Changes vs Freo

[P-man 13,366]

I hope in vain that we bring in an experienced defender in to replace O Mac and provide a little bit more surety back there but I know it isn't going to happen. However Garlo for O Mac would be my preference.

Not withstanding the return of his crunching tackles, Vanders is providing very little outside of that. He doesn't look like he belongs at the level at present. He'd be the one to make way for Grimes but who knows when or if he'll get the call up he's earned.

I'm a Bugg fan, but if one poor game sees you out of the side, I wouldn't mind Neal-Bullen being given another opportunity at his expense.

Dawes had a mare. He couldn't possibly be any worse next week. I'm not sure a trip to Darwin on a six day break is the best way to introduce Hulett. Spencer isn't a bad call. We looked a bit all at sea when Gawn went out of the ruck contest. On gut feel I'd give Dawes one more week to make amends, but I wouldn't mind seeing the return of Spencer and Gawn together out of curiosity as much as anything.

Out: O Mac, Vanders, Bugg

In: Garland, Grimes, Neal-Bullen

[samcantstandya 1,031]

2 minutes ago, P-man said:

I hope in vain that we bring in an experienced defender in to replace O Mac and provide a little bit more surety back there but I know it isn't going to happen. However Garlo for O Mac would be my preference.

Not withstanding the return of his crunching tackles, Vanders is providing very little outside of that. He doesn't look like he belongs at the level at present. He'd be the one to make way for Grimes but who knows when or if he'll get the call up he's earned.

I'm a Bugg fan, but if one poor game sees you out of the side, I wouldn't mind Neal-Bullen being given another opportunity at his expense.

Dawes had a mare. He couldn't possibly be any worse next week. I'm not sure a trip to Darwin on a six day break is the best way to introduce Hulett. Spencer isn't a bad call. We looked a bit all at sea when Gawn went out of the ruck contest. On gut feel I'd give Dawes one more week to make amends, but I wouldn't mind seeing the return of Spencer and Gawn together out of curiosity as much as anything.

Out: O Mac, Vanders, Bugg

In: Garland, Grimes, Neal-Bullen

Drop Dawes

[Diamond_Jim 12,367]

1 hour ago, drdrake said:

I reckon Dawes for Spencer.  Gawn is really starting to look done and I don't blame him he has rucked over 90% in every game we have played.  Just play on really deep, they couldn't be any worse than brick hands

Time perhaps for an experiment along these lines........ the season is over (it has been for a few weeks) and my only interest is in improving the mix.

The problem with Spencer is that I doubt he is a long term solution (eg 1.5 goals per game etc) but if ever he is going to get a chance to show his wares this is the time. The big bonus is that it should give us ruck dominance and thus compliment our game plan.

[samcantstandya 1,031]

2 hours ago, Nasher said:

Honestly I think it'll be a no-change, pending injuries. The players I see in our side that could be improved upon are: Dawes, one of Frost or OMac, Bugg and possibly vandenBerg or Matt Jones.  

Dawes has never been dropped in his whole time at the MFC, so I assume the status quo will be maintained there.  Hulett may be progressing, but I don't see an urgency in bringing him until we're sure he's ready.    

We might leave out OMac (Frost is the better of the two IMO) - for who though - Garland?  I'm not against it but I don't see it as a huge improvement.

I thought Vanders stepped up in the second half when he was put on the ball; didn't get too many damaging possessions but it at least got him tackling again.  We persist, I think.  Matt Jones besides one pretty ordinary fumble was passable.

The players I see out of the side who may be considered are Lumumba, Trengove, Brayshaw, Oliver, Garland, Michie, Hulett, Grimes and Neal-Bullen.  Besides Brayshaw and Oliver, I don't see much opportunity to improve our side given the players in question and the players available to replace them. I expect the club to be as conservative as practicable with Brayshaw given the horror year he's had, and I can't see the point of playing selection ping-pong with Oliver; let him settle one way or the other.

Vanders needs an extended break in the magoos.U don't keep someone in the side who only saving grace is that he tackles.

[old55 22,856]

Bugg has played some reasonable football this year but is a limited player and wasn't good yesterday.  Trengove or Grimes for him.

