agree with a couple posters, the back 6 were horribly exposed because our midfield was second rate. We got sucked into the contest so easily, they just sat out and waited for us to do stupid no look over the head handballs.. it was the Hawks game all over. When it comes in so quick, the Back 6 are always going to look slow,.

 

Unpopular  probably but Nathan Jones was horrible yesterday, in every aspect, heat came and he did not handle it. I love him and praise him often but its a 2 way street, he was bad, so was Jetta, and so was Hibbered, that doesnt help at all. I also thing we didn't pick a great side on reflection, Frost would have helped no doubt  about that, but in the end, this was on the midfield.

 

If you asked any supporter if we have looked slow the last 6 weeks they would say no, when we control teh ball we move it so well we look slick and quick. But the reality is we are slow when we are chasing from stoppages, its just the facts, which makes controling the stoppages so critical for us. 

 

Gawn got beaten, tried really hard, but a better ruckmen beat him. Oliver tried, but ineffective. Viney always tries, but  has not returned the dominant force we had hoped. 

 

Petracca is just going and Brayshaw tagged Phillips really well, but i dont understand the thought behind a ball winner tagging another ball winner. 

so after that rant:

 

OUT: Pedo / Spargo (works hard but not a goal kicker yet) Lewis (but i doubt they will drop him- he needs a couple weeks freshen up)

In: Weid / Garlett (need xfactor) Frost (for Dixon)

1 hour ago, titan_uranus said:

You've been posting about us winning the flag for six weeks.

Hypocrisy at its finest.

I still think we can win the flag but changes have to be made. Our lack of pace has to be one of them. I'm sure our midfield won't have a shocker again like they did against the pies.

2 minutes ago, WERRIDEE said:

I still think we can win the flag but changes have to be made. Our lack of pace has to be one of them. I'm sure our midfield won't have a shocker again like they did against the pies.

I'll bet they do have another shocker. Swans, Eagles to start with.

That's 3 floggings against 2 good teams (Pies Tigers) and against the Hawks plus Q1 against Dogs last week.

Sure we can win the flag (anything is possible) but on the sample set of data so far against top 8 teams, it would be very very long odds I suspect.

(Not trying to be argumentative with you or sound offensive. Internet words do not translate well without tone.)

In: Bugg, Weideman, Garlett.

Out: Hannan, Pedersen, Spargo (reluctantly)

1 minute ago, Dee Zephyr said:

In: Bugg, Weideman, Garlett.

Out: Hannan, Pedersen, Spargo (reluctantly)

Why drop Spargo for Bugg (Garlett can take Hannan’s spot)?

Why drop Spargo at all? 

And why play Bugg at all?

Strange how many people want to drop defenders and forwards when the major problem yesterday was the midfield. That said, the midfield has been very good the previous six weeks. So, I'm not in favour of making many changes but Pedersen was so poor I think he needs to make way for either Weideman or T Smith (preferably the former, as he's the better long-term prosect). It was always a risk having Gawn, Pedersen, Hogan and T McDonald in the same side. At least Weideman and T Smith offer more pace around the ground than Pedersen.

So, assuming no forced changes, I'd give the rest of the team another chance to show why they are already in the team ahead of everyone else. 

2 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Strange how many people want to drop defenders and forwards when the major problem yesterday was the midfield. That said, the midfield has been very good the previous six weeks. So, I'm not in favour of making many changes but Pedersen was so poor I think he needs to make way for either Weideman or T Smith (preferably the former, as he's the better long-term prosect). It was always a risk having Gawn, Pedersen, Hogan and T McDonald in the same side. At least Weideman and T Smith offer more pace around the ground than Pedersen.

So, assuming no forced changes, I'd give the rest of the team another chance to show why they are already in the team ahead of everyone else. 

This is a good point. What midfield depth do we have?

What if someone has an injury (Oliver) or is so out of form they need to be dropped. Who do we have in Casey? Tyson, sure. Garlett in the midfield or on wing (?). Who else? Sorry, don't pay enough attention to Casey.

3 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Strange how many people want to drop defenders and forwards when the major problem yesterday was the midfield. That said, the midfield has been very good the previous six weeks. So, I'm not in favour of making many changes but Pedersen was so poor I think he needs to make way for either Weideman or T Smith (preferably the former, as he's the better long-term prosect). It was always a risk having Gawn, Pedersen, Hogan and T McDonald in the same side. At least Weideman and T Smith offer more pace around the ground than Pedersen.

