14 minutes ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

I'd seriously consider giving OMac a run but other than that i agree. 

Yeah he'd be close too, I just leaned towards Dunn after his game for Casey.

 

9 minutes ago, stuie said:

I'd have the back 6 as TMac, Dunn, Salem, Vince (rotating with Bugg), Wagner, Hunt.

 

That looks very similar to the backline that got smacked against the aints.

Just now, Barney Rubble said:

That looks very similar to the backline that got smacked against the aints.

Back 6 against the Saints was TMac, Dunn, Lumumba, Jetta, Bugg, Salem.

However....

We are not playing the Saints this week.

We are not playing at Etihad this week.

All our players were down that week.

It was a different game to this one.

But hey, Gawn rucked that week too, maybe we should drop him as well?

Also, it's a different look to the back 6 that got smacked against the Dogs....

 

7 minutes ago, Barney Rubble said:

That looks very similar to the backline that got smacked against the aints.

That's what you took out of the Saints game.

The Saints worked harder, spread harder, ran harder  - if you don't pressure the ball carrier coming into the opposition forward line our backs will get smacked. ( most teams backs will get smacked)

I would never drop Gawny, but he does need a bit of assistance.

Game 1 against Mummy he didn't dominate and we fell in.

Game 2 dominated but midfielders were down.

Game 3. Killed Goldy in the centre but Goldy made up for it with 5 goals.

Game 4. Totally dominated won easily

Game 5 Totally dominated won easil

Game 6 Was beaten by Hickey lost

Game 7 Totally Dominated won easily

Game 8 Beaten by Campbell struggled all day.

2 hours ago, nutbean said:

That's what you took out of the Saints game.

The Saints worked harder, spread harder, ran harder  - if you don't pressure the ball carrier coming into the opposition forward line our backs will get smacked. ( most teams backs will get smacked)

No nut bean.

That wasn't the only thing I took out of it.

What I took out of that game was we are one dimensional in the midfield.

We rely too much on Maxy dominating. If Maxy is having a down day we don't have a plan B to counteract the superior midfield.

It then puts pressure on the backline which also doesn't have a plan B.

If max went down in a screaming heap, what would the club do then.?

 Could see some huge beltings.

Out: Jetta (suspended), Harmes (omitted)

In: Kent, Trengove

Harmes has played 2 poor games in 3.  It won't do him any harm going back to Casey for a week or two.

1 minute ago, ProDee said:

Out: Jetta (suspended), Harmes (omitted)

In: Kent, Trengove

Harmes has played 2 poor games in 3.  It won't do him any harm going back to Casey for a week or two.

Agree they might drop Harmes and also that Kent comes back in (we missed his aggression and pressure in the forward half last week i thought). 

But surely ANB comes in after his run of great games at Casey.

I thought OMac might come in for Garland, but perhaps Trengove comes in instead (though that would leave us a tall short down back)

Outs: Garland - Jetta - Hunt

Ins: ANB - Kent - Dunn

-----

FB: Salem - Dunn - Wagner

HB: Michie - McDonald - Vince

C: Harmes - N.Jones - ANB

HF: Kent - Pedo - Watts

FF: Garlett - Hogan - Kennedy

R: Gawn - Tyson - Viney

I: Trac - Oliver - Bugg - Stretch

5 minutes ago, binman said:

Agree they might drop Harmes and also that Kent comes back in (we missed his aggression and pressure in the forward half last week i thought). 

But surely ANB comes in after his run of great games at Casey.

I thought OMac might come in for Garland, but perhaps Trengove comes in instead (though that would leave us a tall short down back)

Sounds funny but makes sense. 

 

I'm spending far too much time on here!

2 minutes ago, ManDee said:

Sounds funny but makes sense. 

 

I'm spending far too much time on here!

Or is that a short tall...

11 minutes ago, binman said:

But surely ANB comes in after his run of great games at Casey.

That seems to be the latest groupthink round here.

If he plays he plays, but despite racking up possessions I'm not yet convinced Neal-Bullen uses it well enough to be an auto recall whenever a spot opens up,

21 hours ago, stuie said:

Back 6 against the Saints was TMac, Dunn, Lumumba, Jetta, Bugg, Salem.

 

Rubbish - Wagner and Hunt played back against the Saints and Salem went off concussed.

3 minutes ago, ProDee said:

That seems to be the latest groupthink round here.

