Jump to content

Featured Replies

1 minute ago, Lord Nev said:

Where'd you see that mate?

I have been told 

 
5 minutes ago, DubDee said:

T Mac needs to take a bath in WD40

his body just cannot allow him to be agile enough to play Key fwd

TinMac 

1 hour ago, adonski said:

Why ?

Partly because of past performance, but also because he gets to more contests than Jackson. I know stats aren't everything, but while both players had minimal influence last week, T McDonald took 4 marks to Jackson's zero. McDonald also had 5 kicks (Jackson 2) and 1 tackle (Jackson 0). To avoid accusations of bias, McDonald and Jackson both had 2 handballs and Jackson had 4 hitouts to McDonald's zero. As I said, neither had any statistical influence on the game.

McDonald's bigger and stronger body also means he's more likely to take contested marks. Is he out of form? Of course. His immediate upside, though, is higher although in the longer term, I would be disappointed if Jackson doesn't reach a higher threshold. 

 
2 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Partly because of past performance, but also because he gets to more contests than Jackson. I know stats aren't everything, but while both players had minimal influence last week, T McDonald took 4 marks to Jackson's zero. McDonald also had 5 kicks (Jackson 2) and 1 tackle (Jackson 0). To avoid accusations of bias, McDonald and Jackson both had 2 handballs and Jackson had 4 hitouts to McDonald's zero. As I said, neither had any statistical influence on the game.

McDonald's bigger and stronger body also means he's more likely to take contested marks. Is he out of form? Of course. His immediate upside, though, is higher although in the longer term, I would be disappointed if Jackson doesn't reach a higher threshold. 

I wouldn’t be surprised if we see Tom back in against North as a way of managing Jackson’s fitness. It’s interesting you point to Tom getting to more contests because I felt like last Thursday was a real embodiment of what he’d been dishing up for a while, he always seems to get to the contest just that fraction too late which means at best he can spoil it but most of the time he gets out marked. In 2018 his first few steps off the mark were, for a tall forward, actually pretty powerful and quick. Now they just look slow and lumbering. 

3 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Partly because of past performance, but also because he gets to more contests than Jackson. I know stats aren't everything, but while both players had minimal influence last week, T McDonald took 4 marks to Jackson's zero. McDonald also had 5 kicks (Jackson 2) and 1 tackle (Jackson 0). To avoid accusations of bias, McDonald and Jackson both had 2 handballs and Jackson had 4 hitouts to McDonald's zero. As I said, neither had any statistical influence on the game.

McDonald's bigger and stronger body also means he's more likely to take contested marks. Is he out of form? Of course. His immediate upside, though, is higher although in the longer term, I would be disappointed if Jackson doesn't reach a higher threshold. 

Yeah if you read the last few posts in this thread you will see the emphasis on how Tom's body seems to be failing him and particularly at ground level where he has been extremely ineffective. Looks slow, heavy and unable to make the right plays. Sure a fit and more mobile Tmac will get the nod every time over an 18 year old developing player. But right now because of Jacksons athleticism and ability to play ruck he's more valuable then Tmac at the moment. I don't think comparing the twos average stats in our worst game of the season really counts for much I'm afraid.


Ins: Vandenberg, Bennell, Tomlinson, Jetta and Rivers

Outs: Sparrow (prefer Harmes/Brayshaw/Salem getting more mid time), Jones (vandenberg plays this role better), Fritch/Melksham (Don't think you can play both and have 2 tall forwards in a modern forwardline), Lockhart (not a lockdown defender, plays too aggressively which left us open), TMac (personally would have removed Jackson)

9 minutes ago, BigMacjnr said:

Ins: Vandenberg, Bennell, Tomlinson, Jetta and Rivers

Outs: Sparrow (prefer Harmes/Brayshaw/Salem getting more mid time), Jones (vandenberg plays this role better), Fritch/Melksham (Don't think you can play both and have 2 tall forwards in a modern forwardline), Lockhart (not a lockdown defender, plays too aggressively which left us open), TMac (personally would have removed Jackson)

Fact or opinion?

 

Don’t mind these staggered announcements on the changes. We might have the complete puzzle before the official time. Keep the mail coming. 

So far -

IN - AVB, ANB possibly

OUT - T Mac , Kozzie

Edited by Dee Zephyr

SO what we know is Tom and Kozzy out, and AVB in. I think Bennell may come in but we need a crumber. i would bring sparg on. We need people at the feet of Weid and Jackson.. Melk, Fritsch and Hannan are the same player.. what has happened to bedford?


3 minutes ago, binman said:

Fact or opinion?

opinion..sorry should have led with that

58 minutes ago, The Stigga said:

Sure, just trying to think outside the box.

Last week, Port had 47 entries for 23 scoring shots, so they were scoring  nearly 50% of the time the ball came in.

Our defense is not all its cracked up to be.

Why do we need to think outside the box?

Our four best players last week were, in no particular order, May, Lever, Lockhart and Hibberd.

The midfield and forward line applied about 1% of the requisite effort and pressure, for whatever reason. So quoting the 23 form 47 stat doesn't say a whole lot about the individuals in the backline. Says a lot more about our team approach to defence.

In each game from Carlton through to Brisbane, our defensive half set up has improved. We've seen Lever and May get better at working alongside each other, and for a period OMac looked decent and may have assisted (or may not, jury's out a bit on that).

In the hierarchy of problems we have, the backline sits well behind the midfield and forward line.

