Who are we playing? When ? Why? How? It’s crazy. 

Just now, spirit of norm smith said:

Who are we playing? When ? Why? How? It’s crazy. 

We are now playing Richmond (previously playing WCE in QLD) as Victorian teams are not allowed to enter Queensland.

8 hours ago, bing181 said:

How many games has he played this year?

I'll wait.

He's had his whole footballing life to work out when your under pressure you get football to ball wide and long in congestion.

He can have a cup of tea after the game.

Edited June 29, 20204 yr by Win4theAges

18 minutes ago, Demonland said:

We are now playing Richmond (previously playing WCE in QLD) as Victorian teams are not allowed to enter Queensland.

Ok. Just got the news and threads updates

We looked better up forward when Tmac went off and Trac was down there, however i did think Tmac showed some improvement late in the game. He needs some support and I would include Weid (or Jackson who at least has a crack) at FF. 

I am not convinced Smith is the answer down back and would prefer someone who can play a lock down role. Omac did that on Darling and this week with two serious forwards on the paddock we need him and May. (Lever's  inexplicable early performance where he failed to contest left me bewildered and he can't play the lock down role). 

In: Omac; Weid (or Jackson); Bennell.

Out: Smith;VDB; Hannan( or Melk)

Melksham should be in trouble. We have plenty of mid sized forwards and he is in the worst form. Tom McDonald is in terrible nick but we are not doing him any favours by playing him as the sole key forward. Brown and/or Weideman should be considered. The likes of Bennell and Kolodjashnij (if fit) could at least offer some much needed run and polish. I’m not particularly pleased with the roles of Lockhart, Smith and Salem at the moment either. Viney and Oliver need to lift, they are offering little in terms of flexibility or accountability at the moment and if our form gets much worse I can see a Matt Crouch style selection statement being made. I know it won’t happen but the changes I would like to see would be - In: Bennell, Brown, Jetta, O Mac Out: Lockhart, Melksham, Salem, Smith. 

16 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

I really felt for Lockhart after he got pinned late in the last quarter. Prior to his injury he was playing really well and was one of the more cleaner players on the ground.

I do hope he gets another go next week. I would continue to bank games into him and get as much experience as possible. 

Agreed - there’s no point to keep chopping and changing. Keep Lockhart and keep Rivers - both will be key components of our defence going forward. In fact most of the guys from Sunday are the right players, they just need (a) game time together (b) to be played in their best positions and (c) to be given a coherent system.

22 minutes ago, Robbie57 said:

We looked better up forward when Tmac went off and Trac was down there, however i did think Tmac showed some improvement late in the game. He needs some support and I would include Weid (or Jackson who at least has a crack) at FF. 

I am not convinced Smith is the answer down back and would prefer someone who can play a lock down role. Omac did that on Darling and this week with two serious forwards on the paddock we need him and May. (Lever's  inexplicable early performance where he failed to contest left me bewildered and he can't play the lock down role). 

In: Omac; Weid (or Jackson); Bennell.

Out: Smith;VDB; Hannan( or Melk)

O.Mac is a spud, Smith is a lot better will do the job on Riewoldt. Why the hatred?

In: Brown, Bennell

Out:  Salem VDB

Viney to back pocket. Brayshaw more game time. Kozzie some mid time.

Shake it up time. 

Omac in to take Riewoldt

May v Lynch

 

In Omac Bennell Brown

Out: Salem Melk AVB (looked a mile off it)

Jones for AVB would be my only change.

5 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

 

IMO, we have few players who are more trustworthy delivering the ball inside 50 than him. I genuinely do not understand your attack on that aspect of his game. He's one of the few players who kicks to a forward's advantage. Did it yesterday on at least two of those inside 50s you mention, did it again vs Carlton.

He's also one of the few players who consistently, all day, runs both ways. 

I can't think of one example in three games where he's been obviously caught out for a lack of speed, either. Not every player has to have Hunt's foot speed.

From what I saw of yesterday's game he was probably in our 10 best players.

Tomlinson was caught holding the ball at half forward, he was caught scrambling to chase faster opponents constantly all game, he's there with them but he's not really catching them. There's no point running all day if you're always behind. One very nice kick to Hunt against Carlton and one good I can remember yesterday, but so often he gets caught unwilling or unable to break a line, has to take a tackle and give a backwards handball or go behind the man on the mark. We've spent a tonne of cash on getting a bigger Dom Tyson with a slightly nicer kick.

It's not his top end speed that's the problem, it's his inability to change direction and accelerate to both defend and take the game on with the ball. It's the trade off for being 6'4 on the wing and given he doesn't use his height at all I don't see how he's ever going to be more than depth.

With the change of opponent especially if the Tigers keep Caddy and McIntosh I'd leave Tomlinson in for this week, but I still think Melksham, Vanders and Bennell are medium term wing options who have a lot more upside. 

