In future all team selections should have to be ratified by a commitee made up of Demonland contributors. 

Chaired by ( insert most qualified)

What could possibly go wrong? 

1 hour ago, DubDee said:

I see the logic in not changing the back 6 too much as they need to gel. Maybe that why melsham should is still in. Goody would have expected a slow start from melksham. 

 

He said as much last year and hinted at an intended patience.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/teams/essendon/melbourne-coach-simon-goodwin-says-players-returning-from-bans-will-need-time-to-settle-in/news-story/f30360b18145f85954ba211cc26f485b

 

I think selection has been very good.  J.Smith, Hannan, T.Smith, ANB, JKH - these are progressive selections.  I don't always agree, but I never will - IMO Bugg for Smith last week was a mistake for example.  But generally I think we've selected well.  I've got nothing against Pedersen but I recognise he's just a journeyman and depth, I'm in favour of trying Hannan and Smith ahead of him, some here see him as the next Carey such is the fervour for him.  I think Melksham was ordinary last week and would prefer to see him out, but it's not fatal and I'm prepared to give him and the selection panel some more rope.

Maybe Kent was dropped for lack tackles.

If so Smith had 11 vs Williamstown. 

Jkh may also be seen as bringing more fwd defensive pressure as well as offensive potency

Watts in the ruck works on two levels it rests spencer but it also intensifies jack - it might be a stretch but it seems to have given him more physical presence - evidenced by more contested marking

1 hour ago, Fifty-5 said:

I think selection has been very good.  J.Smith, Hannan, T.Smith, ANB, JKH - these are progressive selections.  I don't always agree, but I never will - IMO Bugg for Smith last week was a mistake for example.  But generally I think we've selected well.  I've got nothing against Pedersen but I recognise he's just a journeyman and depth, I'm in favour of trying Hannan and Smith ahead of him, some here see him as the next Carey such is the fervour for him.  I think Melksham was ordinary last week and would prefer to see him out, but it's not fatal and I'm prepared to give him and the selection panel some more rope.

That's the misconception a lot people on here use in the argument for or against Pedersen . Don't think those in the for camp think he's the next Carey at all, or anywhere near it

This video is interesting, I've not seen one like it before.

Was it made to appease the masses?

7 minutes ago, loges said:

That's the misconception a lot people on here use in the argument for or against Pedersen . Don't think those in the for camp think he's the next Carey at all, or anywhere near it

You'd think so though with the angst here.  I think Weid is the long term solution, but like I said I'm very happy to see a good slice of Smith and Hannan in the meantime, and they may be complementary.  I know Pedersen is not the flag answer.

Edited April 24, 20178 yr by Fifty-5

It seems clear that Roos and Goodwin have very similar ideas about personnel around the midfield, all players being able to defend, and the contested ball is the main measure of a game. Tyson, Jones, Viney, Hunt, TMac etc. are not going to be dropped because of this - unless injury or atrocious form.

The difference seems to be that Goodwin also emphasises risky, break-the-lines footy with a touch of dare and excitement. JKH, Hannan, Weed, Melksham and others  play simple bread and butter footy but they have that opportunist edge. They do the risky kick, the risky third man up, the fly into the air etc... After the Roos era it feels a bit uncomfortable but I reckon we just have to get used to it. 

To be honest, I like it, even if it leaves me scratching my head sometimes. The over-emphasis on defence is messing up our game. 

7 minutes ago, Maldonboy38 said:

It seems clear that Roos and Goodwin have very similar ideas about personnel around the midfield, all players being able to defend, and the contested ball is the main measure of a game. Tyson, Jones, Viney, Hunt, TMac etc. are not going to be dropped because of this - unless injury or atrocious form.

I would not be shocked to see Tyson playing at Casey this year.

22 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

I would not be shocked to see Tyson playing at Casey this year.

If he continues playing the way he is, it won't be long before he is at Casey.

1 hour ago, Fifty-5 said:

You'd think so though with the angst here.  I think Weid is the long term solution, but like I said I'm very happy to see a good slice of Smith and Hannan in the meantime, and they may be complementary.  I know Pedersen is not the flag answer.

Look I'm happy to be wrong about Pedersen as long as those keeping him out are having an impact, don't think that's the case so far. Lets see how  we go tonight I know he's not the flag answer but don't expect to be playing off this year. Lets just try and make finals first.

1 hour ago, Maldonboy38 said:

 The over-emphasis on defence is messing up our game. 

Not sure i quite understand your point here but what i would say is that a concern for me is how easy we have been to score against this year.

Rather Pedo than Smith. He may not be the future but he has experience, can ruck, can take a mark, can kick a goal and is versatile.  And Melksham worries me down back. Hard at it but brain fades and poor disposal we can ill afford in defence. Unfortunately this is his track record at EFC and now Melbourne. 

1 hour ago, Clint Bizkit said:

I would not be shocked to see Tyson playing at Casey this year.

 

1 hour ago, stevethemanjordan said:

If he continues playing the way he is, it won't be long before he is at Casey.

