52 minutes ago, Vogon Poetry said:

As usual Pro you've nailed it.  I think Wagner's and Hannan's selection is for the same reason, they see them as the future and want them in regardless of whether it gives us the best winning chance.

Weideman was picked for the same reason.  The interesting question for me is "is this development or best available"?  I think with Pedo in the team earlier and maybe some other picks we win games we lost.  Does this strategy fit the "development" or "best winning chance" scenario?  If it's purely for development after so many barren years I find it a little frustrating.  I'm sick of losing. I suppose I'll see the upside when we win a flag!

I guess for us to win a flag VP that we need solid depth ~ 30 across the season. Whilst I'm frustrated some weeks that we've got project players on the park in OMac, Weid etc. a little under done on a game to game basis, I think this selection strategy puts us in a much stronger position for our premiership window over the next 5 years. We need to do this as we don't have the pulling power of Hawthorn to fill the talent gaps, but the better we get I suspect the luckier we will become in this regard as well.

I'd suggest that having just "pulled" Lewis and Hibbard last year, our "pulling power" has now moved past the Hawks, and will continue to do so.

1 hour ago, Vogon Poetry said:

As usual Pro you've nailed it.  I think Wagner's and Hannan's selection is for the same reason, they see them as the future and want them in regardless of whether it gives us the best winning chance.

Weideman was picked for the same reason.  The interesting question for me is "is this development or best available"?  I think with Pedo in the team earlier and maybe some other picks we win games we lost.  Does this strategy fit the "development" or "best winning chance" scenario?  If it's purely for development after so many barren years I find it a little frustrating.  I'm sick of losing. I suppose I'll see the upside when we win a flag!

Interesting observations.  It hadn't occurred to me that Goodwin is knowingly jeopardizing a victory with his selections.  I just assume he knows his list and game-plan better than me and he knows who's best equipped to play the role he requires.  That said, getting games into players who are the future of a footy club often comes at some cost.  But it's not like the Pedersens of this world are usually the difference.

But if you're right he's a courageous first year coach who is doing the right thing by the club and in essence the right thing by himself longterm.

1 hour ago, Vogon Poetry said:

As usual Pro you've nailed it.  I think Wagner's and Hannan's selection is for the same reason, they see them as the future and want them in regardless of whether it gives us the best winning chance.

Weideman was picked for the same reason.  The interesting question for me is "is this development or best available"?  I think with Pedo in the team earlier and maybe some other picks we win games we lost.  Does this strategy fit the "development" or "best winning chance" scenario?  If it's purely for development after so many barren years I find it a little frustrating.  I'm sick of losing. I suppose I'll see the upside when we win a flag!

I disagree. Whilst of course goody would have one eye on the future goody is selecting sides that give us the best chance of winning games now. 

I think it's also about what combinations and structures can implement the game plan more efficiently.

Players like Wagner can free up Guys like Lewis and Vince to play up the ground more.

Oscar Mac in the side gives us the ability to play TMac as a loose man.

JKH was apparently burning it up and in the pre season, so another chance to bring that game day.

1 hour ago, Abe said:

If you read my post you would see that I expressed my view... 

he is being given a run at it because Kent isn't playing at his best and they want to see if his form builds, at this stage I don't think he is ticking enough boxes to be a long term option but I may be proved wrong. 

Since I know you'll say " well the coaches know better" is there any chance you could explain in detail why you think he should remain in the side based on his current output, can a player who granted is putting on pressure retain his spot in the long term if he continues to fail to deliver offensively.

JKH is in tomorrow's side for forward balance and along with Jeff Garlett to apply pressure and to occupy a small/medium defender, interesting that Essendon didn't get much drive off half back

The goals will come, he was in the right spot a couple of times last week but another option was taken, have a look at the Pedo goal as one instance and see who was beside him all on his own as well when Pedo marked it

And clean hands in close got the ball to Jones who was tackled but Petracca got loose ball and goaled as 2nd example

He will retain his spot for as long as the coaches think he is doing his role, doesn't matter a jot what any of us think

1 hour ago, PaulRB said:

I'd suggest that having just "pulled" Lewis and Hibbard last year, our "pulling power" has now moved past the Hawks, and will continue to do so.

Not sure what the Hawks were pulling with Vickery?

What I find surprising is that we have selected players off a one game return from injury, or performance at Casey, over other uninjured players.

I think Wagner, JKH and Hibberd at least have fallen into that category so far.

It would be fair to say that from the above 3 we are one all atm, with Hibberd playing well and JKH not as well.

I have posted before that the FD have a high opinion of JKH and he is clearly being given plenty of opportunity to perform in the team.

It may well be the view of this match committee, that they will play a player they believe is a good player, even though he is not as match fit as others, who they deem not as good, despite better form.

For example, IMO, Billy and Kent are better players than JKH, yet it is JKH in the side. I would guess the FD see JKH as the better player. We can agree to disagree, but in the end, I accept they are in a far better position to assess than me, who just sees games.