 

1 hour ago, WERRIDEE said:

O.Mac is a spud, Smith is a lot better will do the job on Riewoldt. Why the hatred?

No hatred. What i said was: "I am not convinced Smith is the answer down back and would prefer someone who can play a lock down role. Omac did that on Darling and this week with two serious forwards on the paddock we need him and May."

 

 

2 hours ago, 3183 Dee said:

Agreed - there’s no point to keep chopping and changing. Keep Lockhart and keep Rivers - both will be key components of our defence going forward. In fact most of the guys from Sunday are the right players, they just need (a) game time together (b) to be played in their best positions and (c) to be given a coherent system.

This. I saw a bit of the Essendon game on Ssaturday night and I am amazed how similar both our teams played. Is it really possible that missing one game when everyone else has played, particularly only one game into the re-started season, can make that much difference? To answer my own question...I doubt it. But 12 changes, or whatever it was, over two rounds might. 

18 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Tomlinson was caught holding the ball at half forward, he was caught scrambling to chase faster opponents constantly all game, he's there with them but he's not really catching them. There's no point running all day if you're always behind. One very nice kick to Hunt against Carlton and one good I can remember yesterday, but so often he gets caught unwilling or unable to break a line, has to take a tackle and give a backwards handball or go behind the man on the mark. We've spent a tonne of cash on getting a bigger Dom Tyson with a slightly nicer kick.

It's not his top end speed that's the problem, it's his inability to change direction and accelerate to both defend and take the game on with the ball. It's the trade off for being 6'4 on the wing and given he doesn't use his height at all I don't see how he's ever going to be more than depth.

With the change of opponent especially if the Tigers keep Caddy and McIntosh I'd leave Tomlinson in for this week, but I still think Melksham, Vanders and Bennell are medium term wing options who have a lot more upside. 

 

I am 99% positive that kick to Hunt in the Carlton game was actually meant for Petracca on the short lead.

Goodwin is noticeably preferring quicker players this year.  Tomlinson's days are numbered especially against a quick team like Richmond who will just run around him.  Still can't understand why we picked him up and how much we paid when we clearly lacked pace.   

I reckon Lockhart would be better on the wing with his agility and pace against the Tigers.  

I fear this game could get very ugly

4 hours ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Good to see the masses finally wake up to how bad Melksham has been, he should never have played after his efforts in the Carlton game.

Completely inexcusable selection which cost us dearly on the weekend.

Why does our football department keep making these basic errors?

I suspect it's because he was our leading scorer last year and we can't score.

5 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

I'd move Melksham into the midfield on a permanent basis.  Yes, he's out of form, but he is one player who can be creative with ball in hand and hit targets forward of centre.  He might take a few risks and turn it over, but at least he is trying something.

 

Melk on ball was tried in round 1 and did not look good at all. That was a long time ago and might be worth another shot. Personally I'd try the wing at some stage where he played a lot for Essendon. But I'm worried the more he's asked to do defensively the more he'll struggle, he just doesn't look keen to run both ways and he misses those late in quarter red time moments when the game opens up.

5 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

I would have Fritsch play anywhere but inside 50 for the time being.  He is terrific on the lead, but he is even better with ball in hand.  I'd have him leading up from 50-70 metres out, then wheeling around to deliver quickly inside 50 as often as possible.

That leaves what happens inside 50.  I'd have McDonald deep forward with Weideman/Brown up at CHF.  Pickett is given the freedom to do as he pleases inside 50 as long as he is chasing and harassing when the ball hits the deck.  From there, you could have one of Bennell/Bedford as a smaller type forward with better skills, while having someone else like Hannan as another medium forward who can hit a few targets as well.

Haven't we seen over the last two years that Tom is so much better when using his tank to run up the ground and get on the lead? I think burying him deep will only frustrate him and lead to his form tailing off. He's got to keep hitting up and crashing packs and eventually he'll hold more of them. There's a decent argument for a second tall but Tom has to be played where he can do what he does best which is repeat leads.

I'd like to see more of a rotation of the deep forward, be that a second tall or Melk/Hunt/Hannan as it was on the weekend, but Fritsch is so close to being one of the best full forwards in the game - which is both an indictment on the game and praise for Bayley. 2 goals 7 and about 5 marks slipping through his fingers in easy scoring range so far, if there was ever a guy to just hold firm with in much the same role until his luck turns it's got be Fritter.

5 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

For that reason, I'd also have Salem up the ground.  I know they like his disposal coming out of the back half, but I don't see that as an issue.  Get him up to a rotation on the wing and even on a forward flank.

I'd also look to have Trac be a midfielder for 90% of the time.  Give him a spell forward every now and then, especially to mix things up a bit, but he gives us a different dynamic (as Melksham would) to Oliver, Viney and Gus.

