12 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

I don't like it, but if he is going to play Mitchell stopping role is the only job available. 

Just because of his lack of pace? Doesn't make sense.

It's an inside role for him, he still has the ability to find the ball in congestion and dish it out to the movers, and is a solid decision maker. He's not a tagger. Leave that to Vince or Melksham, if they do decide to tag.

I've seen Jack twice this year, once live and once on TV and I don't recall him playing the inside mid role in either of those games although he has started in the centre square on occasions.  But others have seen more and I might be wrong.

And Trenners isn't like for like.  Jones is much faster than Trenners and much more agile.

I hope he gets a go if he's "best available" and I hope he does well.  But if it's a "reward" selection that would be disappointing given where we sit and the fact that players like Stretch, JKH and Wagner all seem better suited to Subi.

Bring him in. he is the obvious choice to replace Jones.

When I watched him pre-season at training I thought he looked best as a small forward. But I dont think he has played that role at Casey. I was impressed with smart fast leading and good hands.

6 minutes ago, Luther said:

Just because of his lack of pace? Doesn't make sense.

It's an inside role for him, he still has the ability to find the ball in congestion and dish it out to the movers, and is a solid decision maker. He's not a tagger. Leave that to Vince or Melksham, if they do decide to tag.

The speed differential of AFL to VFL is massive now. Subiaco is a fast track. 

Tagging another "slow" player is the only task available to JT

1 hour ago, picket fence said:

Wide open spaces and Trengove in mix? I don't think so. We need PACE, would rather Stretch in and rotate a few others>

I don't want to have to call the Mythbusters to sort this one out but if I hear another "wide open spaces" call about Subiaco I'll commit a feckin homicide.

The ground is effectively 7 metres longer each side of the centre circle compared to the MCG but is not as wide (I think @jnrmac gave the dimensions on another thread). A players speed has absolutely SWEET F@#$ ALL to do with how effective they will be in relation to this small variance at league level. In my opinion, the only effect it has on game strategy is on most facets of set ups and postioning at stoppage and zoning. And, given we have good speed on our back and forward lines I can't see how this is going to adversely affect these players.

Playing as an inside mid with a big tank, Trengove will be just fine at Subiaco.

39 minutes ago, Watts Jurrah Dunn? said:

I love Jack, but I'd be very surprised if Trengove, Lewis and Tyson all played in the same side on a quick deck at Subi.

Let Tyson play the inside midfielder role, bring Vince up to play the outside role and bring Stretch or Wagner in to rotate through wing/half back.

Yes, tend to agree. Subi is a fast track and AFL is miles quicker than VFL.

Replacing Jones with Trenners isn't like for like. Jones is much quicker and more agile. Would have thought Wags or Stretch to hb and Salem into the middle. Vince and/or Milkshake to tag if need be. 

However, I trust match selection these days and would love to be proved wrong. The last couple of weeks our relentless pressure has been very good, and that's one thing going in JTs favour.

4 minutes ago, McQueen said:

I don't want to have to call the Mythbusters to sort this one out but if I hear another "wide open spaces" call about Subiaco I'll commit a feckin homicide.

The ground is effectively 7 metres longer each side of the centre circle compared to the MCG but is not as wide (I think @jnrmac gave the dimensions on another thread). A players speed has absolutely SWEET F@#$ ALL to do with how effective they will be in relation to this small variance at league level. In my opinion, the only effect it has on game strategy is on most facets of set ups and postioning at stoppage and zoning. And, given we have good speed on our back and forward lines I can't see how this is going to adversely affect these players.

Playing as an inside mid with a big tank, Trengove will be just fine at Subiaco.

Anything for picket to discourage Trengrove's speed.

Hope so - deserves a chance. Has been very consistent at Casey and provides good on field leadership. 

Problem for me is that no one in the current team deserves to be dropped, and Max in is a certainty. So Jack may have to be patient.

2 minutes ago, PaulRB said:

Problem for me is that no one in the current team deserves to be dropped, and Max in is a certainty. So Jack may have to be patient.

Not sure players will be dropped so much as managed with the travel and 6 day turnarounds 

14 minutes ago, McQueen said:

I don't want to have to call the Mythbusters to sort this one out but if I hear another "wide open spaces" call about Subiaco I'll commit a feckin homicide.

The ground is effectively 7 metres longer each side of the centre circle compared to the MCG but is not as wide (I think @jnrmac gave the dimensions on another thread). A players speed has absolutely SWEET F@#$ ALL to do with how effective they will be in relation to this small variance at league level. In my opinion, the only effect it has on game strategy is on most facets of set ups and postioning at stoppage and zoning. And, given we have good speed on our back and forward lines I can't see how this is going to adversely affect these players.

Playing as an inside mid with a big tank, Trengove will be just fine at Subiaco.

Great that someone picks this up!!

MCG 160 x 141m

Subi 176 x 122m - 16m longer but 19m narrower

Etihad (for comparison) 159 x 129m.

Subi is only "faster" if an attack "gets out the back". WCE know that if they are able to move the ball well through the relatively congested corridor, their forwards can anticipate and run forward EARLY knowing they've got extra space to play with. For the same reason, Subi really punishes midfield turnovers.

