34 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I'm not so sure. I suspect Frost is picked for insurance to go to defence only if Brown and Waite cause problems. But team balance suggests to me that the only place for Frost is as a straight swap for Pedersen which means playing forward when he's not playing the second ruckman role. Otherwise I'm struggling like everyone else to see who plays second ruck for about 8 minutes every quarter. 

Brown is the back-up ruck for North, so maybe when he goes in so does Frost, then OMac swaps over to Waite?

I also think Gawn will go forward a fair bit and try and drag Goldy with him, I wouldn't mind them throwing Melky into the ruck around the ground when he is resting and backing our mids to win the clearance then have much better spread from the contest. Similar to what Richmond do with Grigg.

While there’s lots of hand wringing and moaning about Goodwin’s Ins and Outs this week, none on here have anything like Goodwin’s experience or access to data on the team and envisaged game plan, to do more than speculate.

so rather than add to the noise, I’d suggest the best way to gauge how well Goody is selecting, is look at those players Goodwin’s Added to the team went last week...

So Tyson and Bugg were added, both were handy, if a bit rusty (I.e. Bugg in front of goal), and we won the game...

In the coming weeks if they continue to perform and improve, Goodwins selection decision is further vindicated.

Same now with Froat and Kent, if they perform and we win, tick. 

Then maybe the weekly Henny-Penny session upon selection will ease into something more rational and trusting of our coach, players and FD. 

Frost will kick 3, and his presence,speed and pressure forward create a couple more. Kent kick 2 with a couple delivered long and lace out. 

Hunt will regain his fervour and attack with a stint in the twos...

Frost is the matchup for the agile Waite.  Oscar takes Brown with Lever supporting in his familiar Adelaide role.

I wasn't expecting these selections, but I'm excited to see how the structure works.  North have speed, so on reflection I can understand the changes.  It will force the the team to control the ball more and start taking more uncontested marks and possessions.  The connection between our mids and forwards hasn't been perfect, although Hogan got on the end of a few against Brisbane.

We're currently 15th for uncontested possessions, which means our ball use isn't as efficient as it could be and we're not controlling play as much as we'd like.  Top 5 UC possession teams after two rounds include GWS, Port, Geelong, and Adelaide.  The Saints are there too, but that's an anomaly and shows it's not just one aspect of the game that will deliver results.  They're also a lowly 17th for CP, whereas we're 5th (lower than last year).

Last year we were 5th for UCP (as against 15th), so something is different.  And that difference is our intent on getting the ball inside 50 with a view to either scoring or pressuring the opposition to keep it there.  We're far more direct, but unfortunately we're giving the ball up with turnovers, or long bombs into the 50 only to see the opposition run it out.  Which means we're under more pressure defensively than last year.  I wouldn't want to be a defender at Melbourne at the moment.  

Last year we were no.1 for average disposals and this year we're 12th.  We were also no.1 for handballs and this year 8th.  In trying to be more direct we're giving up the footy too often.  This also contributes to the opposition 'run ons' we find infuriating.  The game-plan has some significant changes from last year, so it will take time to bed it down completely.  The upside is we've gone from averaging 55 inside 50's, which was very good, to 60.  But that won't help much if you're not controlling your entry and we haven't been as well as we could.  Still, it's not all bad.  Last year we were 11th for marks inside 50 and this year 6th due to more direct play (Hogan and Garlett the beneficiaries at times against Brisbane).  

I don't think a lot needs to change, just control the footy a bit more with some uncontested marks/possessions.  In other words, the mids need to spread harder and smarter.

As I said, I didn't see it coming, but I don't mind the strategy of going smaller in the F50.  And unlike some, I don't see Pedersen as crucial to the game-plan.

 

 

3 minutes ago, deeko said:

Hardly next level. Just pick the best 22 who will win you a game. 

It was the same last year losing games to Freo by a less than a kick (not sure if Weid got a kick) and then the next week vs Tigs losing by a couple kicks. I think Tim Smith played that one (May be wrong) and may have got injured. Pedo was dominating the twos and was clearly the better player and I’m sure we would have jagged at least one win from the two. 

Tyson is clearly a better footballer than Maynard and killed it in the VFL the week before. There was no reason for him not to play. Losing by less than a kick you have to wonder what the result could have been with him in over Maynard.

If we miss out on finals by less than a game again it will be hard not to reflect on this again

Don't try and re-write history to suit your argument. That Tigers game, Tim Smith was injured early in the game and so was Spencer, so we had no back up ruck. It's like saying thankfully Peds didn't play that game otherwise he would have been injured too and we would have had no ruck (except the emerging guys) for half the season. Plus Peds hadn't played for Casey before that Freo game, and from memory play OK, he didn't tear it apart, Smith was named one of the bests and came in for Weids that next game against the Tigs.

