MATCH PREVIEW AND TEAM SELECTION - ROUND 6

[Demons11 6,915]

11 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

This may sound sacrilegious - lets treat this like a preseason game to test a new game plan (without a ruckman) and rest everyone who is injured or has serious niggles, especially Petracca.  And if Jones, Vince or Viney are playing injured rest them as well.  Don't even think of bringing Weideman back in - let his knee rest.

Not in any suggesting we not try to win but it is a very long season with some key people already out for a long time.  It may be a chance to give someone in the wings another go.   We just can't afford to risk more serious injuries.  After all it is at Eithad - no place for anyone carrying an injury. 

Then regroup and make a fresh start vs Hawthorn the following weak.

This is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.  Can this person please be sanctioned. Thanks

[Skuit 10,031]

If we make five changes and put Frost in the ruck, could we be liable for another $500,000 fine?

[Cards13 9,117]

I don't see us kicking a winning score, especially with Watts having to ruck for parts of the game. 

Could be a big win to the worst [censored] team to have ever played Aussie rules. 

[Deestar9 1,591]

12 hours ago, praha said:

Just looking at tickets. AFL Members on the wing appears full... where do Melbourne members sit? There is an option for "AWAY AREA" but then it makes me select from all the different areas around the ground. Where would Melbourne members normally sit?

I just booked "best available " in the Melb  supporters area & got seat on Level 1...prob not great seats but at least with Melb supporters 

[Goffer 256]

Not optimistic but this fixture has been the least predictable in the AFL this past decade (2013 being the dishonourable exception). They are taking the opportunity to rest several players so that in itself may be a sign they are chalking this one up already. Break even in the midfield, who knows what will happen, we beat this mob with Col Garland as a forward no reason why we can't do this again.

[Demon_spurs 1,833]

I'm really glad they haven't bowed to some negative feedback and dropped JKH, I went to the game and then watched the replay and was really surprised at some of the negative comments. I thought he played fairly well, took a great mark in the 2nd. was gutsy and got upended, first game back after a  fair lay off, can someone please point out exactly where he went wrong.

[TRIGON 4,783]

44 minutes ago, Skuit said:

If we make five changes and put Frost in the ruck, could we be liable for another $500,000 fine?

No, not if you're serious when you say it.

However if you say it as a joke then watch out!

[titan_uranus 24,974]

This is clearly not close to our best 22. And yet, I still see talent on every line. A sign of the changing times, I suppose.

IMO we need Watts to play permanently forward, as we need someone to keep Hurley occupied.

Hurley's out of form but I feel like if we let him do what Rance did on Monday and zone off, he'll find that form pretty easily.

I like the idea of TMac playing 100% of the game on Daniher. When Daniher rucks, he rucks. When Daniher goes to the bench, TMac does too. TMac is fitter than Daniher (hell, he's fitter than most players his height) and Daniher, though tall, isn't an amazing ruckman.

Bellchambers is better for us than Leuenberger as he hasn't played in 18 months and he's also useless. Obviously would be better to have a ruckman in the side but if Pedersen can at least jump into him and make it some sort of contest in the ruck, I can see Pedersen getting amongst it quite easily through the middle of the ground and leaving Bellchambers in his wake speed- and fitness-wise.

Jones and Viney appear to be fit. They both owe us after 3 and 5 games respectively of sub-par performances. If they lift, and our midfield gets on top of theirs, we can win this despite the outs. But if Essendon's midfielders are on top, I can see their forward line scoring with ease.

I can also see Tyson being the one who is let go on the bench, rather than Harmes (it won't be Salem and I'd have Stretch above both Tyson and Harmes).

[What 18,810]

1 minute ago, titan_uranus said:

 

I like the idea of TMac playing 100% of the game on Daniher. When Daniher rucks, he rucks. When Daniher goes to the bench, TMac does too. TMac is fitter than Daniher (hell, he's fitter than most players his height) and Daniher, though tall, isn't an amazing ruckman.

 

This absolutely has to happen.

[Pates 9,660]

Look I'm not expecting a win, not like I was against Carlton, Fremantle, and to a lesser extent Richmond. But we have to come into this with a positive attitude, not a defeatist attitude. Midfield wise we can beat them, and if you win the midfield you can win the game. We just need to be more efficient when we're in control, we also need to stop giving up stupid goals. 

[What 18,810]

Why didn't Mitch hannan play for Casey last week? He was dropped from the Demon side as i recall, thats what the changes said anyway. Cant recall an injury.

[DubDee 25,664]

This is the team that lost to Carlton, struggled to beat the lions and just beat a horrible Collingwood. 

