6 minutes ago, DubDee said:

what is a Lat injury Nev?

Back muscle I believe.

Big question is do we play a teenage ruckman in LJ or bring in the Preuss?

I think we will need them both.

Unless Pruess has been training well and looks super fit, I would bring in Tomlinson.

we need some marking from kick-ins and around the ground.  We also need width and run.  Tomo gives both - he has served his time for his poor efforts

1 hour ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Nah he's been fine since April. I fact he played the last 2 scratch matches when the club was still in Melbourne. 

He'd be fresh and ready to go.

Gawn being out isn't the end of the world. Might actually make our mids think twice and work even extra harder without the silver service.

Funnily enough if I had know he was fit I would have considered bringing him in even with Max there as well. let him crash and bash, upset opposition plans, soften the other ruck up for Max and let him get forward as well. 

Don't shoot me but I would like to see J Wagner given a game.  

He plays his role well and seems to have a hell of a lot more pride in his jumper than some currently do.

so big max has done his back carrying the team on it like judd did his shoulders doing the same for meth coke, eh?

9 minutes ago, Bravo Oscar, Bravo said:

Don't shoot me but I would like to see J Wagner given a game.  

 

 

 

46 minutes ago, Bravo Oscar, Bravo said:

Don't shoot me but I would like to see J Wagner given a game.  

He plays his role well and seems to have a hell of a lot more pride in his jumper than some currently do.

I'd prefer his bro

3 hours ago, Mel Bourne said:

@binman I noticed a chuckle at this, and am pretty sure it wasn’t a genuine one. I know you’re a staunch defender of Omac, and believe me, I’m not one of the ones who pile on the guy, but maybe you can set me straight; I saw two very clear incidents where Georgiades deftly gave Omac the slip and found plenty of space. The first, resulting in the first goal of the match. If you look at the replay of that mark, one can very clearly see an Omac not knowing where his opponent is or where he himself should be, until the ball was marked. I get that good forwards do this to defenders regularly, but an 18-year old? C’mon. What am I missing here? 

Mel, it was in fact a genuine chuckle. I laughed because i felt a powerful sense of deja vu having responded at some length to a near identical comment.

In the bartlett soft as butter thread i made a comment in response to a number of posts saying that omac had been schooled by a third gamer (various words to that effect) noting that i didn't think that was the case. 

Dazzledavey36 responded and said he thought my Omac confirmation bias was impacting my assessment.

Acknowledging that might be true, i said i would check the vision of the game, with a focus on the first goal of the game of the match as DD, like you (and others) put the blame at Oscar's feet. Which i duly did

I watched: video of every involvement in the game of both Georgiades and Omac on AFL stats pro. I watched the involvements of Westhof too to see who was on him.  And Lever's involvements for good measure. 

The bottom line of this admittedly over the top forensic review:

• Omac had a poor game. Though he was far from our worst player  
• Certainly played on Georgiades, and more than i thought was the case
• But as i suspected he was not on him all the time. Not even close to it.
• And in terms of Omac being schooled by Georgiades, or taught a lesson that is just 100% wrong.

Not one of his goals were Oscar's fault. In fact with all three of the goals Georgiades kicked, Omac was wasn't even on him at that time.

And only one of his two points could remotely be considered Omac's fault (a mark on the lead that was impossible to stop).

Georgiades took one contested mark for the match and it was not taken on Omac.

My case is set out in this post

And deoanox contributed this excellent post explaining what went down with that first goal and that with our zone systeme Omac did exactly what he was supposed to do - go to Westhoof in the goal square and hand off to Lever to take Georgiades (the post also references a good post from Rusty Nails that reflects your position on that first goal - and gaddy lyon's too for that matter).

By the by, in that post deanox makes the excellent point that the issue people should be highlighting is why there was so much space in our 50, a result of terrible defensive running from our mids, the block that was allowed to be put on Lever, Harmes being indecisive and Tmac lumbering in to the 50 like a lost heffer and not attacking the contest.

I don't want to shut don't comments but can i ask you not to debate the above. The reason i ask that is the mods asked for the discussion to stop as it was clagging up an unrelated thread (as it would here if we start to go back and forth). I posted this to answer your entirely reasonable question. 

However i I plan to start a thread to discuss tactics, structures, zones etc and thought i'd revisit this discussion there as it relates to the use of zones and the roles of players in them. So perhaps we can revisit it there.