[picket fence 16,704]

Inns Grimes, Either Hullett Or Weeds , Clarry Choo Choo

Outs Dawes, O Mac, Vanderberg or Kennedy

[dazzledavey36 52,912]

30 minutes ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

After a short moment of pondering, I was going to nominate AVB as an out however I believe what is currently letting us down is our tackling. Vanders had 8 which I believe was equal our second best. 

Oliver in.

Stretch out. 

Why Stretch? He along with Hunt were the positives. They provide run and speed which we will need against the likes of Walters Pearce and Ballentyne.

 

[rjay 24,616]

1 hour ago, Undeeterred said:

Some of these suggested changes are nuts.

Trengove is not a like for like for Dawes and no way that change gets made.

Harmes/Kennedy/Kent all played really good games yesterday. 

Harmes was down back for a good part of the day and actually looked really good.

Kent attacked the ball and provided run. He also played the role of storming off the back of the square and collecting a hand off on the way through and, when it worked, it looked really dangerous.

Kennedy cracked in all day and was good. A couple of missed shots are no reason to drop him.

I'd be surprised if there were many changes, really. Nobody stands out in the VFL, other than Grimes, and it will only be a question of whether they want to get in any of Brayshaw, Oliver or Lumumba. I doubt they will.

No he's not, he can actually play...

[Fat Tony 5,090]

Garland for O Mac, who just doesn't have the intensity required at present.

Brayshaw for Dawes. Dawes looks finished IMO and we would be better off with another runner, particularly in Darwin give the dew.

I'd like to see Grimes come in, but there isn't a spot.

[Undeeterred 3,045]

6 minutes ago, rjay said:

No he's not, he can actually play...

And?

My point stands.

[rjay 24,616]

9 minutes ago, Undeeterred said:

And?

My point stands.

No it doesn't at all...if somethings not working you have to make changes.

Your point stands if you think we still have positional football.

Good coaches think outside the box. For example last year the dogs didn't use a ruckman because they thought Minson was no longer up to the level, this year Port have done the same thing.

If we don't have a big tall useful key forward then look at what other options we might have. Again the dogs have used Stringer and Dixon as there key forwards...Redpath is the tall.

We have Hogan and Watts, maybe time to run some more mobile players to cover the rest.

[Soidee 1,496]

Matt Jones and Dawes out.  

[dazzledavey36 52,912]

6 minutes ago, rjay said:

No it doesn't at all...if somethings not working you have to make changes.

Your point stands if you think we still have positional football.

Good coaches think outside the box. For example last year the dogs didn't use a ruckman because they thought Minson was no longer up to the level, this year Port have done the same thing.

If we don't have a big tall useful key forward then look at what other options we might have. Again the dogs have used Stringer and Dixon as there key forwards...Redpath is the tall.

We have Hogan and Watts, maybe time to run some more mobile players to cover the rest.

Not a bad idea at all mate. 

 

[Soidee 1,496]

Why do some think Grimes will help this side progress ? He is a terrific young fella, however he is depth only and WILL NOT get any better. 

Bringing Grimes into the team will not help us win more games.  Get real.

[John Dee 445]

Grimes in, Ol' Concrete Hands out.

[Undeeterred 3,045]

34 minutes ago, rjay said:

No it doesn't at all...if somethings not working you have to make changes.

Your point stands if you think we still have positional football.

Good coaches think outside the box. For example last year the dogs didn't use a ruckman because they thought Minson was no longer up to the level, this year Port have done the same thing.

If we don't have a big tall useful key forward then look at what other options we might have. Again the dogs have used Stringer and Dixon as there key forwards...Redpath is the tall.

We have Hogan and Watts, maybe time to run some more mobile players to cover the rest.

Sorry, but if you saw yesterday's game live, you'd realise that the absolute last thing we need is even fewer targets in the forward line to kick to.

Now, we might need better, but we don't need fewer.

We have Kennedy, Harmes, Kent, van den Berg and Garlett running around crumbing in the forward line. Trengove doesn't add a thing to that mix.

[old dee 23,505]

1 hour ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Why Stretch? He along with Hunt were the positives. They provide run and speed which we will need against the likes of Walters Pearce and Ballentyne.

 

Sorry to disagree dd but I thought he was average at best and IMO poor.

He is too small and holds onto the ball for  too long.

