Jump to content

Featured Replies

Presented, contested, grabbed 2, kicked 2, got pushed in back probably 6 times.

Play him for the rest of the season and let him build some continuity and confidence!

 
3 hours ago, D4Life said:

Presented, contested, grabbed 2, kicked 2, got pushed in back probably 6 times.

Play him for the rest of the season and let him build some continuity and confidence!

Couldn't agree more looks like he is scared to make a mistake cos he will get dropped, Needs to be told your playing for the rest of the season as long as you crash packs and have second efforts, the goals will come 

Almost gave me the"old Weideman smile" of how much he liked it. Turned a corner i reckon.

 

He played his role yesterday. He provides us a strong target inside 50, and though he doesn’t clunk all the marks he crashes packs and creates opportunities for our smalls. Another thing I liked is that he doesn’t get sucked up the ground like others in the forwardline - he anchors himself closer to goal and it improves our entire structure. If he plays that same role he did yesterday he’d kick 40 goals a year and setup many more.

He needs to stay in the team and needs to be played forward, not swung around the ground in the ruck. Sure he can take ruck contests inside 50, but he stays inside 50.

Edited by Lord Travis

He should be designated as our #1 up forward, leading our attack. I reckon he will come on if given that kind of responsibility.


It was a pass yesterday with a couple of good marks. Question I have when we snap a quick kick forward how often does his opponent mark Lin stead of him? Almost always. One on one push and shove he is quite poor. When he gets a run at it he is potentially very good. I was hoping by now he could push off his opponent a bit better. 

32 minutes ago, Bay Riffin said:

It was a pass yesterday with a couple of good marks. Question I have when we snap a quick kick forward how often does his opponent mark Lin stead of him? Almost always. One on one push and shove he is quite poor. When he gets a run at it he is potentially very good. I was hoping by now he could push off his opponent a bit better. 

He is a leading type forward, keep playing him to his strengths. That GC kid who was taking all the marks is a star. 

 

Defenders covered him more than would normally happen. T Mac looked good early in game because defenders needed to cover both Weid and Tom. When Tom went of the defenders then just needed to cover Weid. This made his efforts yesterday even more commendable. He will get better with more games under his belt.


Please for Weid but still needs to build he strength around the legs and backside.

He definitely gets outbodied a bit and shoved under the ball but this will come.

Played his role yesterday clunking a couple and crashing some packs. The structure looks a thousand times better with him in.

Hopefully they just play him all year now as a second target. Gives Maxy a rest not having to push forward so much

10 minutes ago, John Lord said:

Defenders covered him more than would normally happen. T Mac looked good early in game because defenders needed to cover both Weid and Tom. When Tom went of the defenders then just needed to cover Weid. This made his efforts yesterday even more commendable. He will get better with more games under his belt.

Bang on John, I'd be signing him up for the next 5 years...big breakout coming up

Yesterday was just his 32nd game. He still has a heap of learning and development to go through before he reaches his peak.

Just needs to learn how to use his big bodied presence more. The 2018 EF & SF shows he can do it.

He was serviceable. Kicking straight made a big difference as he was out marked and failed to make a contest on too many occasions. When he does contest and split packs it looks great but doesn't do it often enough.

People saying he needs to play the rest of the year based on that performance are kidding themselves. He has earned his game next week and that's it at this stage.

Edited by Watts the matter


26 minutes ago, Demon Disciple said:

Yesterday was just his 32nd game. He still has a heap of learning and development to go through before he reaches his peak.

Just needs to learn how to use his big bodied presence more. The 2018 EF & SF shows he can do it.

Only just turned 23 as well. Anyone expecting him to play like a 26-27 year old big key forward is kidding themselves.

It's time for him to show a bit, but we can't expect him to dominate. I think people see a Hogan type come straight in an dominate and expect all talks to do it. It just doesn't happen.

Edit: for comparisons sake. Hawkins break out year was the year he turned 24 (2012). Until then, he had done very little (except win 2 flags of course). 18 games and 21 goals in 2010, and dropped from the seniors in 2011.

I'm not saying Weid will be a Hawkins, but all but the very special big guys take time.

Edited by Mickey

6 minutes ago, Mickey said:

Only just turned 23 as well. Anyone expecting him to play like a 26-27 year old big key forward is kidding themselves.

It's time for him to show a bit, but we can't expect him to dominate. I think people see a Hogan type come straight in an dominate and expect all talks to do it. It just doesn't happen.

Edit: for comparisons sake. Hawkins break out year was the year he turned 24 (2012). Until then, he had done very little (except win 2 flags of course). 18 games and 21 goals in 2010, and dropped from the seniors in 2011.

I'm not saying Weid will be a Hawkins, but all but the very special big guys take time.

For every Hawkins you could find 20 other key position players with similar outputs in their first few years.

The very special talls show it from day one with glimpses. I don't see it with Weideman.

This Weideman talk has been going on for the last 3 years now and it drives me nuts. I hope he does well but his poor agility and lack of ground level game will always hold him back.

I've mentioned it before but he has shown the least (maybe on par with Schache) out of all the talls from the first round in his draft. Most of them are also struggling this season but he has still shown the least. Hipwood, Curnow, McKay, Himmelberg, Weitering and Schache.

47 minutes ago, Watts the matter said:

For every Hawkins you could find 20 other key position players with similar outputs in their first few years.

The very special talls show it from day one with glimpses. I don't see it with Weideman.

This Weideman talk has been going on for the last 3 years now and it drives me nuts. I hope he does well but his poor agility and lack of ground level game will always hold him back.

I've mentioned it before but he has shown the least (maybe on par with Schache) out of all the talls from the first round in his draft. Most of them are also struggling this season but he has still shown the least. Hipwood, Curnow, McKay, Himmelberg, Weitering and Schache.