If he plays he plays, but despite racking up possessions I'm not yet convinced Neal-Bullen uses it well enough to be an auto recall whenever a spot opens up,

You might be right, but Plapp has been effusive in his praise for ANB in the last 3 weeks and Roos has consistently emphasised the need for those in the twos to put blocks of good games together to be considered for senior selection and the importance of rewarding such form.

 

11 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

Rubbish - Wagner and Hunt played back against the Saints and Salem went off concussed.

Ugh. That was the listed starting back 6. That's all.

 

Wish I could be at the game to see Trenners run out on Sunday.

21 hours ago, Barney Rubble said:

No nut bean.

That wasn't the only thing I took out of it.

What I took out of that game was we are one dimensional in the midfield.

We rely too much on Maxy dominating. If Maxy is having a down day we don't have a plan B to counteract the superior midfield.

It then puts pressure on the backline which also doesn't have a plan B.

If max went down in a screaming heap, what would the club do then.?

 Could see some huge beltings.

Max had his worst game of the year on Sunday.

He was ineffectual - although we did win the taps 50/42.

We were just down down in clearances 39/35 but won centre clearances 12/11 and lost stoppages 28/23 - hardly a belting.

Our midfield was not one dimensional on Sunday - what is was ( compared to the Bullies) is sloppy. The bulldogs were much cleaner than us - we fumbled way more than they did putting pressure on ourselves. Also throws or no throws, the bulldogs mids just disposed better than we did.

Our midfield went up against the number one clearance team in the comp and was not pulverised although Maxy was very ordinary.

If Maxy goes down in screaming heap we replace him with someone who is nowhere as good as he is and that will probably mean that our midfield output will diminish  - that is nothing to do with not having a plan B - that is recognition that we don't have a ruckman kicking around doing nothing that is anywhere near as good as Gawn. (for the record - West Coasts mids would lose supply if NicNat went down Lycett had to ruck full time and the Swans weren't as potent as the year before when they lost buddy )

I doubt it'll happen but I'd like to see four changes:

Ins: Dunn, Trengove, Kent, ANB

Outs: Garland, Harmes, Jetta, Michie

 

 

4 hours ago, ProDee said:

That seems to be the latest groupthink round here.

If he plays he plays, but despite racking up possessions I'm not yet convinced Neal-Bullen uses it well enough to be an auto recall whenever a spot opens up,

Have you seen ANB play this year for Casey? Are you basing this on actual or where you think he is as a player? I have seen Casey v Pies and Essendon this year. Not saying Trengoves form is not promising but if Trenners gets a game ahead of ANB then the ethos of honouring form for promotion is not what this would appear to be. 

I'm not sure Kent should be a walk up start even if he's right to go.

His form line has been very up and down this year and he's not yet a proven player.

To me he doesn't deserve to be an automatic inclusion.

28 minutes ago, rjay said:

I'm not sure Kent should be a walk up start even if he's right to go.

His form line has been very up and down this year and he's not yet a proven player.

To me he doesn't deserve to be an automatic inclusion.

You're kidding right? He has been down in 2 losses we have had, and was sorely missed on Sunday. Frontal pressure and his ability to find space make him very much an automatic inclusion.

Salem and jetta out. 

Omac, anb, Newton, grimes and Kent in

Roos is quoted on MFC website that ANB will be in starting 22 and probably O-Mac. With Garland in the side if O-Mac plays I feel we will be going in too tall again.

1 minute ago, big_red_fire_engine said:

Roos is quoted on MFC website that ANB will be in starting 22 and probably O-Mac. 

O-Mac in Garland out?

5 hours ago, binman said:

Agree they might drop Harmes and also that Kent comes back in (we missed his aggression and pressure in the forward half last week i thought). 

But surely ANB comes in after his run of great games at Casey.

I thought OMac might come in for Garland, but perhaps Trengove comes in instead (though that would leave us a tall short down back)

I wasn't far away (i missed Salem going out):

“With Alex Neal-Bullen’s [recent] performance [in the VFL], he’ll come in the side. He’s been terrific in the seconds and played some terrific footy, which is good,” Roos told Melbourne TV.

“Kenty, we think will get through training for us tomorrow (Friday) and he’s important player for us.

“[We’ll] probably [bring in] Oscar McDonald as a defender, [who] will be coming in for Nev Jetta.

Roos must have bought into the DL groupthink