He needs to improve his DE, but no way he goes to Casey on the back of his current form.

The questions on his defensive capabilities are a bit of a fallacy too, but I'm sure that won't stop you two sprouting that every time he's mentioned.  

v Carlton (7 tackles - second most tackles on the ground); v Geelong (5 tackles - equal 4th most for the MFC); v Freo (5 tackles - equal 4th most on the ground).

16 hours ago, tappysquads said:

I know how frowned upon evidence is on this site, but Melksham is going at 76% efficiency this year. 11th best in the team and ahead of names such as Watts, Jones, Petracca, Vince, Hunt, Garlett, Hogan, Tyson....... 

I'm all for using stats 'Tappy' to back a solid argument but the issue I have here is that Melkshams possessions are all in wide open spaces and he is missing targets the players at his level shouldn't. The majority are uncontested.

Its the same argument when people talk of T Macs efficiency being high. So it should be when he is streaming out of defence trying to hit someone 30m away.

You can't compare in and under mids (Tyson, Jones etc) with back flankers imo. 

Btw, I'm not calling for Melksham or T Mac to be dropped but I do get frustrated at them (along with Vince) with there constant uncontested turn overs

4 hours ago, Fifty-5 said:

You'd think so though with the angst here.  I think Weid is the long term solution, but like I said I'm very happy to see a good slice of Smith and Hannan in the meantime, and they may be complementary.  I know Pedersen is not the flag answer.

But you can't win a flag if you're not winning games in the H&A season. What's wrong with winning games now with a player like Pedersen, who has shown in the recent past that he can play the role that Weid, Smith and Hannan are failing at?

Never been a fan of JKH, comes across at times scared of his own shadow.

Tried a couple flashy things tonight that failed, looked slow, added minimal pressure and can't stick a tackle to save himself. I thought his VFL game last week was similarly average.

I don't what ' The Kent' has done but he adds a lot more value than JKH.

Also.... massive shame about Smith and very unlucky but can't help but think if Pedo played we would have been more physical in the guts and stopped a few simple clearances.

Really think our selections didn't help this week

2 minutes ago, deeko said:

Never been a fan of JKH, comes across at times scared of his own shadow.

Tried a couple flashy things tonight that failed, looked slow, added minimal pressure and can't stick a tackle to save himself. I thought his VFL game last week was similarly average.

I don't what ' The Kent' has done but he adds a lot more value than JKH.

Also.... massive shame about Smith and very unlucky but can't help but think if Pedo played we would have been more physical in the guts and stopped a few simple clearances.

Really think our selections didn't help this week

How so?  We can't plan for having 2 on the bench for the second half.  Up until that point we were well and truly dominating and, thus, you would argue Goodwin had made the right changes.

Melksham - zero tackles tonight, 3 in each of the previous two -- I wonder how that stacks up as a KPI.  IMVHO another Essendon Trojan Horse -- hope the coach isn't too. ?

2 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

How so?  We can't plan for having 2 on the bench for the second half.  Up until that point we were well and truly dominating and, thus, you would argue Goodwin had made the right changes.

I get that WB but I struggle mainly with the JKH call up. I really struggle to see what he brings.

Especially when it's going to be slightly wet

3 minutes ago, monoccular said:

Melksham - zero tackles tonight, 3 in each of the previous two -- I wonder how that stacks up as a KPI.  IMVHO another Essendon Trojan Horse -- hope the coach isn't too. ?

Hibberd?

8 hours ago, deeko said:

I'm all for using stats 'Tappy' to back a solid argument but the issue I have here is that Melkshams possessions are all in wide open spaces and he is missing targets the players at his level shouldn't. The majority are uncontested.

Its the same argument when people talk of T Macs efficiency being high. So it should be when he is streaming out of defence trying to hit someone 30m away.

You can't compare in and under mids (Tyson, Jones etc) with back flankers imo. 

Btw, I'm not calling for Melksham or T Mac to be dropped but I do get frustrated at them (along with Vince) with there constant uncontested turn overs

If you won't I will. Melksham for Lewis. For starters. 

And maybe his mainly ineffective possession in the wide open spaces explains zero tackles tonight in a tough tight game 

pfttttt

If he is there next week, I am not. 

2 minutes ago, deeko said:

I get that WB but I struggle mainly with the JKH call up. I really struggle to see what he brings.

Especially when it's going to be slightly wet

You may be right there, and he only had 11 touches and didn't hit the scoreboard, but he also laid 6 tackles so he certainly put on plenty of pressure.  He worked his way into the game.

If we could combine the offensive skills of Kent and the defensive pressure that JKH brought tonight then we'd really be on to something.

His selections were fine, we dominated three quarters of the game. 

One of the smarter things mark neeld used to say is the last thing we see is the scoreboard and we are doing so much right but our lapses are really costing us, there has been plenty to like in every game we have played but we are still in the youngest couple of sides in the comp so we will build consistency 

2 minutes ago, Abe said:

 

One of the smarter things mark neeld used to say 

Please..... no......