8 hours ago, Demons11 said:

Yeah let's bring in blokes who are average at VFL level, great move.  

 

Melksham has been BOG in the last 2 games he played for Casey and Weed has been very poor in the last 2 games and looks lost. 

11 hours ago, ding said:

Weid has to go. Needs about 2 years in the 2's to develop physically. Other changes?? Dunno.No way we lose next week......... Do we?

Dont bring back anyone who cant kick or tackle for ANY reason. Whiskey here i come.........................................................

 

Weed to the weights room.

I think we need to drop Weideman.
"We need him in because he is a tall"

Did he take a contested mark all day? no point having a tall if he cant mark, might as well bring in someone who will halve the contest and be quick whilst going to ground.
Harmes should be in for Weid. (Yes Harmes is a backman but hes a tough body who is better than Weid.)
Kent out for Stretch (NFI why Stretch hasn't been playing)

11 hours ago, danielE288 said:

Ben Holland still run around?

Ive heard he's a podiatrist. Ironic really. He had such a donkey kick on him.

9 hours ago, Stingray said:

Bugg has to go - such poor kicking is inexcusable. We lost because of a very poor team effort not that of one man, but his inability to be at all composed cost us dearly today. Inexperience can be excused and he did get his hands on it and created space, but a total lack of composure or goal awareness (or even just some confidence over an easy set shot!) cannot. The cost to the team is too great for such poor performances and they shouldn't be tolerated.

Like Daniher? Everyone can have an off week at kicking goals! He was great agaisnt Adelaide. Give him a break! At least he had several shots on goal which is more than we can say about many of our forwards.

8 minutes ago, DominatrixTyson said:

Ive heard he's a podiatrist. Ironic really. He had such a donkey kick on him.

No mean feet 

Kent out (and stay out until a heart is found in that chest).

Melksham in - play in Kent's HF position.

Weid - ?????  We need some lead up forwards.  We have nothing at the moment, and it is killing us.  Play him deep and leading to 30.  All day.  

A few guys may need a rest.  A few others a brain transplant.

Just had a look at the ladder/upcoming games. Of the pack of 5 teams on 20 points above us, 4 play each other (rich v ess & dogs v st. k) and 1 (port) play a team above (geel). 

We are a game clear of remaining teams below. 

So IF (note, I F) we can win in the desert, we could go into the bye in 9th spot with % at 20 points / 5-5. 

Im clutching at straws, right?!

2 minutes ago, Deemented Are Go! said:

Just had a look at the ladder/upcoming games. Of the pack of 5 teams on 20 points above us, 4 play each other (rich v ess & dogs v st. k) and 1 (port) play a team above (geel). 

We are a game clear of remaining teams below. 

So IF (note, I F) we can win in the desert, we could go into the bye in 9th spot with % at 20 points / 5-5. 

Im clutching at straws, right?!

9th

Hmm

Im giddy with excitement

7 minutes ago, buck_nekkid said:

Kent out (and stay out until a heart is found in that chest).

Melksham in - play in Kent's HF position.

Weid - ?????  We need some lead up forwards.  We have nothing at the moment, and it is killing us.  Play him deep and leading to 30.  All day.  

A few guys may need a rest.  A few others a brain transplant.

agree 

In. Brains. Reasonable consistent umps

outs. Poor decision making.  Those mongrel umpires.

 

27 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

9th

Hmm

Im giddy with excitement

Haha. If it was at the expense of Richmond?!

10 hours ago, Deestar9 said:

What a pathetic statement....watts at best is a brilliant 3rd forward...wing & at the moment relief ruckman ...he is not a full forward as at times he had to play today against two of the best backman in the league....if we as supporters were told we'd win some amazing games ...lose some winnable games but always be in the game ...you would take it in a heartbeat....like it or not ...we are undermanned ...we are young & we have enormous upside...everyone is disappointed but to bag Watts after today's game is downright ridiculous. They were bigger...stronger...& just better on the day &  yet we still nearly pinched it...such an ill informed opinion 

You get angry too easy. If you cant handle other peoples opinions perhaps this is not the place for you. Perhaps you are not the football God you think you are. Maybe try some medication.

13 minutes ago, Deemented Are Go! said:

Haha. If it was at the expense of Richmond?!

Well i suppose you're inferring they drop to 10th. I think we'll actually nudge them to 8th the way we're going

Out: Kent, Weideman, Wagner. Bugg stays only because of lack of decent replacements, just keep him away from the goals. I'd be happy to never see Kent again.

In: Harmes, Stretch, Trengove. 

Why anybody would want Melksham back in is beyond me. His attack on the football is not AFL standard.

We desperately need at least two more key position players, a shortcoming that was blatantly obvious during last weeks trade and draft period. Instead we brought in a bunch of small forwards. 

 

Hopefully we get there a few days early. 

We seem to keep missing the starts to games 

We need two things: 1) height with aerial contesting 2) outside run who can kick.

Bugg getting heaps of the ball but butchering it has exactly the same outcome as Watts or Weid not being able to get it - the opposition get the ball. Kent demonstrating no physical grunt has the same affect as lazy defensive running - the opposition get the ball. Do we have players to come in who can help us get the ball, keep it, and use it? Otherwise it is deckchairs on the Titanic. 

