Changes v Richmond R5

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

2 hours ago, The heart beats true said:

This week:

Hogan for Weid. Thats it.

BECAUSE then you've got Jordy and Hibberd ready the following week, and Brayshaw hopefully in touch and knocking down the door. He's too good for the 2's.

I also think our midfield need to be held accountable for that loss and be given a chance to atone. They were nowhere near it in the 3rd and they owe us a 4 quarter effort.

Still not convinced about Hannan, but if Hibberd and Lewis go back, Vince and Salem can go to the wings and everyone rolls forward one spot pushing Hannan and Melksham out.

I still wish we had another forward target. Watts and Hogan are good, but that 3rd versatile forward option is what we lack. I think the long term need for that and the Hogan suspension is all thats kept Weid and Hannan in.

Thumbs up on the pushing up of Vince/Salem although Vince is a perpetual big bomb into forward 50 player. Not sure you can be just that in today's game and survive/help the team win more often. IF we get Gus right and into some decent form and Mr Vince doesnt lift/change his disposal methods, i would bring GUs in as a direct replacement but only in that wing (outside) role pushing forward.

Tim Smith and Pedders are the only serious alternatives as the 3rd tall at this point.

- Smith/Pedders (whoever performs better at Casey)....straight in for Hannan.

- Hogan for Weeds

- Omac/Hibberd (whoever performs better at Casey) for 'no contested ball/turnover king/no run off HB' Milkshake.

Edited April 16, 2017 by Rusty Nails

[beelzebub 23,378]

Id disagree that Bernie will always long bomb in. With good presenting he'll pick the eyes out ...if there.

Bit of a rabble currently

[Demon Jack 6,911]

Out: Weideman, Hannan

In: Hogan, Hibberd (hopefully he's fit)

 

[Diamond_Jim 12,591]

2 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

A major reason we lost was the lack of a marking target up forward. They successfully flooded our forward 50 so we found it extremely difficult to hit up a leading target, especially considering our transition from defense was slow and they ran hard both ways. This led to us either bombing long to the top of the square where we had no marking targets or handballing/chip kicking backwards to wing/half back until someone did a hurried long kick forward for a shallow I50 entry again with no big marking targets.

They played the game on their terms to perfection bottling us up and forcing us to bomb inside 50 then backing themselves in to win the ground ball and push forward in waves so they had players running free towards goal. Had we had a Hogan or Gawn (Spencer did ok when he was up there) we would've been able to take greater advantage of our forward 50 entries. Weideman was completely ineffectual and dropping Smith left us too short up there especially when Watts went into the ruck.

An excellent summation. All I would add is that we also seemed to have more crucial turnovers than they which perhaps reflected our over use of the ball. Cannot remember too many uncontested marks in the MFC forward 50 that would reflect quick ball movement whereas I can easily think of several to Fremantle.

[Diamond_Jim 12,591]

9 minutes ago, Demon Jack said:

Out: Weideman, Hannan

In: Hogan, Hibberd (hopefully he's fit)

 

that sounds about right

are we going to tag Martin and if so with whom?

[Gator 17,361]

1 hour ago, No10 said:

 

Watts is the best at F50 entry.  Not the only.

You said "one of the most important" and "one of the main reasons we lost"

I agree.  But do you expect Harmes, ANB etc to suddenly become elite at one of the most important skills?

Or in absence of Hogan, should we have kept Tim Smith to bust open packs, rather than Watts?

We had 13 marks inside 50 to Freo's 10, so clearly we have players that can hit a target inside 50, however, we had plenty of opportunities that went begging.

Lewis, Salem, Watts, Oliver, Vince and Jones can all hit targets inside 50.  It was more our system that let us down.  We were too slow getting it in forward of centre and continually overused the footy.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,222]

7 minutes ago, ProDee said:

We had 13 marks inside 50 to Freo's 10, so clearly we have players that can hit a target inside 50, however, we had plenty of opportunities that went begging.

Lewis, Salem, Watts, Oliver, Vince and Jones can all hit targets inside 50.  It was more our system that let us down.  We were too slow getting it in forward of centre and continually overused the footy.