I'd love to move Salem but it's not just kicking out of the backline it's composure around a pack to find some clearing handball receives and a defensive zone that needs continuity. If Salem comes up to the midfield then are we really trusting ageing Jetta and Hibberd and youthful Rivers and Lockhart to control things back there? Nev's never had attacking drive. We saw unrestrained Hibbo in round 1. Lockhart's not ready for a bigger role with the ball and that's a lot to put on Rivers. I guess Harmes go back, but he's more of an aggressive runner than the composed use that is still vital from half back.

I don't think the new and improved Trac tank is ready for full midfield and I still think he's so dangerous around half forward it's not the best idea either. You've then got at least a 5 man midfield rotation - I assume Harmes is back to half back - of which Viney has to play 75% midfield as well. All of a sudden you're looking at a lot of Oliver forward and Gus playing where I don't know?

I thought the coaches did pretty well on the weekend with the midfield rotations. Harmes back in got the speed and line breaking back. Brayshaw in limited minutes played as well as he had for a long time and started to look more like the balanced midfielder who's outside game (whilst up and down) can be a huge asset. Tracc played a nice balance and Oliver - getting to play a bit forward too -  was his usual self.

I think we forget what Harmes, Oliver and Brayshaw can do as inside midfielders capable of running, crashing off and through tackles and kicking long to space. We can have really good forward entries without excellent hit up kicks. Brisbane are a side that achieves it with Lyons, Berry, Neale. Hawthorn as well - Mitchell, O'Meara, Shiels and Worpel aren't exactly great kicks.

9 minutes ago, Demon Disciple said:

I fear this game could get very ugly

Me too. Dees by 6 goals +

9 minutes ago, Buzzy said:

I am 99% positive that kick to Hunt in the Carlton game was actually meant for Petracca on the short lead.

Goodwin is noticeably preferring quicker players this year.  Tomlinson's days are numbered especially against a quick team like Richmond who will just run around him.  Still can't understand why we picked him up and how much we paid when we clearly lacked pace.   

I reckon Lockhart would be better on the wing with his agility and pace against the Tigers.  

It was a desperation move to find a serviceable wing player but that's all he is.

Lockhart struggles for fitness and hunts the ball a bit too much to be a smart winger. Now we're back on the MCG I'd stick with Tomlinson just to cover the KM's but yeah his long contract is going to look like dead weight. 

15 hours ago, Mental Demons said:

Sends the wrong message to who?

How old is Lockhart ?

How many games has he played? 

Who is playing better to push him out?

In this start stop season I thought he was really good and took the mark of the day. He has a future and will get better with more games. He did tire but it was not why we lost and he still offered more than others have offered lately.

I like Locky and Think  he is part of our future backline with Rivers  BUT to not address his failure in being caught twice (not once) then laughing would be irresponsible.

To day he didn't cost us the game is not correct but at least 5 Geelong goals were soft in my opinion.

Lockys 2 frees No defender on goal line and Duncan  left alone At CHF both in the first quarter, are ALL match losing  goals.

Our defence has potential but I believe that O Mac as goalkeeper plus May at CHB and Lever floating and intercepting with Rivers on HB flanks and Lockhart with either Jets or Hibbo or Salem should be our best team defence.On occSions Joel May be better than one if the talls (Oscar ) for mobility.

I think Salem is ok but is not an urgent footballer and elsewhere his skills may be best suited.

The forward line is something else and a work in progress but it resembles a crowded marketplace or the Champs Élysées with about 8 roads meeting together 

Cant believe how Goody etc didn't look at Carlton separation of forwards that enabled one on ones with their Cats opponents and nullified their team football from the back.

Seriously what input does  Alan Richo A Goody and the defence coach (not sure who ) but we are so devoid of and plans to minimise our opponents it is so obvious it's disgraceful.

The whole team plays dumb  football Because there is no innovation by the Coaches.

BTW I would have switched Smith to the forward  line in the 3rd quarter or at least at 3/4 time to provide more spark and marking strength. Harmes full time back and more minutes from Angus and Trac on the ball.

You have to Make things happen at times And Goody is footy brain dead basically on game day !

Changes should be out AVB, Melksham in Brown/Weideman (whoever is going better in the scratch matches) and Bennel

1 hour ago, Demon Disciple said:

I fear this game could get very ugly

Going on yesterday’s performance, we’ll be lucky to even kick 6 goals

8 minutes ago, Demon Disciple said:

Going on yesterday’s performance, we’ll be lucky to even kick 6 goals

Given in two of Richmond's last three games they only scored five goals, that will be enough, thanks.

26 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Given in two of Richmond's last three games they only scored five goals, that will be enough, thanks.

I reckon a draw 4 goals 1 apiece. It stands the risk of being the most boring game of 2020 so far and there have been some doosies