Trying to predict selection these days is a hard a trying to predict who we will be playing next weekend.

It seems that every adverse decision that is taken at the AFL has an effect on us. The season is so compromised and chopped up for us I find it very difficult to be involved.

No matter who we play next week I think we need a tall forward option and a tall back option. In Wiedeman and OMac. Out? take ya pick.

 

Play May in the forward line. Bring back Jetta. Try Vandenberg or Weidemann down back. Oscar MacDonald is a dud. Never pick him. Delist. At least May is big and can take a mark and kick straight. Most of our forwards are too scared to have a shot at the goals, chipping it around or hand passing in the forward fifty and or getting caught flat footed with the ball.

I have not seen it mentioned here at all, but is there any merit in trying Tomlinson as a forward and pushing Salem to the wing? Or even Hunt? Tomlinson has good size. I know some here have knocked him this week, but actually thought he was pretty good. 

Edited June 29, 20205 yr by Leoncelli_36

1 minute ago, Leoncelli_36 said:

I have not seen it mentioned here at all, but is there any merit in trying Tomlinson as a forward and pushing Salem to the wing? Or even Hunt? Tomlinson has good size. I know some here have knocked him this week, but actually thought he was pretty good. 

Tomlinson runs both ways, Salem doesn't and I'm not sure Hunt does enough either

On 6/28/2020 at 8:14 PM, Win4theAges said:

He cost us 2 clear goals from holding the ball, hesitating to kick the ball clear.

Kick to who? Straight back to Geelong like 90% of his teammates? At least he looks for options, not his fault there wasn't any imo.

tomlinson and langdon have been brought in to play the wings and carry the ball, and already for what felt like half the first quarter we were playing tomlinson in the ruck - let's leave him where he was brought in to play rather than trying to turn tomlinson into a chb or chf

fwiw, tomlinson lead the metres gained for the entire match by some margin - he had 503 (more than dangerfield, cats' best, by 30) with viney (433), salem (288), langdon (281), may (280), and petracca (259) our only players over 250 compared to 6 over 300 for the cats

previous week langdon was the only player to get over 450, with salem miles back on 355 our next best

This season should be officially deemed a work-in-progress year (yeah I know, another one) and get games drilled into the youngsters one or more of Jackson, Sparrow, Pickett (obviously), Bedford, Chandler, Bradtke should be getting games every week. 

1 hour ago, Older demon said:

WE did ! we made a bid on him at pick 3 and it was matched by GWS as was their right to an academy player. You cannot do more than that.

No we didn't.

52 minutes ago, CHF said:

Trying to predict selection these days is a hard a trying to predict who we will be playing next weekend.

It seems that every adverse decision that is taken at the AFL has an effect on us. The season is so compromised and chopped up for us I find it very difficult to be involved.

No matter who we play next week I think we need a tall forward option and a tall back option. In Wiedeman and OMac. Out? take ya pick.

 

I would drop Melksham on Hai efforts which were terrible but realistically he has more of a chance to pop up and kick 3 or 4 goals than VDB who I still think is an honest trier. So Weid in for VDB.

Down the other end? Smith is the obvious one. Or maybe we move Smith forward drop Melksham and VDB and bring in Weid and OMac.

11 hours ago, TheJam said:

How do you know the structures? Or roles even? You don’t. So this ‘criteria’ you mention is irrelevant.

You think you will find there is a wider group than demonlanders questioning selection? Very speculative.

I read through these threads sometimes and I’m not gonna lie it’s quite hard to understand where over 70% of you are coming from.

 The negativity in here is mind boggling and I think many of you have no right to call yourself ‘supporters’.  We are 1-2. Played terribly and only just got done. 
 

One can only assume you are a fairly new supporter to  the  Dees or another of the plants that feature here to defend the decisions of the Club

9 hours ago, Older demon said:

WE did ! we made a bid on him at pick 3 and it was matched by GWS as was their right to an academy player. You cannot do more than that.

No we didn't. He got bid on at pick 10 by Carlton. Green looked good but is the last thing we needed.

On 6/28/2020 at 7:25 PM, Diamond_Jim said:

Weideman in for either Melksham or Vandenberg.

Smith out for O Mac (Lever and Smith should not be played in the same backline)

Perhaps Jetta for Lockhart

Bennell ?

On 6/28/2020 at 7:25 PM, Diamond_Jim said:

Weideman in for either Melksham or Vandenberg.

Smith out for O Mac (Lever and Smith should not be played in the same backline)

Perhaps Jetta for Lockhart

Bennell ??

Geelong kicked 7 goals for the game, the backline did a pretty good job.  Why would you replace any of them? give smith a chance, hr has played 2 games.
 

1 hour ago, Demons11 said:

Geelong kicked 7 goals for the game, the backline did a pretty good job.  Why would you replace any of them? give smith a chance, hr has played 2 games.
 

I agree with this (the bolded bit). I remain unconvinced about Smith, though. He isn't doing enough at the moment to justify his spot, but on the other hand, he hasn't had much continuity. With Richmond having two genuine tall forwards, I think he should play again this week to assist May and Lever. However, if he doesn't justify his spot this weekend, I fear the experiment should come to an end, at least for now. 

Bennell kicked 4 in Sunday’s practice match, thinking he might get the nod at expense of AVB. 