So, assuming no forced changes, I'd give the rest of the team another chance to show why they are already in the team ahead of everyone else. 

We were beaten last week against the Dogs n the midfield so alarm bells were ringing then. They have lost connection with Max again and are being smashed at the clearances - a rethink is needed because I think opposition sides have figured us out.

Just now, titan_uranus said:

Why drop Spargo for Bugg (Garlett can take Hannan’s spot)?

Why drop Spargo at all? 

And why play Bugg at all?

Something has to give unfortunately. I can’t see anyone omitted from the midfield even though they were poor yesterday. There might be a change in the defence but it was hardly their fault yesterday. Was that the highest inside 50 count against us this season?

I was disappointed at the easy goals the Pies got starting from deep in their defence. Perfect example was the goal with what was it? 30 seconds to go until the 3 quarter time siren and they had the ball in their back pocket Punt Rd end and went all the way with 3-4 kicks.

Bugg might be a more miss than hit with his kicking but does work his butt off defensively and finds himself in good spots more often than not. 

It’s only a suggestion which of course will end up way off the mark as usual. 

Smith stays. He did some good things. Tyson should be right in the frame and JKH, Garlett, Stretch and Frost chances too. If we want to move past Pedersen then Weid is a really promising ruck now which makes that an easier decision. As a 3rd tall, Weideman is fine right now. Harmes, ANB, Vince, and Hannan should be worried IMO. Spargo had a ripper 2nd term but faded. He looks lively though. Hannan, Harmes, and Pedersen for Tyson, Garlett, and Weid is what I would do.

I think the midfield mix needs to change, just not sure how that looks.

I watched jkh on Saturday and thought that he was playing a good brand of inside outside football.  I had marked his cards but I would think about giving him a run.

In: Tyson, Garlett, Frost

Out: Hannan, Spargo, Vince

 

Why have our clearances dropped off since we have had all of Viney, Oliver and Jones at our disposal?

Too many ball hunters?

12 minutes ago, rpfc said:

Smith stays. He did some good things. Tyson should be right in the frame and JKH, Garlett, Stretch and Frost chances too. If we want to move past Pedersen then Weid is a really promising ruck now which makes that an easier decision. As a 3rd tall, Weideman is fine right now. Harmes, ANB, Vince, and Hannan should be worried IMO. Spargo had a ripper 2nd term but faded. He looks lively though. Hannan, Harmes, and Pedersen for Tyson, Garlett, and Weid is what I would do.

Agree, although I'd keep Harmes in and drop Vince. We just can't play Vince and Lewis in the same side from now on I don't think

Core issue on lack of leg speed was getting smashed on the inside..Goodwin said something like when you're winning the inside you look fast on the outside...flip that...when you get smashed on the inside you look slow on the outside.  

In. Brayshaw (guts) ,Weed, GARLETT,  TYSON.

Out: Pedo, Spargo, Petracca

 

I think the midfield from now should be centred around Brayshaw, Oliver & Viney.

Petracca if no spell at Casey needs more time in there as well as Salem. In fact, Salem and Brayshaw have looked as good as anyone in the guts this year but we didn't see them moved into there yesterday for whatever reason.

A few players are causing me concern at this stage.  ANB and Harmes look a million dollars against the poorer teams but go completely to water when the pressure is turned up- both of them put in shockers against Hawthorn, Richmond and yesterday against Collingwood.  Against weak opposition ANB seems to have time and space to make smart decisions; Harmes seems powerful and assured.  When playing against the big bodies and intense pressure, they are fumbly and lost.

Whilst Lewis is experienced and a good organiser, and played some of his best games for the club in the last few weeks, he once again yesterday highlighted the absurdity of being a small defender who cannot keep pace with any opposition small forwards.  Can we really have him in our backline come finals, if he can't compete when the ball hits the ground?

Vince.  I'm just not seeing what he's giving us this year.  He used to be a physical player with a booming kick that would break opposition zones and put teammates running into space.  Yesterday he had just the seven kicks and one tackle.  I'm not sure that it's an issue with form for Bernie anymore, he just can't seem to keep up with the contest nowadays.

Love what Spargo has shown this year and I am convinced he will be a good player for us.  But yesterday, he was brushed aside with impunity.  He's come into the team, made a solid contribution and picked up invaluable experience, but he needs more bulk and strength if he's going to make a contribution against the better teams or in September.  Send him to the VFL, play him on the ball and let him develop there for a few weeks.