Coming off 5 day break with a bunch of cheats coming off 12 months. 

Im just saying...

were gong to smash this pricks!

[DubDee 25,664]

1 hour ago, Skuit said:

If we make five changes and put Frost in the ruck, could we be liable for another $500,000 fine?

Only if we win with the last kick on the siren 

[deespicable me 1,485]

Selection interesting with the complete back-line available for the first time this year. The back six look pretty solid, especially if Oscar comes onto the bench to help cover our lack of talls. Hibberd, Jetta and Lewis in the back-line is a few hundred games of experience.

As a consequence Hunt and Melksham move up onto the wings. Hunt not having to be as accountable, linking and running forward looks good. We have played six good quarters at Etihad this year, hopefully another three will be enough. I think we'll lead by a fair way at some stage and then.............................................................................................cruise to victory.

[Adam The God 30,126]

5 hours ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Surely we'd be better with Frost on Daniher than Frost in the ruck.

He's never played on him either. He would have been the perfect match up in Round 2 last year, but we were trying the Frost forward experiment (or was he injured at that point in time?).

I'm really keen to see how Frost goes on Daniher. I've always felt like he's a near perfect match up for Daniher. Will also hopefully run off him too.

4 hours ago, dl4e said:

Hannan at full forward ??? I find it amazing he is selected. With Gawn and Hogan missing will be tough.

I don't find it amazing at all. Quick. A good leap. A good goal sense. Will be a handful if he works hard.

4 hours ago, Petraccattack said:

Oh yeah that was a classic.  THink he was referring to the 2015 game when T Mac went forward in the last quarter and peppered away at the goals, managing one from 4 or 5 shots.

I envy you for not remembering losses to Essendrug, I wish I could wipe them all from the memory.

Unfortunately, you've reminded me, HH. I do remember that. Painful. But you are partly right. I've witnessed so many horrific matches that I wipe them and move on quickly. 148 and 186 are harder to erase, but the more we win, the less I'll remember it. 

[Wadda We Sing 10,685]

Can't wait to see what Hibberd will bring against his old club. The few Essescum supporters I know are dead set spewing they lost him. His debut for us was pretty damn good.

[Adam The God 30,126]

2 hours ago, Cards13 said:

I don't see us kicking a winning score, especially with Watts having to ruck for parts of the game. 

Could be a big win to the worst [censored] team to have ever played Aussie rules. 

If we have 22 players, we should have enough opportunities to kick a winning score. It's all about accuracy and obviously restricting easy opposition goals.

[beelzebub 23,313]

4 hours ago, A F said:

If we have 22 players, we should have enough opportunities to kick a winning score. It's all about accuracy and obviously restricting easy opposition goals.

Id agree. Enough players to kick us a winning score. I feel it's more about our mids negating Ess from providing a  chance to kick one.

Even bigger game for Pig coming up.

[Demons11 6,915]

6 hours ago, Petraccattack said:

Why didn't Mitch hannan play for Casey last week? He was dropped from the Demon side as i recall, thats what the changes said anyway. Cant recall an injury.

He was held over as an Emergency

[JV7 2,350]

Just occurred to me... If those [censored]$ can beat us with a makeshift side 12 months ago, why can't we beat them without our first 2 rucks & full forward. We owe them big time

[praha 11,236]

9 hours ago, Deestar9 said:

I just booked "best available " in the Melb  supporters area & got seat on Level 1...prob not great seats but at least with Melb supporters 

With AFL Members pass? I suspect behind the goals.

[Salems Lot 2,493]

I don't mind this team.

 

[bing181 9,193]

13 hours ago, monoccular said:

Coach's favourite will play wherever he wants, provided he doesn't have to lay a tackle 

Hibberd managed to get maximum coaches votes of the Dees players, plus a place in team of the round as a half-back.

Tackles? Zero. Nil. None. Zilch.

 

[Fat Tony 5,220]

I know we have a lot out this week but we had Geelong on toast but for poor goal kicking without Hogan, Lewis or Hibberd and Gawn being injured early. This should give us confidence. The key to winning is finding a way to negate Daniher, Heppell and Merrett and being able to break even in the centre clearences.

[poita 3,891]

34 minutes ago, bing181 said:

Hibberd managed to get maximum coaches votes of the Dees players, plus a place in team of the round as a half-back.

Tackles? Zero. Nil. None. Zilch.

 

Difference being that Hibberd won the football and used it well. It is hard to lay a tackle when you have the ball.

Not only does Melksham not tackle, but he doesn't get many possessions and gives half of those straight back to the opposition.