3 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

Possibly, but I'd like to back in that Gawn has learned from both experiences.  I'm just not sold on Gawn playing forward - I like it when he drifts down there for the odd goal, which he did really well last year, but I'm not a fan of him as a stay at home forward while Spencer runs around in the ruck.

Proof will be in the pudding, though, and I'd be happy to be wrong.  But I just don't see it happening.

Not sure if saints used third man up tactic last year to nullify Gawn. If this is the case then they will have to alter their strategy for round 1.

1 hour ago, hardtack said:

I'd like Spencer to be played off the bench when and if Hickey is getting the better of Max.  I could see Spencer's aggression phasing Hickey, allowing Max to come back in and take advantage.

Imagine telling the players spencer is going to be wasting one their rotations for the chance that max will get beaten. Time to move beyond the assumption that players are getting beaten, if they are picked we are backing them in to play well each week. Max included.

Fact of the matter is Max is our biggest asset given the new 3rd man up restrictions. Why on earth would we take him out of the middle for any more than a few minutes to rest? Sure he might be protected a little from injury but at what cost? a slow top heavy forwardline with 2 big blokes roatating though who cant play as forwards. If we had a severe lack of tall forward options then sure play them. But now we are picking between natural tall forwards and an unathletic ruckman. Spencil for all his hard work and efforts should not be in this conversation. I for 1 think spencer could be our most valuable 23rd man, but unfortunatly for him he is nothing more than a backup.

It's hard to tell which if any are the red herrings in Goodwin's press conferences.

I think he's opting for speed over everything, so at least against St Kilda, Trengove, Jetta and Tyson wont get a look in (maybe Tyson back for Round 2).

Again on the speed theme Spencer shouldn't get a gig unless they play 2 rucks, which the Saints have said all along, they wont. I also cant see them being scared enough of Hickey to want a tag team of Spencer and Gawn.

Garlett in because his injury was short term relative to Tyson and Kent (plus others).

I expect to see Lewis in the middle for half the game or more, but have chucked him up the back for now.

I cant really see underdone players coming in. An outside chance might be Pederson for versatility back, forward and ruck but I don't think so.

I'm unsure about Watts but the alternatives in Spencer and Pedo slots him in. As mentioned before Pedo as an outside chance for Watts (out of favour) or Weid (not quite ready but should be good enough to cancel out any McCartin in impact)

I think ANB is keeping Kent's seat warm.

The team (version 2 or 3):

Hunt O Mac Vince

Lewis T Mac Melksham

Salem Jones Stretch

Petracca Hogan Brayshaw

Harmes Watts Garlett

Gawn Viney Oliver

I/C J Smith, Bugg, ANB and Weid

 

36 minutes ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

Why on earth would we take him out of the middle for any more than a few minutes to rest? Sure he might be protected a little from injury but at what cost? 

If we had two Gawns, one would be taking 6 marks a game in the goal square.  Pity Spencer is no Gawn in the ruck.

2 hours ago, rjay said:

 

Earlier in their careers Gawn & Spencer played a bit of footy together at Casey. Gawn was preferred forward and Spencer in the ruck...the only reason I could see at the time was that Gawn was a marginally better forward than Spencer, and that wasn't saying much.

I always thought at the time they needed to play Gawn more in the ruck because even then he was superior to Spencer.

It was only when big Max had his opportunity to play as the number one ruckman that he blossomed.

Now if we want to see Max regress the move to play Spencer in the ruck and Max forward will achieve this.

Dont flirt with form...

Max must play as the number one man and spend a significant amount of time on ball and as 'Wise' says he's better off drifting forward rather than being stationed there.

In my team Spencer wouldn't get a game but unfortunately going by the JLT games it looks like Goodwin is heading down that path.

Would be like Stef Martin all over again. He was best when Jamar was out injured and had a good run as top dog rucking solo. When Jamar came back we tried to play both as ruck / fwds and it patently didn't work.