And if you were going to make a change, "thinking outside the box" is a nice buzz phrase but what are you actually trying to implement, and in what way does TMac help? He's slow, unfit, out of form, and hasn't played defence since 2017. And you've suggested adding him to Lever, May and OMac. Why do we need to go taller? Why do we need to go slower? Who makes way for him?

I don't think there's a solid argument that TMac should be a defender and should replace OMac. I think there's even less of an argument that he should be added to the backline.

I would liked to see Bedford given another crack but I’m ok with ANB coming in for Kozzie. 

I think one of the major questions is do we bring back Bennell with the full expectation he won’t play against North? Or hold him back one more game perhaps looking ahead to say we may need him vs North. Also looking even further ahead if almost argue he’s more important to have vs the pies. 

I have a feeling that Jones is going to survive the chop, it’s tempting to make some wholesale changes but I think we’re going to end up with OUT TMac, Kozzie IN AvB, ANB. 

Edited by Pates


 

18 minutes ago, Dee Zephyr said:

Don’t mind these staggered announcements on the changes. We might have the complete puzzle before the official time. Keep the mail coming. 

So far -

IN - AVB, ANB possibly

OUT - T Mac , Kozzie

You think thered be at least 1 more change as only one of those is due to form.

2 minutes ago, Pickett2Jackson said:

 

You think thered be at least 1 more change as only one of those is due to form.

I get the feeling Brayshaw may get a rest and Tomlinson come in on a wing.

So we have signed Tomlinson to a 4 year deal & he can’t get a game  please explain???

Will the mfc Destroy another afl player career in Tom Mac???

9 minutes ago, Pickett2Jackson said:

 

You think thered be at least 1 more change as only one of those is due to form.

4 or 5 changes with one "Shock" dropping should be on the cards. Now is the time to see if Bedford, Rivers and Jordon can keep others out. Or perhaps to see if Brown contribute in the forward line. To see Tomlinson given another go. Something along these lines.

We're playing one of the worst 18th clubs in 30 years. Try some kids.

Edited by John Demonic

3 minutes ago, hardtack said:

I get the feeling Brayshaw may get a rest and Tomlinson come in on a wing.

Well HT in 40 minutes from now you may look like a genius.

Edited by Pickett2Jackson


3 minutes ago, hardtack said:

I get the feeling Brayshaw may get a rest and Tomlinson come in on a wing.

Or possibly Jones for Tomlinson. 

1 minute ago, Pickett2Jackson said:

Well HT in 40 minutes from now you may look like a genius.

There's a first time for everything I suppose.

Listening to goody's presser I get the vibe he is taking the swing the axe approach. 

Im tipping a couple more outs and I reckon it will be Jones and......drum roll.....brayshaw

 
43 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

If the ANB news is true, it could easily be vandenBerg and ANB for TMac and Pickett.

I'd also like to see Tomlinson get another look in.  Thought he was fairly stiff to be dropped in the first place.

Happy if that comes at the expense of Jones.


Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

Featured Content

  • REPORT: St. Kilda

    When looking back at the disastrous end to the game, I find it a waste of time to concentrate on the final few moments when utter confusion reigned. Forget the 6-6-6 mess, the failure to mark the most dangerous man on the field, the inability to seal the game when opportunities presented themselves to Clayton Oliver, Harry Petty and Charlie Spargo, the vision of match winning players of recent weeks in Kozzy Pickett and Jake Melksham spending helpless minutes on the interchange bench and the powerlessness of seizing the opportunity to slow the tempo of the game down in those final moments.

      • Clap
      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 1 reply
  • CASEY: Sandringham

    The Casey Demons rebounded from a sluggish start to manufacture a decisive win against Sandringham in the final showdown, culminating a quarter century of intense rivalry between the fluctuating alignments of teams affiliated with AFL clubs Melbourne and St Kilda, as the Saints and the Zebras prepare to forge independent paths in 2026. After conceding three of the first four goals of the match, the Demons went on a goal kicking rampage instigated by the winning ruck combination of Tom Campbell with 26 hitouts, 26 disposals and 13 clearances and his apprentice Will Verrall who contributed 20 hitouts. This gave first use of the ball to the likes of Jack Billings, Bayley Laurie, Riley Bonner and Koltyn Tholstrup who was impressive early. By the first break they had added seven goals and took a strong grip on the game. The Demons were well served up forward early by Mitch Hardie and, as the game progressed, Harry Sharp proved a menace with a five goal performance. Emerging young forwards Matthew Jefferson and Luker Kentfield kicked two each but the former let himself down with some poor kicking for goal.
    Young draft talent Will Duursma showed the depth of his talent and looks well out of reach for Melbourne this year. Kalani White was used sparingly and had a brief but uneventful stint in the ruck.

      • Thanks
    • 0 replies
  • PREGAME: West Coast

    The Demons return to the scene of the crime on Saturday to face the wooden spooners the Eagles at the Docklands. Who comes in and who goes out? Like moving deck chairs on the Titanic.

      • Clap
      • Like
    • 61 replies
  • POSTGAME: St. Kilda

    This season cannot end soon enough. Disgraceful.

      • Angry
      • Sad
      • Clap
      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 453 replies
  • VOTES: St. Kilda

    Captain Max Gawn still has a massive lead in the Demonland Player of the Year Award from Christian Petracca, Kozzy Pickett, Jake Bowey & Clayton Oliver. Your votes please; 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 & 1.

      • Like
    • 25 replies
  • GAMEDAY: St. Kilda

    It's Game Day and there are only 5 games to go. Can the Demons find some consistency and form as they stagger towards the finish line of another uninspiring season?

      • Thanks
    • 566 replies