The ball is therefore harder to get through or move out of the corridor and the middle of the ground, but when you do, the rewards are greater. Whether it's faster or not depends on how you play it, and whether we're aware of how the opposition play it.

i'm torn over trengove

the only role i could see is playing as a close tagger on mitchell where speed would not be an issue, but could he do the job on mitchell effectively......maybe? .....If he could take mitchell out of the game it would be worth it

 

4 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

i'm torn over trengove

the only role i could see is playing as a close tagger on mitchell where speed would not be an issue, but could he do the job on mitchell effectively......maybe? .....If he could take mitchell out of the game it would be worth it

 

If....

18 minutes ago, Akum said:

Great that someone picks this up!!

MCG 160 x 141m

Subi 176 x 122m - 16m longer but 19m narrower

Etihad (for comparison) 159 x 129m.

Subi is only "faster" if an attack "gets out the back". WCE know that if they are able to move the ball well through the relatively congested corridor, their forwards can anticipate and run forward EARLY knowing they've got extra space to play with. For the same reason, Subi really punishes midfield turnovers.

The ball is therefore harder to get through or move out of the corridor and the middle of the ground, but when you do, the rewards are greater. Whether it's faster or not depends on how you play it, and whether we're aware of how the opposition play it.

MCG - 17,709 square metres

Subi - 16,855 square metres

More room on the MCG.

2 minutes ago, Demonised said:

MCG - 17,709 square metres

Subi - 16,855 square metres

More room on the MCG.

Square metres apart, West Coast play a zone that suits the shape of the oval.

Goodwin seems to be a pretty switched on coach and I would be surprised if we didn't adjust accordingly.

Win this week and we will be the talking point of the competition.

 

53 minutes ago, chook fowler said:

Not sure players will be dropped so much as managed with the travel and 6 day turnarounds 

I think people are overly focused on the very small difference between a 7 day break (I.e. that Trenners is on) and a 6 day break (which a current best 22 is on)... it's 1 day FFS! And with sports scientists, masseuses, physios, blah, blah blah I'm sure it can be managed so as to have little to no impact.

Specific injuries are a seperate discussion.

The team has said they've prepared for this sequence of games and I assume, as a result, that we'll manage it so as to have our current best 22 on the park for each game. As we don't have the wins in the bank to "manage" players which results in anything less than our best 22.  

18 minutes ago, PaulRB said:

I think people are overly focused on the very small difference between a 7 day break (I.e. that Trenners is on) and a 6 day break (which a current best 22 is on)... it's 1 day FFS! And with sports scientists, masseuses, physios, blah, blah blah I'm sure it can be managed so as to have little to no impact.

Specific injuries are a seperate discussion.

The team has said they've prepared for this sequence of games and I assume, as a result, that we'll manage it so as to have our current best 22 on the park for each game. As we don't have the wins in the bank to "manage" players which results in anything less than our best 22.  

Geelong off the bye haven't won in years. That is approximately a 14 day break. Teams complain about a 6 day break. What is it about 7 days that makes it the magic number? 

I wouldn't say Jones has been playing a predominantly "inside" role, so not entirely a like for like imo. Jones gets on the outside a fair bit these days.

Love the sentiment here, which I share, but I hope the match committee don't share. If they think he is good enough great otherwise let's pick our best side for the West. 

3 hours ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

Give the kid a run, he bloody deserves it. 

He deserves it, and he should be ready. I feel there are no excuses anymore. At least this kid will be able to look back knowing that he had every opportunity. I still feel as though he has plenty to offer. I have been keeping an eye on his stats in the VFL, and his DE (with I think is disposal efficiency, but could be effectiveness) is usually very good, and that is an area we aren't so great at as a team. So I think Trengove has something to offer our team. If he managed to get back anywhere near his best it would be a massive bonus. He was the best junior I have seen on our list - closely followed by Petracca.

Only if Jordan Lewis is a late out.

 

4 hours ago, Demonland said:

Thoughts?

He's been "in the mix" every week!

4 hours ago, Luther said:

Stretch should have come back weeks ago IMO, we miss his run at times.

Trenners deserves a game on form, reward him.

For Stretch to come back in, who makes way for him?

We haven't lost a game for the past 4 weeks.  Pretty hard to bring in Stetch just to add some pace, when realistically, it hasn't been a concern in the past month.

Different story with the likes of Max coming straight back in.  Even given our current form, Hogan will be an upgrade on someone when he is ready to come back.

1 hour ago, Wrecker45 said:

Geelong off the bye haven't won in years. That is approximately a 14 day break. Teams complain about a 6 day break. What is it about 7 days that makes it the magic number? 

People love post hoc analysis to make sense that are actually made up of a multitude of factors -that confirm biases one way or another...AND THEN - these beliefs be it at a supporter or athlete level, actually start to perpetuate the outcome of the game because of the perceived influence and meaning that this has on stresss, cause and effect and output of behaviours. 

In effect people don't know what they don't know - and yes I am pontificating that I do... and am happy to provide examples and scientific evidence (not just 'theories) as to why this works...

Edited June 21, 20178 yr by Danelska