We had a couple of crucial misses again yesterday, the two obvious ones that spring to mind are Viney after the 100m penalty and Weideman in the last. I'm sure there was a couple more though, Harmes missed a relatively easy one in the 3rd too and that one we stuffed up when Kent couldn't get onto his left and Watts hacked at it when it had already bounced through. Thems the breaks.

[What 18,810]

27 and sunny in Brisbane today.  Tough conditions for the Tigers, but our game isnt until Monday so wont matter too much probably.

[TeamPlayedFine39 8,508]

All eyes on the VFL tomorrow. Looking for strong performances from:

Kennedy (Hannan on the HFF is yet to convince)

Hibberd (Worsfold has said his returning players have 'Hit the wall.'  Melksham looks similar.

Trengove (emergency yesterday in a team with some questionable skills under pressure)

Pederson (Weideman has struggled recently and the corkie yesterday in the opening minutes restricted him)

Smith (Bit stiff to be dropped after one game - needs to clunk a few)

Brayshaw (There's a spot there for him if he can turn his form around)

 

Our success this year is dependent on the pressure coming from the seconds.  Though our depth is already being tested, we need an in-form Casey to keep the pressure on the seniors and for the development of the fringe players.

[old55 23,595]

Weed's positioning is a puzzle.  He's often in a place the ball just cannot get to.  At stoppages in our forward half he's 20-30m direct goalside of the stoppage, the ball is not going to get there, it goes over his head if we win the clearance.  When the ball is in our back half and we win possession, Weed is too often running away from the ball carrier with his back to the play.  The only possible explanation I can think of is that he's drawing a KPB out of our F50.

[daisycutter 29,616]

4 hours ago, Abe said:

I'd probably give weld a rest and being in hogan, 

 

jeez, abe, you like going out on a limb. 

[ArtificialWisdom 4,045]

2 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

that sounds about right

are we going to tag Martin and if so with whom?

Bugg could run with him. either that or Viney?.. either way Frost should take him when he goes forward.

[Diamond_Jim 12,591]

Darcy Moore... five kicks one handball...0 goals ... 1 behind

He and Weideman continue to run neck and neck along the bottom .... which coach will blink first (perhaps they will both just shut their eyes).

After this week I can understand the call for Weideman to go back to Casey and on balance I reluctantly agree provided they can give him some good match simulation.

Weeks out in the wind of Casey are not really what is required.

Brayshaw is the big question mark. Does he require a good or a top game to force his way back.

[DeeSpencer 25,715]

4 hours ago, Fifty-5 said:

Weed's positioning is a puzzle.  He's often in a place the ball just cannot get to.  At stoppages in our forward half he's 20-30m direct goalside of the stoppage, the ball is not going to get there, it goes over his head if we win the clearance.  When the ball is in our back half and we win possession, Weed is too often running away from the ball carrier with his back to the play.  The only possible explanation I can think of is that he's drawing a KPB out of our F50.

Agree with this and would love an explanation from the coaches. He's almost always a decoy and it just has to be a set plan. The poor guy never touches the ball and then lacks the confidence to go and get it when he finally does end up in better position.

[Moonshadow 17,676]

2 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Agree with this and would love an explanation from the coaches. He's almost always a decoy and it just has to be a set plan. The poor guy never touches the ball and then lacks the confidence to go and get it when he finally does end up in better position.

He competes well for contested, pack marks, bringing the ball to ground for the crumbers, but yes, often gets caught where the ball isn't. Looks lost. With increased games at Casey and a few in the seniors when his Casey forum is good, I think he will refine his leading patterns and timing. Let's not forget that our delivery inside 50 is often shizen. I have hope he'll mature in body and game, but it appears he may have a stint at Casey ahead of him. 

[dtrinh 71]

After going to the game yesterday I'm surprised they kept Weids in the team without Gawn and Hogan. He hardly led to the right areas, couldn't apply much pressure when we turned the ball over and just looked lost. At times we needed a tall target to kick it long to and usually he had already led and was around the 50 mark. He got pushed out of one on one marking contests too easily. If Smith or Peders was there at least there would be a target with a big body our players would be confident to kick to, to at least create a contest for the ball to hit the ground. I think he will develop into a good player but he's just a little boy playing against men. I think he needs to develop at Casey first and gain a few kilograms before coming back to the senior side.