I think the ruck/fwd partnership works best when one is a ruck foremost and rucks 70%+ game time and the other is a capable, ~200cm tall forward (e.g. Tippett or Rory Lobb) who commands a spot in the forward line in his own right but can meaningfully relief ruck for up to 30% of game time due to size and athleticism.

Playing two rucks and jawboning one of them into a forward role rarely works - you end up just losing a forward.

1 hour ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

Imagine telling the players spencer is going to be wasting one their rotations for the chance that max will get beaten. Time to move beyond the assumption that players are getting beaten, if they are picked we are backing them in to play well each week. Max included.

Fact of the matter is Max is our biggest asset given the new 3rd man up restrictions. Why on earth would we take him out of the middle for any more than a few minutes to rest? Sure he might be protected a little from injury but at what cost? a slow top heavy forwardline with 2 big blokes roatating though who cant play as forwards. If we had a severe lack of tall forward options then sure play them. But now we are picking between natural tall forwards and an unathletic ruckman. Spencil for all his hard work and efforts should not be in this conversation. I for 1 think spencer could be our most valuable 23rd man, but unfortunatly for him he is nothing more than a backup.

I agree for the most part AF, but Hickey has been the only ruckman to nullify Gawn (something that the new third man up rule will have no effect on) to the point where it cost us dearly.  After watching Spencer in the JLT games, I believe he has the aggression (in my opinion) to quieten Hickey down.  I will not be in the least bit surprised to see Spencer named in the 22... and if I'm wrong, well... I'm wrong

Oh, and I haven't suggested that they rotate in the forwards... Spencer can come off the bench, Max move to the forwards for a spell and one of the forwards take a break. It's patently obvious that like most on here, I'm no great tactician, but I see no reason that it couldn't work.

Edited March 22, 20178 yr by hardtack

38 minutes ago, steve_f said:

If we had two Gawns, one would be taking 6 marks a game in the goal square.  Pity Spencer is no Gawn in the ruck.

I cant agree with that. Gawn's marks in the forwardline almost always come from him floating forward either alone or with a ruckman (or sometimes an unlucky midfielder) following him. If you play him as a forward he will be up against real key defenders who while maybe giving up some size will be much better at nullifying him and kill him on the rebound. 

2 hours ago, hardtack said:

I agree for the most part AF, but Hickey has been the only ruckman to nullify Gawn (something that the new third man up rule will have no effect on) to the point where it cost us dearly.  After watching Spencer in the JLT games, I believe he has the aggression (in my opinion) to quieten Hickey down.  I will not be in the least bit surprised to see Spencer named in the 22... and if I'm wrong, well... I'm wrong

Oh, and I haven't suggested that they rotate in the forwards... Spencer can come off the bench, Max move to the forwards for a spell and one of the forwards take a break. It's patently obvious that like most on here, I'm no great tactician, but I see no reason that it couldn't work.

It did work well in 2015 down at Geelong.

7 hours ago, mauriesy said:

There is no such thing as "season defining" in Round 1.

You're right. The wrong turn of words on my part. However a loss in this game could (i stress could) mean the diffetence between making the 8 or not. How about season shaping

Not sure if mentioned before but Round 1 is exactly the 10th anniversary of the begining of the great misery. Lost the first 9 games of the season and in the wilderness ever since. Beaten by the saints 93-62 in Round 1 2007. I hope the players are aware of this and play accordingly. 

Edited March 22, 20178 yr by america de cali

33 minutes ago, america de cali said:

Not sure if mentioned before but Round 1 is exactly the 10th anniversary of the begining of the great misery. Lost the first 9 games of the season and in the wilderness ever since. Beaten by the saints 93-62 in Round 1 2007. I hope the players are aware of this and play accordingly. 

Remember that game we were hyped after 2006 and Brock McLean was going to go to new levels after his performance in the final, then he busted his foot right in front of me and that was that all over 

8 hours ago, BrisbaneDemon said:

Gawn and Jesse don't work well as a forward line, they both fly for everything and a lot of times last year got in each others way.