 

2 hours ago, BrisbaneDemon said:

If Brown gets off the leash and starts kicking a few, i believe Frost will be played as a extra man in defense, if you shut down Brown you shut down North, well played Goodwin....

Why would you play Frost as an extra man in defense when you have one of the two best in the league in Lever?

 

I don't have any problem with us dropping Hunt, he hasn't shown anywhere near his 2016 form this year. Hopefully he'll dominate in the VFL and demand to be put back in, we all know what he's got but he hasn't shown it this year.

Pederson I was a little surprised by, I didn't think he was doing a bad job as relief ruck/forward but I guess he wasn't doing a whole lot of positive things as well. Frost gets given a chance as second ruck/defender, which I like because for a big guy he has great pace.

Kents inclusion surprises me but again he has pace which suits our running style. 

Who will we potentially look to tag? Who will the Kangaroos look to tag?

1 minute ago, jnrmac said:

Why would you play Frost as an extra man in defense when you have one of the two best in the league in Lever?

have to agree with JnrMac. Frost isn't there as an extra man in defence, he's there as an extra tall IN our defence (even though  listed as CHF on the team sheet) It means that Lever can play third tall which should be good for his confidence. But I can't see Frost used as a 7th player behind the ball, that would be Lever playing as intercept player, or someone like Lewis depending on why they are playing a spare defender.

13 minutes ago, ProDee said:

Frost is the matchup for the agile Waite.  Oscar takes Brown with Lever supporting in his familiar Adelaide role.

I wasn't expecting these selections, but I'm excited to see how the structure works.  North have speed, so on reflection I can understand the changes.  It will force the the team to control the ball more and start taking more uncontested marks and possessions.  The connection between our mids and forwards hasn't been perfect, although Hogan got on the end of a few against Brisbane.

We're currently 15th for uncontested possessions, which means our ball use isn't as efficient as it could be and we're not controlling play as much as we'd like.  Top 5 UC possession teams after two rounds include GWS, Port, Geelong, and Adelaide.  The Saints are there too, but that's an anomaly and shows it's not just one aspect of the game that will deliver results.  They're also a lowly 17th for CP, whereas we're 5th (lower than last year).

Last year we were 5th for UCP (as against 15th), so something is different.  And that difference is our intent on getting the ball inside 50 with a view to either scoring or pressuring the opposition to keep it there.  We're far more direct, but unfortunately we're giving the ball up with turnovers, or long bombs into the 50 only to see the opposition run it out.  Which means we're under more pressure defensively than last year.  I wouldn't want to be a defender at Melbourne at the moment.  

Last year we were no.1 for average disposals and this year we're 12th.  We were also no.1 for handballs and this year 8th.  In trying to be more direct we're giving up the footy too often.  This also contributes to the opposition 'run ons' we find infuriating.  The game-plan has some significant changes from last year, so it will take time to bed it down completely.  The upside is we've gone from averaging 55 inside 50's, which was very good, to 60.  But that won't help much if you're not controlling your entry and we haven't been as well as we could.  Still, it's not all bad.  Last year we were 11th for marks inside 50 and this year 6th due to more direct play (Hogan and Garlett the beneficiaries at times against Brisbane).  

I don't think a lot needs to change, just control the footy a bit more with some uncontested marks/possessions.  In other words, the mids need to spread harder and smarter.

As I said, I didn't see it coming, but I don't mind the strategy of going smaller in the F50.  And unlike some, I don't see Pedersen as crucial to the game-plan.

 

 

This is the crucial bit. We are definitely trying to get the ball in quicker to our fwd line. This means less chipping around and less uncontested posessions. I can live with that.

We haven't got it quite right yet as it also means if our mids and fwds cant hold the ball in, it bounces out pretty quickly and our players are out of position. We saw against Geelong a lot of bombing into our fwd line. We clearly weren't playing to coaches instructions and the ball flew out. The first half saw Geelong's 24 entries i50 result in 20 shots at goal an 8 points given up.

We got it right in the first half against Brisbane but fell away in the second half for a host of reasons- two of which are probably the 6 day break and the humidity. Umpiring was another.

Its round 3 and we are trying to get the balance right. I will watch with great interest how we manage that balance between attack and defend. I would say the selections are designed to bolster that speed and flexibility (not sure Kent is that flexible but Hannan was failing in one of his key roles of fwd pressure.)

I think thats why Goody loves Bugg so much. He tackles, has endurance and applies a lot of pressure. Lets' himself down with kicks but a coach will cut them some slack for that if the first part is delivered.