 

On 04/05/2017 at 11:45 AM, Fifty-5 said:

OMac out means changing the ruck structure that worked so well last week - brave!

NO WAY.. Think Hogan will be in to play on Frawley.. ( you remember that turncoat) and Wagner will also be in after a great game at Casey last weekend

28 minutes ago, DeeZee said:

I think it's also about what combinations and structures can implement the game plan more efficiently.

Players like Wagner can free up Guys like Lewis and Vince to play up the ground more.

Oscar Mac in the side gives us the ability to play TMac as a loose man.

JKH was apparently burning it up and in the pre season, so another chance to bring that game day.

I think it's more likely Lewis stays back and Wagner replaces Vince, releasing him into the midfield permanently. But agree with the rest of this.

releasing bernie to the midfield is a great move imo,now we have reinforcements down back.

Although aging and not as quick as he was he still loves a goal.

Hope he puts in a ripper.

13 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

Possibly, but Kent is fit and in form according to Plapp

I don't rate players, it only sets you up for a fall and a serve of humble pie

 

Methinks that football forums would be better focussed on the merits of players guns and name dropping.  

Actual discussion of football should be actively discouraged and ridiculed whenever possible.

And everyone knows that if you don't go to training and talk soccer with the lads your opinion holds no value.

On 04/05/2017 at 5:41 PM, Dingo said:

Isn't it a good thing ,that we are debating who  should come in this week? Shows our depth.

Only takes a few losses before we agree that we've no depth and the list is a shambles.

34 minutes ago, DEMON DAVID said:

NO WAY.. Think Hogan will be in to play on Frawley.. ( you remember that turncoat) and Wagner will also be in after a great game at Casey last weekend

Umm.. Forwards don't 'play on' defenders mate. 

 

12 hours ago, davo said:

Kent should be in instead of JKH, twice the player

I wonder if that's the problem. Kent looks overweight to me. Perhaps he needs to be about 1.7 times the player and until he does the work to get properly fit, he may have to get used to the Casey jumper.

34 minutes ago, McQueen said:

Umm.. Forwards don't 'play on' defenders mate. 

 

Its all about forwards defensive game,. haven't you heard !!

I'm from that bygone era where it used to be about the scoreboard. 

I blame Elvis and The Beatles

I think Goodwin and the FD are doing a tremendous job and we are clearly improved from last year.  We are playing with intensity and attacking, and contrary to popular wisdom, attack wins flags.

Selection has favoured the future when there's a choice and if players follow team rules they'll be given an extended opportunity.  If not, they're out.

 

1 hour ago, beelzebub said:

Its all about forwards defensive game,. haven't you heard !!

I'm from that bygone era where it used to be about the scoreboard. 

I blame Elvis and The Beatles

I can't remember, BB, but were you a fan of Howe? You must have been with this attitude.

1 hour ago, beelzebub said:

Its all about forwards defensive game,. haven't you heard !!

I'm from that bygone era where it used to be about the scoreboard. 

I blame Elvis and The Beatles

WTF, i wasn't scoring at all then!!!

On Thursday, May 04, 2017 at 5:41 PM, ProDee said:

Hawthorn were the laughing stock of the competition until the 1960's.

Let hope for a return to a pre 1960s AFL World order!!

When for  the coerresponding game last year against the Hawks, I stated on this forum that I was thinking of putting a $50 us to win, I was advised by @Ethan Tremblay that I'd get more enjoyment from burning my money.  How the worm has turned.  For what it's worth, I think the Hawks are bigger outsiders this time with the bookie's than they perhaps should be and may represent a value bet, but I'm hoping for the same result as last year.  I'd be happy for Hawthorn to put in a competitive effort and come close, but for us to take away the four points.

6 minutes ago, Rodney (Balls) Grinter said:

When for  the coerresponding game last year against the Hawks, I stated on this forum that I was thinking of putting a $50 us to win, I was advised by @Ethan Tremblay that I'd get more enjoyment from burning my money.  How the worm has turned.  For what it's worth, I think the Hawks are bigger outsiders this time with the bookie's than they perhaps should be and may represent a value bet, but I'm hoping for the same result as last year.  I'd be happy for Hawthorn to put in a competitive effort and come close, but for us to take away the four points.

Everybody knows not to listen to me.

23 minutes ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

Everybody knows not to listen to me.

Lol.

As it turns out, I didn't put the bet on, but was more anoyed that we'd let a getable game slip than I would have been about loosing the fifty bucks. 

Really hoping the MFC assert ourselves tomorrow, continue our rise and keep the Dorks in the  duldrums.

If we lose tomorrow we will be equal on points with Carlton.

2 hours ago, beelzebub said:

Its all about forwards defensive game,. haven't you heard !!

I'm from that bygone era where it used to be about the scoreboard. 

I blame Elvis and The Beatles

 I get that the forwards need to apply pressure when they've not got the footy but, watching the Saints forwards last night present themselves on good leads time and time again made me think we've still got a long way to improve in this area.