Edited August 3, 20204 yr by binman

1 hour ago, binman said:

Mel, it was in fact a genuine chuckle. I laughed because i felt a powerful sense of deja vu having responded at some length to a near identical comment.

In the bartlett soft as butter thread i made a comment in response to a number of posts saying that omac had been schooled by a third gamer (various words to that effect) noting that i didn't think that was the case. 

Dazzledavey36 responded and said he thought my Omac confirmation bias was impacting my assessment.

Acknowledging that might be true, i said i would check the vision of the game, with a focus on the first goal of the game of the match as DD, like you (and others) put the blame at Oscar's feet. Which i duly did

I watched: video of every involvement in the game of both Georgiades and Omac on AFL stats pro. I watched the involvements of Westhof too to see who was on him.  And Lever's involvements for good measure. 

The bottom line of this admittedly over the top forensic review:

• Omac had a poor game. Though he was far from our worst player  
• Certainly played on Georgiades, and more than i thought was the case
• But as i suspected he was not on him all the time. Not even close to it.
• And in terms of Omac being schooled by Georgiades, or taught a lesson that is just 100% wrong.

Not one of his goals were Oscar's fault. In fact with all three of the goals Georgiades kicked, Omac was wasn't even on him at that time.

And only one of his two points could remotely be considered Omac's fault (a mark on the lead that was impossible to stop).

Georgiades took one contested mark for the match and it was not taken on Omac.

My case is set out in this post

And deoanox contributed this excellent post explaining what went down with that first goal and that with our zone systeme Omac did exactly what he was supposed to do - go to Westhoof in the goal square and hand off to Lever to take Georgiades (the post also references a good post from Rusty Nails that reflects your position on that first goal - and gaddy lyon's too for that matter).

By the by, in that post deanox makes the excellent point that the issue people should be highlighting is why there was so much space in our 50, a result of terrible defensive running from our mids, the block that was allowed to be put on Lever, Harmes being indecisive and Tmac lumbering in to the 50 like a lost heffer and not attacking the contest.

I don't want to shut don't comments but can i ask you not to debate the above. The reason i ask that is the mods asked for the discussion to stop as it was clagging up an unrelated thread (as it would here if we start to go back and forth). I posted this to answer your entirely reasonable question. 

However i I plan to start a thread to discuss tactics, structures, zones etc and thought i'd revisit this discussion there as it relates to the use of zones and the roles of players in them. So perhaps we can revisit it there.

My genuine apologies for making you have to re-live this! 

Wasn’t visiting that thread (one can only take in so many!) so I obviously missed some pretty comprehensive discussion about this already. I guess I was going by seeing Omac standing shoulder-to-shoulder with Georgiades in the square immediately following that goal (then watching the vision of him finding that space so easily, and watching Omac lose him in the process) and assuming he was his man at the time. If it wasn’t his man at the time, he paired up very quickly with him after, which if you’re adamant wasn’t the case, must have been down to a very prompt coaching move. 

Seeing that goal kicked and with such a minimum of fuss in the creation of it, immediately gave me a vibe that we were going to take a bath. 

Nonetheless, very appreciative for the considered response!

Edit: and it’s funny how our bias towards certain players can occasionally get in the way of the true picture. Everybody seems to pick a player early on in their career, and decides to almost sponsor them from afar throughout. I think it’s funny little quirk to following the game - a pastime within a pastime or something. Mine is Jay Lockhart. His first few games were pretty exciting to watch and I was super-impressed by his adaptability to the big league. Showed moments of class and skill that point to something possibly bigger. Watching him bugger it up a couple of times against the Lions and seeing him get lightly roasted here was almost a personal attack! How could I be so wrong? Nope, I’m not wrong! All a bit silly, but that’s what we are. Anyway I think it’s possible your guy in this story is Omac and I will do my utmost to support you through it! 

Edited August 3, 20204 yr by Mel Bourne

Max not playing? Clearly the only solution is to drop the entire midfield and swing in the B team - match sim would have them ready to play against a side that gets every single hitout. 

4 minutes ago, Mel Bourne said:

If it wasn’t his man at the time, he paired up very quickly with him after, which if you’re adamant wasn’t the case, must have been down to a very prompt coaching move. 

Seeing that goal kicked and with such a minimum of fuss in the creation of it, immediately gave me a vibe that we were going to take a bath. 