On 6/28/2020 at 7:13 PM, Lord Travis said:

It’s scary that we have basically a full list to choose from and this is the best we can serve up. Not sure any changes will have much effect. Maybe Weid or Brown in as a forward target.

At this very moment, Brown looks the most ready.

Stop trying to turn players into something that are not.

Smith is a forward play him as one 

Harmes is a good middle fielder not a HB.

TMac is a high half forward or CHB not a deep FF.
 Bailey is not a KPF. Play him where he plays best as a HF.

Hannah is a VFL talent that’s  why he was not on the Dogs list reserves for him no consistency.

Play Weideman as a key forward for the next month if does not fire we will know he is a bust. He ain’t a Ruckman. 

 

 

 

1 minute ago, old dee said:

Stop trying to turn players into something that are not.

Smith is a forward play him as one 

Harmes is a good middle fielder not a HB.

TMac is a high half forward or CHB not a deep FF.
 Bailey is not a KPF. Play him where he plays best as a HF.

Hannah is a VFL talent that’s  why he was not on the Dogs list reserves for him no consistency.

Play Weideman as a key forward for the next month if does not fire we will know he is a bust. He ain’t a Ruckman. 

 

 

 

I agree with the opening line. I'm afraid, though, that I don't think Smith is a forward. Or a defender. I think he's an experiment that was worth trying because of its high upside, but I don't think he will ever make it to the standard necessary anywhere on the ground.

4 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I agree with the opening line. I'm afraid, though, that I don't think Smith is a forward. Or a defender. I think he's an experiment that was worth trying because of its high upside, but I don't think he will ever make it to the standard necessary anywhere on the ground.

That’s possible LDC but surely when you are crying out for forwards why persist with him in defence.

What about the others?

10 hours ago, Mel Bourne said:

This season should be officially deemed a work-in-progress year (yeah I know, another one) and get games drilled into the youngsters one or more of Jackson, Sparrow, Pickett (obviously), Bedford, Chandler, Bradtke should be getting games every week. 

All of those are fringe VFL players except perhaps Pickett who is the size of a flea and gets brushed aside too easily,

19 minutes ago, old dee said:

Stop trying to turn players into something that are not.
Smith is a forward play him as one 
Harmes is a good middle fielder not a HB.
TMac is a high half forward or CHB not a deep FF. Bailey is not a KPF. Play him where he plays best as a HF.
Hannah is a VFL talent that’s  why he was not on the Dogs list reserves for him no consistency.
Play Weideman as a key forward for the next month if does not fire we will know he is a bust. He ain’t a Ruckman. 

Correct on most points IMO. However:
FD will not move TMac back after playing him all pre-season (and last 2 years) as a forward.
I'd give Hannan another couple of runs. Others I'd drop before him.
I've been very disappointed with Weid's performance in the ruck. He doesn't jump and he's too easily bodied off the ball.
Tomlinson ruck effort poor on Sunday. May need to be TMac that relieves Max. Max down fwd may be a good thing.

11 hours ago, Mel Bourne said:

This season should be officially deemed a work-in-progress year (yeah I know, another one) and get games drilled into the youngsters one or more of Jackson, Sparrow, Pickett (obviously), Bedford, Chandler, Bradtke should be getting games every week. 

All of those are fringe VFL players except perhaps Pickett who is the size of a flea and gets brushed aside too easily,

Weidemann will be delisted, go to Collingwood and become an elite star forward. He’s currently a poor man’s Jack Watts. He doesn’t kick as accurately and is too thin, easily brushed aside in marking contests. Our rejects blossom when they get to a club with a strong winning culture. For example Jeremy Howe, Earl Spalding, Stefan Martin.

Edited June 30, 20205 yr by My name is legion

13 minutes ago, My name is legion said:

All of those are fringe VFL players except perhaps Pickett who is the size of a flea and gets brushed aside too easily,

So why do we have them? Either get rid of them or get them going NOW. The only way they won’t get “brushed aside” is when they’ve got games in them and the experience that comes with that. With little money to play with and low draft picks for the time being, these players are our future whether we like it or not. There’s plenty of talent in there, but without experience they will dwindle, coast then eventually settle for the mediocrity that our club seems to thrive on. 

57 minutes ago, old dee said:

That’s possible LDC but surely when you are crying out for forwards why persist with him in defence.

What about the others?

Generally agree with your summation of the others, although I think the question of whether T McDonald is a full forward or centre half forward no longer matters in today's game.

Hannan looks good when he is near the ball, but he just doesn't get near it often enough. I'm not basing that comment on the Geelong game. His history has shown that he can be good but only in frustratingly short patches.

Harmes is best on ball. I suspect Rivers wasn't expected to be ready as soon as he was and that the Match Committee recognised before the rest of us that Hibberd and Jetta might not "get back to their best" so were looking for options. Rivers may not play all year, but with him, Lockhart, Hibberd, Jetta and Salem to choose from (I'm not expecting Josh Wagner to play any significant part unless we get injuries), perhaps Harmes will stay midfield. There's one additional reason why Harmes should remain in the midfield. He seems to me to be the best two-way runner of that group. If you have the chance to watch the replay of the Geelong game, watch closely how poorly Oliver responds when he has to run back hard. It's the part of the game that he has to work harder on.