[dieter 3,325]

I thought Hannan was good. Ditto Neal Bullen, Jack Frost and Harmes.

I'd bring in Hogan for Weidemann, Brayshaw for Melksham and Pederson for The Bugga.

[The heart beats true 18,128]

I'm so looking forward to this game now. I reckon our boys will be stinging.

I fully expect the first 10 minutes to be absolutely brutal. Viney, Oliver, Jones, Vince and Hogan all with something to prove.

Will be a cracker.

[Gorgoroth 12,958]

BHarmes needs to play more as a forward, looks terrible around the ground but does smart things inside f50.

Bugg offers pretty much zero , get rid.

The prob with Hannan is he, like weid suffer without Hogan as the main target. One needs to go.

Milkshake must lift, if Hibs is ready he gets replaced. But we need to get Salem out of the back 50 and into the midfield, he and Petracca made a massive difference. Brayshaw is the same, if he plays it has to be as a mid, not a forward, he ain't a forward.

[What 18,810]

2 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Darcy Moore... five kicks one handball...0 goals ... 1 behind

He and Weideman continue to run neck and neck along the bottom .... which coach will blink first (perhaps they will both just shut their eyes).

 

 

Unfortunately for Moore he has been talked up as the next Wayne Carey by Pies fans when he is not even close to having the same talent level as a lot of the other young KPP's running around.  

And he is 2 years older than Weid, which just highlights even more that people need to lay off the our 19 year old KPF. He should be developing at Casey like any other teenaged key position player.

[SFebes 4,884]

11 minutes ago, Gorgoroth said:

BHarmes needs to play more as a forward, looks terrible around the ground but does smart things inside f50.

Bugg offers pretty much zero , get rid.

The prob with Hannan is he, like weid suffer without Hogan as the main target. One needs to go.

Milkshake must lift, if Hibs is ready he gets replaced. But we need to get Salem out of the back 50 and into the midfield, he and Petracca made a massive difference. Brayshaw is the same, if he plays it has to be as a mid, not a forward, he ain't a forward.

Funny you mention that, Salem & Petracca in the midfield looked good in the last. at least these two are clean, along with Oliver and unlike Jones & Viney.

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

8 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

that sounds about right

are we going to tag Martin and if so with whom?

We would be crazy not to. ANB and Bugg should be able to take the edge off.

[Deemented Are Go! 3,679]

30 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

We would be crazy not to. ANB and Bugg should be able to take the edge off.

shhh, don't tell anyone 

[monoccular 17,431]

2 hours ago, Moonshadow said:

He [Weed] competes well for contested, pack marks, bringing the ball to ground for the crumbers, but yes, often gets caught where the ball isn't. Looks lost. With increased games at Casey and a few in the seniors when his Casey forum is good, I think he will refine his leading patterns and timing. Let's not forget that our delivery inside 50 is often shizen. I have hope he'll mature in body and game, but it appears he may have a stint at Casey ahead of him. 

I think we sometimes forget that Weed is a second year player being asked to play in the hardest position on the ground with half a dozen games under his belt, and without big man support at least since the Hogan brain fade. Add to that a leg injury early on in Saturday's game and he was all at sea.  Needs some 'down time' at Casey despite the often gruesome conditions .

I still hold high hopes for him. 

As for Melksham, has he done anything (positive) worthy of mention this season?

 

[JV7 2,351]

I've said it the past 2 weeks & I'll say it again this week... Pedersen has to be bought in! We continually lack a marking option to kick to, it might change this week with Hogan in the side, but he still needs help. Bringing Pedersen is gives us:

A) another tall to kick to/bail out kick who will provide a contest every time

B) can play 2nd ruck & allow Watts to play permenant forward where he is at his best.

I know Pedersen isn't the future but I still think he can play a pivotal role. He needs to be bought in this week.

In: Hogan, Pedersen

Out: Weideman, Melksham