2 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Hope you are right 'Rusty' and that extra space isn't just used up by their spare man in defence and other than Jeffy, our small forwards haven't shown much success so far this year, at being able to pounce and snare goals. 

The make up of this weeks team is a bit of a mystery.  It supports the game plan we would like to have (midfield defence, accurate fwd 50 entries, high pressure forwards) but that isn't what we actually do or are capable of doing.   But gosh I hope this team works out!

Like OD I still think we are about 4 to 5 quality players off troubling the top 6 clubs.  But Norf isn't a top 6 prospect at this point of the season so this week SHOULD be very gettable.  In the end everything said on here is just a bunch of thoughts and in some cases very astute observations mixed in with some cluey football brains (some with experience some with none).  I am obviously not one of those.  In the end we just have to sit back and have faith in the ppl appointed that they are making the right moves, most of the time!  Nobody is perfect but given where we are coming from as a club we need a hec more correct moves than crappy ones in order to get ourselves out of the gutter that was the last decade.

We have seen definite signs of progress for sure and some great work by all involved to get us out of the mud in the gutter that was the Neeld era. To me though, this week is a line in the sand critical match that we absolutely must win if we are to take a psychological step forward and leap frog some of the middle of the rung clubs (or just below), like Norf, and start to pave our own way up the ladder into successful times.

A win this week will also boost the confidence of all involved at the club that we are doing just that, not just the players and internal stakeholders.  Will be a nice boost to the cophers of our membership drive I would think and bust the last major hoodoo!  After this weekend we might be all ahead full steam as a revitalised club on a real path to success...finally.  Fingers crossed!

If the coach is to be believed Frost is there for defence:  '... we were keen to put another tall defender in Sam Frost into the team...'

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-04-06/jayden-unlucky-but-not-at-his-best-goodwin

Looks to me they are experimenting with different defense combos.

So small forward line it is.  Pray for accurate kicking into the forward line and lots of pressure from midfielders and our small/mid sized forwards.

13 minutes ago, ProDee said:

Frost is the matchup for the agile Waite.  Oscar takes Brown with Lever supporting in his familiar Adelaide role.

I wasn't expecting these selections, but I'm excited to see how the structure works.  North have speed, so on reflection I can understand the changes.  It will force the the team to control the ball more and start taking more uncontested marks and possessions.  The connection between our mids and forwards hasn't been perfect, although Hogan got on the end of a few against Brisbane.

We're currently 15th for uncontested possessions, which means our ball use isn't as efficient as it could be and we're not controlling play as much as we'd like.  Top 5 UC possession teams after two rounds include GWS, Port, Geelong, and Adelaide.  The Saints are there too, but that's an anomaly and shows it's not just one aspect of the game that will deliver results.  They're also a lowly 17th for CP, whereas we're 5th (lower than last year).

Last year we were 5th for UCP (as against 15th), so something is different.  And that difference is our intent on getting the ball inside 50 with a view to either scoring or pressuring the opposition to keep it there.  We're far more direct, but unfortunately we're giving the ball up with turnovers, or long bombs into the 50 only to see the opposition run it out.  Which means we're under more pressure defensively than last year.  I wouldn't want to be a defender at Melbourne at the moment.  

Last year we were no.1 for average disposals and this year we're 12th.  We were also no.1 for handballs and this year 8th.  In trying to be more direct we're giving up the footy too often.  This also contributes to the opposition 'run ons' we find infuriating.  The game-plan has some significant changes from last year, so it will take time to bed it down completely.  The upside is we've gone from averaging 55 inside 50's, which was very good, to 60.  But that won't help much if you're not controlling your entry and we haven't been as well as we could.  Still, it's not all bad.  Last year we were 11th for marks inside 50 and this year 6th due to more direct play (Hogan and Garlett the beneficiaries at times against Brisbane).  

I don't think a lot needs to change, just control the footy a bit more with some uncontested marks/possessions.  In other words, the mids need to spread harder and smarter.

As I said, I didn't see it coming, but I don't mind the strategy of going smaller in the F50.  And unlike some, I don't see Pedersen as crucial to the game-plan.

 

 

This is the crucial bit. We are definitely trying to get the ball in quicker to our fwd line. This means less chipping around and less uncontested posessions. I can live with that.

We haven't got it quite right yet as it also means if our mids and fwds cant hold the ball in, it bounces out pretty quickly and our players are out of position. We saw against Geelong a lot of bombing into our fwd line. We clearly weren't playing to coaches instructions and the ball flew out. The first half saw Geelong's 24 entries i50 result in 20 shots at goal an 8 points given up.

We got it right in the first half against Brisbane but fell away in the second half for a host of reasons- two of which are probably the 6 day break and the humidity. Umpiring was another.