Nonetheless, very appreciative for the considered response!

 

 

All good.

He did pair up with Georgiades straight after that goal and most (but not all) other goals.

But once the ball was in motion, because we play a triangle zone defence the defender's swap opponents depending on where that player moves to. So Georgiades was never his man, as such. At least not in the way Dixon was mas (as May stayed on him almost all game) 

Omac's role in that zone is to play the deepest of our 3 big defenders (as occurred in that instance with him going to hoff in the goal square) and Lever (or any other defender) taking the forward who leads into space.

in that zone system it is the job of the small defenders, mids and anyone else who can get there to cover and block space. If they don't it is a sure sign we are being slack and not working hard enough, as was the case right from the start of that game (hence that too easy gola) to the very end (hence any number of other too easy goals). Turnovers don't help either!

5 hours ago, DubDee said:

It will freshen him up and make the team more accountable.  if we cant beat the next 2 teams without Max we are screwed anyway

I think the North game will be a good test for us and it's a genuine 50/50 game. They'll trouble us in certain areas.

But yeah, if we can't beat Adelaide we're in a world of pain.

3 hours ago, Bravo Oscar, Bravo said:

Don't shoot me but I would like to see J Wagner given a game.  

He's not the biggest disaster on the list and does have a crack when he plays, but is he even in the HUB? Has he played a game of footy in the last 6 weeks?

IN  - Tomlinson, Smith, V'Berg, Bennell

OUT - Gawn, O Mac, Hannan, Jones

I really rated O Mac's performances against GC and Hawthorn, but he did some ordinary things against Brisbane and was downright horrible against Port. Wouldn't mind giving J Smith some more experience now that finals are cooked (we ain't going 7-2 with a poor %)

Hannan hasn't clocked in for the last 2 weeks and has to pay the price.

Bennell for Jones seems logical if not like for like.

Fritsch will be dropped if he has another poor game this week.

Edited August 3, 20204 yr by Bring-Back-Powell

13 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

IN  - Tomlinson, Smith, V'Berg, Bennell

OUT - Gawn, O Mac, Hannan, Jones

I really rated O Mac's performances against GC and Hawthorn, but he did some ordinary things against Brisbane and was downright horrible against Port. Wouldn't mind giving J Smith some more experience now that finals are cooked (we ain't going 7-2 with a poor %)

 

good changes but I would hold the faith with O Mac for now.  Smith was pretty poor when he was playing

and I don't think finals are cooked.  beat two bottom 4 teams and we should should be 5-5 with % of ~100.  we'll have to improve from there but it is definitely possible

Regardless of Max's availability you would think Tomlinson and Vanders are the definate ins.

I would like to see TMac come out for one of those two as he is a bit of an embarrassment at the moment. If we're going to stick with this stupid 3 talls forward lineup I would like to see Mitch Brown come in. The guy has some genuine experience, the ability to get himself free and mark and hit the score board. Would like to see him come in and support Weid and Fritsch as the third option.

There really should be some harsh calls made this week. Players that have a reputation or longer leash like Jones and TMac need to make way for guys who are actually knocking on the door. 

My ideal team for this week would be:

B        Lockhart    May      Omac  

HB     Hibberd      Lever   Salem

C       Langdon    Oliver    AVB

HF    Hannan      Weid     Tomlinson

F       Kozzy         Fritsch  Bennell

         Gawn         Viney    Petracca

I/C:  Brayshaw, Sparrow. Rivers (one of: Brown, Jackson or ANB)          

54 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

He's not the biggest disaster on the list and does have a crack when he plays, but is he even in the HUB? Has he played a game of footy in the last 6 weeks?

I thought all of the fit guys on the senior list had joined the main group?

Ok , so we are too top heavy up forward and omac out of form ( not my opinion )

Kill two birds with one stone 

T mac to take o Mac spot down back and still have the option of throwing T mac forward during the game

Adelaide will be licking their lips, and for more than one reason, so will Norf.

Edited August 3, 20204 yr by TheoX

Does it matter who we pick, the problems are deeper than 2 or 3 player changes.

I really do not get the calls for TMac to move back into defence. I equate it to the call for Smith to move into the forward 50. IMO both ideas are rubbish. TMac does not look fit enough to run out a game and his reaction time and agility are non existent. As for Smith forward, well, he has not shown anything as a footballer where ever he has been played. 