Weitering has only just come good, and he was a number 1 draft pick. Hipwood and Curnow play as tall flankers rather than key forwards. 

McKay is another who is only just coming on and I think will be a good player. But these guys are only just coming into the age where they should be impacting consistently. 

All I'm saying is writing him off at this stage is a tad premature in my opinion.

For someone who hasn’t played for a very long time at senior level and given our generally woeful delivery forward, he did as well as can be expected. 


He attacks the contests and he rarely gets out marked which means he nullifies the constant stream of slow high bombs that go into our forward 50 which at least created a ground level contest and allows us to lock the ball in. 
We were so much better at keeping the contest in our front half yesterday simply for this reason. We had repeated entries and while they didn’t always work like in previous weeks, yesterday the ball didn’t just bounce in and then straight out again. 

He did his job, and injuries aside, should be given every game for the rest of this season.

Would love to see a full game of him and Tmac as our two talls. Both would benefit greatly from not taking multiple tall defenders individually, and there is no doubt our structure would look much better too. 

I just hope we leave him in the team for 4 - 5 weeks 

he will have bad patches even games , but he will learn , let him play 


It is not Rocket science that we need two tall forwards as focal points and one of them to crash the pack for the crumbers every now and again. The Weid  IMO is  crucial and now must be paired with another tall, may it be Brown Tmac or Petty when fit.

He had a good game without TMac and held his own. Needs a partner in crime.  I hope Goody plays him and gives him time to perform.

Edited by nosoupforme

I thought Sam presented and played quite well on Saturday.  All things considered.  Kudos.

It's a tough gig playing as a KPF these days.  Crowded forward lines & zones makes it near impossible for a KPF to stand out.

So the expectations need to be tempered.  A lot of grunt work for not a lot of reward.  But without that structure,  our forward line is up against it. 

And he's still learning. 

You'd like to imagine that Sam would be getting some specialised coaching because again,  it's a tough role to excel at.  Body positioning,  knowing where to be and where to lead to as well as the other basics often need to be taught.  Unless said player is a bit of a natural.

And if T-Mac is out next game we need to place another tall in the forward line otherwise Weideman can be double-teamed out of the contest (esp against a team like the Hawks) Brown is the back-up so he looks the logical replacement.  Petracca & Gawn can drift forward to help out. 

Not sure Weideman or Brown are suited as forwards who can roam far and wide as T-Mac can do (when he's on song) so we might have to improvise in that area.  Melk & Fritsch can both play as high half forwards so there's that option.

If we were marking him on a A+ to F system I’d give him maybe a generous B+, he had good periods to the game where he was timing his runs well to give him the best opportunity to mark it or at the very least bring it to ground. Ironically his best passage of play involved him not even marking the ball, he had three opponents going up for the same ball as him and he crashed the pack (taking out another suns player) and it resulted in a goal for us. It was Neitz/Ox like. 

2 goals and 2 contested marks is a decent first up effort, I’d hope this is a starting point. Need a bit more follow up work as well which was a highlight of his at the end of 2018. 

 
13 hours ago, Watts the matter said:

For every Hawkins you could find 20 other key position players with similar outputs in their first few years.

The very special talls show it from day one with glimpses. I don't see it with Weideman.

This Weideman talk has been going on for the last 3 years now and it drives me nuts. I hope he does well but his poor agility and lack of ground level game will always hold him back.

I've mentioned it before but he has shown the least (maybe on par with Schache) out of all the talls from the first round in his draft. Most of them are also struggling this season but he has still shown the least. Hipwood, Curnow, McKay, Himmelberg, Weitering and Schache.

yes and at pick 9 he was amongst the most fancied

17 hours ago, Demon Disciple said:

He should be designated as our #1 up forward, leading our attack. I reckon he will come on if given that kind of responsibility.

Wouldn't it be great if w e could finally develop our own 


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

Featured Content

  • NON-MFC: Round 13

    Follow all the action from every Round 13 clash excluding the Dees as the 2025 AFL Premiership Season rolls on. With Melbourne playing in the final match of the round on King's Birthday, all eyes turn to the rest of the competition. Who are you tipping to win? And more importantly, which results best serve the Demons’ finals aspirations? Join the discussion and keep track of the matches that could shape the ladder and impact our run to September.

    • 73 replies
  • PREVIEW: Collingwood

    Having convincingly defeated last year’s premier and decisively outplayed the runner-up with 8.2 in the final quarter, nothing epitomized the Melbourne Football Club’s performance more than its 1.12 final half, particularly the eight consecutive behinds in the last term, against a struggling St Kilda team in the midst of a dismal losing streak. Just when stability and consistency were anticipated within the Demon ranks, they delivered a quintessential performance marked by instability and ill-conceived decisions, with the most striking aspect being their inaccuracy in kicking for goal, which suggested a lack of preparation (instead of sleeping in their hotel in Alice, were they having a night on the turps) rather than a well-rested team. Let’s face it - this kicking disease that makes them look like raw amateurs is becoming a millstone around the team’s neck.

    • 1 reply
  • CASEY: Sydney

    The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

    • 1 reply
  • REPORT: St. Kilda

    Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
    This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

    • 4 replies
  • PREGAME: Collingwood

    After a disappointing loss in Alice Springs the Demons return to the MCG to take on the Magpies in the annual King's Birthday Big Freeze for MND game. Who comes in and who goes out?

    • 305 replies
  • PODCAST: St. Kilda

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 2nd June @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we have a chat with former Demon ruckman Jeff White about his YouTube channel First Use where he dissects ruck setups and contests. We'll then discuss the Dees disappointing loss to the Saints in Alice Springs.
    Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show.
    Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/

    • 47 replies