Seeing Collingwood's run yesterday, I'm not so convinced on the three-pronged tall forward line.  We need pace and some run and carry and our two fastest players (Hunt and Frost) are both playing VFL.  If Pedersen is to go out of the side, I would like to see him replaced with a small running player.

Essentially, I don't think we should base our changes on trying to re-strock the team that thrashed Essendon, Carlton, StKilda, Gold Coast, Adelaide and the Bulldogs.  We need to put together a team that can challenge and defeat Collingwood, Richmond or West Coast.

If Petty and Baker play we will get flogged. Pedersen and Smith go out as does one of  Spargo and Hannan. Frost, Hunt and Garlett come in. We’re a better side with Garlett and Hunt in form. Frost ads pace and hopefully he can act as the third man up. If we start bleeding I’d switch TMac done back and play Hogan one out in the square. We ran forward and over handballed in close on the weekend. Probably a by product of 6 weeks of flogging sides. It’s interesting to note that against Geelong we basically went man on man in the second half and held them to under 3 goals. Wouldn’t be opposed to playing Port that  way. Anyway we’ll rest and reload. Port Adelaide is our first final since 2006

Edited June 12, 20186 yr by Roost It

4 minutes ago, Roost It said:

If Petty and Baker play we will get flogged. Pedersen and Smith go out as does one of  Spargo and Hannan. Frost, Hunt and Garlett come in. We’re a better side with Garlett and Hunt in form. Frost ads pace and hopefully he can act as the third man up. If we start bleeding I’d switch TMac done back and play Hogan one out in the square. We ran forward and over handballed in close on the weekend. Probably a by product of 6 weeks of flogging sides. It’s interesting to note that against Geelong we basically went man on man in the second half and held them to under 3 goals. Wouldn’t be opposed to playing Port that  way. Anyway we’ll rest and reload. Port Adelaide is our first final since 2006

Yep - we're not at 'play the kids' just yet...

We need pace, but what we don't need is pace with poor disposal, I think this will be a targeted area in the coming draft/trade period. While Hunt and Frost are fast, they are butchers of the footy.

Two points:

1) I'm not a Pedo lover or hater but I'm a little over Match Committees not understanding that the probability of a player who's been concussed playing a good game the following week is something less than 20%.   Set ourselves up for failure right there.

2) Let's not overdo the need for outside pace.  Goodwin correctly stated in his presser that the biggest determinant of outside pace is winning the ball on the inside.  We failed to do that yesterday.  Sure, a classy outside mid would be a good addition.  However, the Dees have looked well and truly pacy when we were on the winning streak (and smashing it in terms of contested footy).

1 minute ago, Copuchas said:

Two points:

1) I'm not a Pedo lover or hater but I'm a little over Match Committees not understanding that the probability of a player who's been concussed playing a good game the following week is something less than 20%.   Set ourselves up for failure right there.

2) Let's not overdo the need for outside pace.  Goodwin correctly stated in his presser that the biggest determinant of outside pace is winning the ball on the inside.  We failed to do that yesterday.  Sure, a classy outside mid would be a good addition.  However, the Dees have looked well and truly pacy when we were on the winning streak (and smashing it in terms of contested footy).

True, but I'm more concerned by our pace when we don't have the ball.

 

 

Slight change of topic. Casey has another bye this weekend, didn’t they have one a few weeks ago? Does the VFL schedule their byes to coincide with the AFL side?

That makes Garlett and Stretch without a competitive game for nearly 3 weeks by the time the Port game comes around.

54 minutes ago, Stretch Johnson said:

Why have our clearances dropped off since we have had all of Viney, Oliver and Jones at our disposal?

Too many ball hunters?

 

46 minutes ago, Hardatit said:

Core issue on lack of leg speed was getting smashed on the inside..Goodwin said something like when you're winning the inside you look fast on the outside...flip that...when you get smashed on the inside you look slow on the outside.  

I think that's why Brayshaw was left on the wing most of the day, we were top heavy in the mid field while Oliver had a very good game, Viney was sent to tag DeGoey and Jones was pretty ordinary. I think if anything, we could have ran a tag with both Jones and Viney, with Viney going forward when not tagging and Jones heading to half back. 

My changes for Port would be Peds for Weid, and also Vince for Hunt - giving us more speed but to also play him alternating between wing and half back so either Jones or Viney can come out of the middle for Brayshaw to go in.