He seems to run around with the ball for so long that he loses where his team mates are and inevitably  gets caught with the ball.

I do not see him making it.

 

[watchtheeyes 1,404]

Gee I reckon everyone is being a bit harsh on Vanders, people are talking as if he ONLY tackled. He still picked up 17 touches with 7 contested.

When we were getting steamrolled in the 3rd he was the only one showing any energy. His tackling around the ball highlighted by impactful 2nd efforts really stood out for me. There's no way I'd be dropping him.

Outs: Dawes (was freaking hopeless), Omac

Ins: Garland/Grimes (for Omac), and I don't quite know for Dawes yet - just don't want him there. For a 'leader' he was extremely disapppointing.

Reckon you might also see Clarry and/or Brayshaw. Have a feeling they left Clarry out of that game specifically to keep him fresh for Freo.

 

Worth also pointing out that I thought Vince was pretty disappointing yesterday as well.

[Steve13 457]

I like the idea of Spencer in for Dawes. I understand that Dawes played on one of the outstanding defenders in Tahlia but yesterday he offered very little, he was not even able to break even on most occasions. Spencer and Gawn 50-50  ruck/forward would provide headaches for opposition. We have seen how dangerous Max can be forward and Spencer has been hitting the scoreboard semi regularly at VFL level.

[watchtheeyes 1,404]

Can't agree with you there. His 'running around' was more trying to shake off defenders after collecting the ball under pressure, he also gets up and down the ground really nicely.

I can definitely see him making it.

EDIT: Sorry, meant to quote old dee on that one.

Edited July 4, 2016 by watchtheeyes

[SaberFang 7,151]

If we seriously go into yet another short break match with no changes, I seriously give up. How many times this year has the club wheeled out Roos to admit selection mistakes as the reason for lethargic performances?

It would be really nice to win one match this year a) against a team Roos has never defeated at the MFC, b) against a team we didn't already defeat last year and c) after a <6 break.

Breaking the godawful NT record would be nice, too.

[ArtificialWisdom 4,044]

3 minutes ago, old dee said:

Sorry to disagree dd but I thought he was average at best and IMO poor.

He is too small and holds onto the ball for  too long.

He seems to run around with the ball for so long that he loses where his team mates are and inevitably  gets caught with the ball.

I do not see him making it.

 

when?? the time he was tackled before even gathering it and pinned for holding it (cheers Razor). Or all the 4 or 5 times he held it for a few extra seconds using his speed and agility to avoid tacklers and then shot out either a handball or a kick. He was one of the best and has huge upside. He and hunt are the only 2 with genuine run and carry. Unless they wish to rest them i dont want to see them out of the side ay time soon.

[DemonLad5 1,642]

Walker and Jenkins combined for 4 or 5 grappling, 1 on 1 marks which turned into goals yesterday. Freo don't have any forwards who will be doing that. They will persist with O.Mac and Frost. 

No way we go to Darwin unchanged

IN: Hulett, Grimes

OUT: Dawes, Kent (please)

[old dee 23,505]

Just now, ArtificialWisdom said:

when?? the time he was tackled before even gathering it and pinned for holding it (cheers Razor). Or all the 4 or 5 times he held it for a few extra seconds using his speed and agility to avoid tacklers and then shot out either a handball or a kick. He was one of the best and has huge upside. He and hunt are the only 2 with genuine run and carry. Unless they wish to rest them i dont want to see them out of the side ay time soon.

Then we are going to disagree AW

[Samael 560]

3 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

In the next 3 weeks we have trips to NT and WA both after 6 day breaks so need to pick 'fresh' players (which we didn't do for the Alice game under similar circumstances). 

In: Wagner (if fit will be fresh), Trengove (who didn't play yesterday should be fresh), Brayshaw, Oliver (statistics aside, the only 2 that looked sharp at Casey yesterday).

Out: Vand (still looks troubled by injury), Dawes (must go), and 2 of Harmes/Kennedy/Kent.  Unfortunately, it may be M Jones who makes way.

Proviso:  Casey have another bye next week which may affect selections as to who needs continuity eg we may see Lumumba in to get match fitness (yes I know it should happen at Casey but circumstances may not always allow that.  Not saying H will get selected, just saying the Casey bye may affect selections).

He was horrendous yesterday.