OUT: Bugg (gets exhausted at AFL level and his kicking suffers). Kent (I am a fan but he has been a huge disappointment this year), Weid (If Hogan is in the team, Weid stays but as a main target he lacks physical attributes to impact aerial contests as).

IN:    Stretch (he can kick and has some class). A smokey in Mitch King.(probably a bit too soon but Pedo, Watts and TMac are needed around the ground) Another smokey in Hulett ( yes again, too soon but we have to try another option over Weid). At least these two smokies are new deckchairs! 

I normallly hate bringing up players too soon from Casey but needs must. Watts has some credits but is very close to needing Casey time. If we had all of Gawn, Spencer, Smiths x2 and Hogan available Watts could be dropped. 

1 hour ago, The Sailing Demon said:

I think we need to drop Weideman.
"We need him in because he is a tall"

Did he take a contested mark all day? no point having a tall if he cant mark, might as well bring in someone who will halve the contest and be quick whilst going to ground.
Harmes should be in for Weid. (Yes Harmes is a backman but hes a tough body who is better than Weid.)
Kent out for Stretch (NFI why Stretch hasn't been playing)

You still need someone to make a contest, which he does 

I thought Weids made a contest in the first couple of weeks, but haven't seen a lot of it since. How many times did he overrun the drop of the ball yesterday, infuriating!

Surprised no one is mentioning Kennedy, he's the one who comes in for Kent for me (who I agree was dreadful).

Melksham has to come back in, at the expense of Bugg I'd say.

I have no idea how to solve the lack of talls situation other than to say we are desperately missing Gawn. He would've been able to drift back and sit in the d50 when required yesterday, and similarly provided a more reliable target up forward. But we got murdered in the ruck. I know we won the clearances, but our clearances are often scrappy and achieved by sheer will. Some of the hit outs to advantage for the roos saw them stream out of the square without a hand being laid. Being able to deliver kicks inside 50 without pressure is always going to make it hard to defend.

 

Out: Kent, Bugg, Weideman (but for who?)

In: Kennedy, Melkham, (King, ANB, Smith, Trengove, Harmes, help...)

 

Actually, as I wrote that it occurred to me that Harmes has good vertical on him. So maybe Harmes for Weids, tell him to tackle and fly at the footy. Not perfect, but Weids is miles off.

Reading the flight of the ball is an 'ability'. I don't think it's really one you can teach. Well  maybe you can teach it but not all can master it. It requires a lot of same time computation together with the ability to fully understand space in 3D. 

This aspect concerns me a bit re Weid. A lot of things can change; body shape , fitness even skills, but reading the ball ? You either can or can't in my book.

I would drop Kent purely on the back of not going hard at the ball int eh last when he stuck his arm out after swerving off the line of the ball (as pointed out by many here). I don't care what else he did all game but that was inexcusable. Pretty sure the ball went straight down the other end for a goal too!

For Kent I would bring in one of Harmes (is tough at it but disposal iffy), Stretch (not so tough at it purely due to size but disposal better), or even Ben Ken (how has he been going? He showed a bit at times last year. Maybe tell him this is his chance and let him rip)

Might as well just try stuff now 

Don't think we're in contention any longer

Lets mix it up, try new things; maybe footy in the 1st qtr ? I know ... a bit left field perhaps ?

14 hours ago, Clint Bizkit said:

I had no confidence in Watts when he was one-on-one with an opponent in our forward line, lacked any kind of explosiveness.

Over the last two weeks Watts has been playing like the kid on the anti-marijuana TV commercial from a few years back. Struggling with marking, looks off the pace.

Wouldn't be surprised if he is carrying an illness with absolutely no one capable of coming in to play his role.

Just now, 3Dee said:

Over the last two weeks Watts has been playing like the kid on the anti-marijuana TV commercial from a few years back. Struggling with marking, looks off the pace.

Wouldn't be surprised if he is carrying an illness with absolutely no one capable of coming in to play his role.

Exactly my thinking.

Looks way out of sorts. No one can replace.

Doesn't do him or team any favours. 

2 minutes ago, 3Dee said:

Over the last two weeks Watts has been playing like the kid on the anti-marijuana TV commercial from a few years back. Struggling with marking, looks off the pace.

Wouldn't be surprised if he is carrying an illness with absolutely no one capable of coming in to play his role.

I hope that's the case (and that he gets better) - tons of talent and our best ball user. But gone missing (like days of old) in the last 2 weeks, and we can't carry players with a "lack of intensity". Why can't he take an overhead mark - he repeatedly jumped <out> of packs yesterday.

14 hours ago, chookrat said:

Salem will be fine - insufficient force. Vinci will be fine, unless they do him for being punched in the mouth and in the stomach.

I thought the punch was about 20 cm lower than that.

12 hours ago, Socrates said:

Out: Goodwin, Wagner, Weideman, Oscar Mc

In: Roos, Grimes, Dawes, Dunn.

I'm starting to think you're not actually Socrates. If you were, you would be asking questions, not providing answers.

I'm not in favour of making substantial changes to the team that comprehensively defeated Adelaide the week before. However, I suspect Jack Watts might have a leg or groin problem. He clearly didn't want to kick the ball yesterday. He might need to be rested next week to give him a three week break with the bye. Other than that, I'd prefer one of Stretch, Harmes or ANB  (whoever has been best at Casey) for Kent. And maybe Melksham for Wagner.