also favors talls and our talls are better then theirs.  

Do we actually play a "contested grinding game"?

57 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Again, don't like raining on parades but I hope people realise part of the reason we were able to do so much scoreboard damage after half-time was because of the following:

Rosa and Sexton both played no part in the game after mid-way into the second quarter which hugely affected their rotations.

Prestia and Miller were also unable to play at 100 percent because of injuries. Miller was almost hobbling around with his ankle.

That's a significant chunk of their midfield and I know there'd be supporters using that as an excuse as to why we'd been so comprehensively beaten had we been at the receiving end. 

The Dees can't win - had we rolled over and been beaten, people would been angry that we couldn't put a side away that had only 2 rotations on the bench.  Then, when we actually do it, and do it well, we need to be reminded that the only reason we did it was because of injuries, which gives little credit to the performance.  Some are never happy.

I don't see why it needs to be put into perspective, either.  No one here is claiming dynasties, premierships and the like after the win.  Everyone is simply enjoying something so rare - a huge win, and a win where we kicked 24 goals.

So enjoy it, Steve. I know you like analysing the negatives, and it's hard for you to enjoy a win, but maybe you should try it sometime.  You might even find that you like it.

If viney head knock r urns out to be an issue then ANB should replace him, otherwise no change needed.

 

No change unless forced by injuries !

The thing that hurt the crows this week was that they had to man up on Redpath. Assuming the Dogs will do the same, they want to make sure that we have to put one of our key backs on him instead of them following Stringer up the ground. Now I think that we will see Dunn in the emergencies ready to come in based on the Dogs selection. We have been a good backline in the past with Dunn, Garland and McD, the question is if we are brave enough to go back to it. 

1 hour ago, spirit of norm smith said:

No change unless forced by injuries !

That logic kept Oliver out against St.Kilda. 

We needed him. 

Salem over Michie is a given if fit. Its whether we make a further change.

3 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

The Dees can't win - had we rolled over and been beaten, people would been angry that we couldn't put a side away that had only 2 rotations on the bench.  Then, when we actually do it, and do it well, we need to be reminded that the only reason we did it was because of injuries, which gives little credit to the performance.  Some are never happy.

I don't see why it needs to be put into perspective, either.  No one here is claiming dynasties, premierships and the like after the win.  Everyone is simply enjoying something so rare - a huge win, and a win where we kicked 24 goals.

So enjoy it, Steve. I know you like analysing the negatives, and it's hard for you to enjoy a win, but maybe you should try it sometime.  You might even find that you like it.

You're crazy and you don't read posts properly.

I enjoyed the win as much as anyone.

 

 

4 hours ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Again, don't like raining on parades but I hope people realise part of the reason we were able to do so much scoreboard damage after half-time was because of the following:

Rosa and Sexton both played no part in the game after mid-way into the second quarter which hugely affected their rotations.

Prestia and Miller were also unable to play at 100 percent because of injuries. Miller was almost hobbling around with his ankle.

That's a significant chunk of their midfield and I know there'd be supporters using that as an excuse as to why we'd been so comprehensively beaten had we been at the receiving end. 

 

 

I recall a game vs GWS at the MCG at the end of 2014 where they had 18 fit men for the whole last quarter and beat us by 10 goals

Nothing is going to bring me off the high of last nights demolition.

 

10 hours ago, jacey said:

Roos erred when choosing the team v saints. Shouldn't make the same mistake.

Oliver got rested so wouldn't be surprised if hunt and Wagner got theirs. 

In. Salem. Prince

Out. Wagner. Hunt

 

Wagner and Hunt were SUPER and won't go this week. I agree Lamumba not a walk up start 

In Salem

Out Michie 

That might be it!

7 minutes ago, Petraccattack said:

 

I recall a game vs GWS at the MCG at the end of 2014 where they had 18 fit men for the whole last quarter and beat us by 10 goals

Nothing is going to bring me off the high of last nights demolition.

 

As I've said, the injuries contributed to the demolition job we did on them. Nobody can argue that. 

I never discounted the way we played in certain parts of the ground, especially in and around the contest all night. We were great. And which also obviously contributed to the result. Obviously. 

We clearly have a more talented, deeper and better functioning side who are confident which helps too. 

You're largely missing my point by referencing a loss to an injury-riddled side during a game that occurred two years ago.

There are many more variables you are conveniently discounting.

Edited May 8, 20169 yr by stevethemanjordan

Not sure Wagner is the right match up for Stringer/Redpath/resting ruck (Roughead or Campbell) if the Dogs have the 3 marking options. 

Possibly Jetta goes to Stringer but I think Stringer will be too quick for him in space. So it might be Garland to Stringer and then we'll have to consider bringing in some more height to the back half. Which likely means Lumumba to play on Redpath. 

Michie wasn't too bad but has to go. Lumumba and/or Salem back in. 

If it's decided that both of those guys should come back in then I don't know what the right answer to fitting them in will be.

I'll play devils advocate and say that on the form he was showing, Salem wouldn't be an automatic in. He was nothing short of awful against the Saints prior to his injury, and I say that as a fan.

He may slot straight back in but I thought Michie grew into the game and would be stiff to make way after getting just one opportunity.

22 hours ago, dl4e said:

Salem in. I would drop Bugg.

We don't need lamumba and his mistakes. The above is probably all. Garland ?

Is this the same Bugg who is always in the top three or four in the Disposals category  ?   Maybe he should consider going blonde .

If Viney is out, we might see Trengove in. By all accounts his form has been pretty good. 

Once upon a time the club could hardly field a full AFL std team and when injuries accumulated we were stuffed ( even more )

2016 ... Can't fit everyone in

It's got better ...just a bit 

3 minutes ago, Hampton 22 said:

If Viney is out, we might see Trengove in. By all accounts his form has been pretty good. 

If Viney is out then SURELY ANB gets his chance. He hasn't just bashed the door down. He's bashed it down, danced on it, then set it on fire and smeared the ashes in Roosy's face.

1 hour ago, stevethemanjordan said:

You're crazy and you don't read posts properly.

I enjoyed the win as much as anyone.

 

 

Really?  Could have fooled me.

Seriously, why would one select H?    Hunt and Wagner, and maybe a returning Salem offer far more and don't run around like headless chooks.

Garland is a worry - for a senior player panics, or just does't think far too often but who would replace him?  Frost?

On the Casey thread I asked those who saw both games who they think should be in or out, if indeed any changes are needed.

1 hour ago, Hampton 22 said:

If Viney is out, we might see Trengove in. By all accounts his form has been pretty good. 

Was Viney concussed, or hit more high on the chest wall?