Its round 3 and we are trying to get the balance right. I will watch with great interest how we manage that balance between attack and defend. I would say the selections are designed to bolster that speed and flexibility (not sure Kent is that flexible but Hannan was failing in one of his key roles of fwd pressure.)

I think thats why Goody loves Bugg so much. He tackles, has endurance and applies a lot of pressure. Lets' himself down with kicks but a coach will cut them some slack for that if the first part is delivered.

1 minute ago, Red and Blue realist said:

Don't try and re-write history to suit your argument. That Tigers game, Tim Smith was injured early in the game and so was Spencer, so we had no back up ruck. It's like saying thankfully Peds didn't play that game otherwise he would have been injured too and we would have had no ruck (except the emerging guys) for half the season. Plus Peds hadn't played for Casey before that Freo game, and from memory play OK, he didn't tear it apart, Smith was named one of the bests and came in for Weids that next game against the Tigs.

 

Ok R&B I can’t remember exactly how it went with injuries but I do recall Smith going down. Not blaming that (and Spence) in the tiges game but I remember at the time wondering why Pedo wasn’t in.

I was at that Casey rd 1 game. Pedo had a great match around the ground clunking some big grabs everywhere and had plenty of the pill. Smith played really well also and I recall now being stoked when he got his shot at it. 

I’m not trying to rewrite history here. I just get a tad touchy when we lose in a close game and subjective players do little. 

 

You have to admire Buggs attitudinal turn around and application, if not his skills

Buggs played his first game at this level since he hit the Swan and was ostracised... a little slack and time for him to tweak and get into his groove would seem fair..?

When he was at his pesky best last year, we were rolling.

 

This quoting Hibberd seems to support Frost playing in defence...but not necessarily the thought that it would be to free up Lever: 

Melbourne Footy‏ @MelbourneFooty

FollowingFollowing @MelbourneFooty

More

Michael Hibberd: "With Frosty back this week, it might free me up a bit, which will allow me to use my run and carry, as it's probably my biggest strength." #AFLDeesNorth

2 hours ago, jnrmac said:

Why would you play Frost as an extra man in defense when you have one of the two best in the league in Lever?

 

Because Lever is going great guns at the moment........

2 hours ago, ProDee said:

Frost is the matchup for the agile Waite.

Seems to be the case.

I just hope his game IQ has gone up a notch because Waite is a very smart footballer and will play him on a break if not.

7 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

This quoting Hibberd seems to support Frost playing in defence...but not necessarily the thought that it would be to free up Lever: 

Melbourne Footy‏ @MelbourneFooty

FollowingFollowing @MelbourneFooty

More

Michael Hibberd: "With Frosty back this week, it might free me up a bit, which will allow me to use my run and carry, as it's probably my biggest strength." #AFLDeesNorth

Maybe it will free up both Lever and Hbberd.

We will become a much better and dangerous team.

I understand what Bugg brings to the side, but I also understand that his skills are below required AFL level, and his inability to hit the scoreboard severely hurts the side. 

For me he is on borrowed time. 

Is Gus out of contract? I’m surprised he is not an emergency at least this week. 

If it is Frost on Waite, I suspect Frosty might burn him a couple of times on the rebound.

One of the joys of watching Sam play is when he breaks from defense like a crazed Great Dane bounding headlong forward, at which time we all get excited and yell "Frrrrrooooossst!!!!" ... before he bombs it long and turns it over... and we sit quietly down and drink more beer.

1 hour ago, deeko said:

I’m not trying to rewrite history here. I just get a tad touchy when we lose in a close game and subjective players do little. 

Just seems to be a lot of people who jump on the coach about selection, in particular about 'subjective' players, without realising that only taking the advice of those on here, Jones, Gawn, Jetta, TMac, OMac, ANB, Harmes etc. would have never have played more than a handful of games before being sent on their way (they were all subjective players during their career - OMac arguably still is on here). Unless those players were giving an extended go we'd never know how good they could be. Clearly Maynard had shown the coaches enough to be picked round 1, it didn't work so they sent him back to Casey, not going to crucify the coaches for that or place blame on 1 player when we lose by less than a kick.

Brayshaw's is form

Hannan and Hunt the same

I asked at training today

They are expected to knock the door down at Casey, starting Sunday

Kent has been rewarded for not only 'attacking' the game last week, even though it was only a praccy game but his training, he has been doing extra and has exceeded all his previous stats

3 hours ago, Pates said:

Who will we potentially look to tag? Who will the Kangaroos look to tag?

Vince to Cunnington.

Jabobs will go to Jones or Oliver.

I am going to ask all these people putting Frost onto Waite what happens if Waite plays the backline ? He did that a fair bit last week.