Before Smith gets a run forward, I would get Brown in there.

I do not rate TMac in any shape or form. Jones is not a shadow of his former self.

I just hope that they go back to the basic structures that are needed in ant team. Oliver, Viney, Petracca and Brayshaw rotating as the inside mids with Harmes as a hard tagger on the opposition problem child. Langdon on one wing And I would look at ANB on the other and tell him to run, run, run and then run some more. I may even get Hunt back in as a wing after he has watched replays of Langdon's games a few dozen times.

Defence I would leave as is and give them a chance to settle and work together. last week's performance was not the fault of the backs.

In attack I would leave to combination of Wiedeman and Jackson for the moment. Pickett to be dropped..... not 'rested'... dropped. Tell him he ha to work harder in defending the forward 50 and has to look to use support. Yeah, yeah,  I know, there was a very good passage of play where he was involved but that lasted all of 5 seconds duration.  Fritsch or Hannan? I am beginning to think we cannot afford to have both in the team. Maybe Brown replaces on of them and Bennell replaces Pickett. 

If Max does not get up I would have Pruess in the side to do the job that Max presently does.

Not sure what sort of team that ends up looking like and could not be bothered to work it out afterall, the team cannot be bothered looking like they are interested in playing so why should I waste too much effort?

I am on my last legs with this coach and list of players.

44 minutes ago, CHF said:

In attack I would leave to combination of Wiedeman and Jackson for the moment. Pickett to be dropped..... not 'rested'... dropped. Tell him he ha to work harder in defending the forward 50 and has to look to use support. Yeah, yeah,  I know, there was a very good passage of play where he was involved but that lasted all of 5 seconds duration.  Fritsch or Hannan? I am beginning to think we cannot afford to have both in the team. Maybe Brown replaces on of them and Bennell replaces Pickett

If you bring in Brown and Bennell for Hannan and Pickett then you haven't seen anything yet when it comes to poor forward pressure.

Kossie had a bad night against Port, but his pressure has been consistently very good. His skills and decision making has been up and down  - moments of brilliance with tap ons and clever hands mixed with some hungry kicks, but his pressure has been consistently strong. 

The talented player most in need of a rocket is Fritsch, although being moored deep forward is not all his fault. Same goes for Hannan who's had the best month of his career then put in a stinker, the difference is Hannan has also been a very good pressure player for most of the year.

Pressure really is the key to our game plan and especially our forward line. Petracca, Melksham/Bennell a couple of Weid clunks and weight of numbers gives us a chance against most sides once we are in the game and playing with confidence. But if we can't hold teams up and let them run free we're a mess.

5 hours ago, Yung Blood said:

Regardless of Max's availability you would think Tomlinson and Vanders are the definate ins.

I would like to see TMac come out for one of those two as he is a bit of an embarrassment at the moment. If we're going to stick with this stupid 3 talls forward lineup I would like to see Mitch Brown come in. The guy has some genuine experience, the ability to get himself free and mark and hit the score board. Would like to see him come in and support Weid and Fritsch as the third option.

There really should be some harsh calls made this week. Players that have a reputation or longer leash like Jones and TMac need to make way for guys who are actually knocking on the door. 

My ideal team for this week would be:

B        Lockhart    May      Omac  

HB     Hibberd      Lever   Salem

C       Langdon    Oliver    AVB

HF    Hannan      Weid     Tomlinson

F       Kozzy         Fritsch  Bennell

         Gawn         Viney    Petracca

I/C:  Brayshaw, Sparrow. Rivers (one of: Brown, Jackson or ANB)          

I suspect that will be pretty close. I doubt brown plays. Time to bring rivers back. Jackson stays in I hope. 

In a sick strange way I'm kind of glad that Max is out, I think the players had started to get lazy with the silver service they were getting from Max. They forgot as ball winners they actually had to have the desire to get the ball.

With the ruck contest now going to be a lot more even, dare I say it weighted towards the other teams, they will have to regain their hunger to actually want the ball. This also gives Jackson an opportunity to be our main ruck, I think we need to persist with Weid focusing on being a forward so someone will need to come in to chop out for Jackson. Perhaps Tomlinson, maybe Brown?

We are being tested here, the players should be setting themselves the challenge to win just as many clearances as they did with Gawn. In a cheeky way throw at back at Max for saying "well I always give silver service".