Hopefully they've spent the pre season learning complementary leading patterns and the art of subtle blocking and protection when flying for the same ball.

Who's going to be the first poster to take the completely guessed season eve Footy Show squads seriously ?

Garry Lyon can get stuffed. He's done this club no favours and I'm sick of the bloke.

Tyson is best 22. Every day of the week.

 

3 minutes ago, Ron Burgundy said:

Garry Lyon can get stuffed. He's done this club no favours and I'm sick of the bloke.

Tyson is best 22. Every day of the week.

 

Sorry but what does Garry Lyon got to do with round 1??

HS "experts" have picked Saints x 25 and Dees x 2.

I didn't include Turnbull or KoD.

Completely understandable.

I'm backing Gawn to win the ruck duel, he's a competitive beast. 

Surprised anyone reads the Hun anymore, least of all pays it any attention.

14 minutes ago, ProDee said:

Thirdly, it's better than the Fairfax rag that I suspect would be the Bible of some round here.

 

Any actual football examples? Or just your usual political bias popping up where it's not wanted?

21 hours ago, puntkick said:

I hope that we are sending someone with some balls down to Adelehad Stadium to inspect the surface before we commit to playing there Saturday and risking our players on the new surface.

Meanwhile Richmond,( Carlton ) Collingwood, Hawthorn,(Essendon ) get to play on their home ground round 1 !

If there's one thing MFC supporters should not be complaining about, it's Round 1 fixtures.

We haven't been interstate in Round 1 since 1998, a ridiculously long time. And of those 19 consecutive Melbourne-based Round 1 games, this is only the 3rd at Etihad.

We have been shafted in many ways over the years, but not in this area. 

11 hours ago, rjay said:

 

Earlier in their careers Gawn & Spencer played a bit of footy together at Casey. Gawn was preferred forward and Spencer in the ruck...the only reason I could see at the time was that Gawn was a marginally better forward than Spencer, and that wasn't saying much.

I always thought at the time they needed to play Gawn more in the ruck because even then he was superior to Spencer.

It was only when big Max had his opportunity to play as the number one ruckman that he blossomed.

Now if we want to see Max regress the move to play Spencer in the ruck and Max forward will achieve this.

Dont flirt with form...

Max must play as the number one man and spend a significant amount of time on ball and as 'Wise' says he's better off drifting forward rather than being stationed there.

In my team Spencer wouldn't get a game but unfortunately going by the JLT games it looks like Goodwin is heading down that path.

I think this is actually Goodwin applying his football philosophy. Every Melbourne player shoulder be adaptable and able to play multiple positions for the team. Flexibility is the key and every player, from Hogan to Gawn, needs to exemplify this. Gawn should be able to play ruck and take marks playing as a forward, instead of only in situations where he floats forward during spells in the ruck. 

To be unpredictable is a weapon to Goodwin's game. That's my reading of it anyway.

That said, I'm not saying I don't necessarily agree with the flirting with form comments.

13 hours ago, ProDee said:

I think smashed twice is an exaggeration. 

In the first match their stats were virtually identical.  13 disposals each, Gawn 3 marks to Hickey's one and 38 hitouts to 36, also in Gawn's favour.

I'm happy to acknowledge Gawn was nullified and perhaps even shaded due to Hickey's more telling disposals, but I wouldn't agree that a bloke that had no more disposals, less marks and less hitouts "smashed" the other guy. 

Hickey clearly won in the second game even though he once again had less hitouts. 

Fair enough. Smashed is hyperbole. He was certainly beaten and I think was a key reason why we were beaten. Not the main reason which was our poor defense allowing the Aints runners to completely annihilate us.

If we run the Spencil then the Aints might have a real problem countering that. 

From the Saintsational site: picture of Etihad surface as of 21st March !

That's sawdust to mop up all the vomit after Adele. Only logical.

Shitzenhuisen friggen ground, and I also agree Gary Lyon can get stuffed, has done nothing at all for this club sans playing career, which I might add was only reasonably good! Would he be in our best 10 players of all time?? Not in mine!