Am I alone in being puzzled about Tom’s role on Thursday? Don’t misunderstand me, he tried hard and was not too bad.

But he was given the role of running with Boak. This meant that when Boak was in the middle for centre bounces, Sparrow was there too.

problem was that this meant that  one  of  our gun midfielders was not there. Surely, in Clarry, Viney, Trac and Brayshaw we have an  excellent midfield. 
I  would  have told Sparrow to pick up Boak outside the centre bounces. I might be wrong but I thought Tracc was in there less than normal

Bizarre inclusion

Complrtely agree. A bizarre selection. I thought we'd play him back, but he said prior to the match he'd play midfield and a bit forward. If he was manning Boak in the middle did he follow Boak to half back as well? 

We've already got Gus and Harmes being played out of position because we can't fit them in the midfield and we bring in yet another mid? Did they want to use Harmes on Gray and Gus on a wing, therefore neither could play on Boak?

I just don't understand the thinking. Can anyone constructively illuminate me on this?

I assumed he would play half forward or half back, but to get lots of centre bounces was an odd decision. As the OP mentioned, he wasn’t bad, but not sure he improves the team at all playing in the guts.

Goodwins stubbornness comes to the fore again.

Any learnings from throwing Corey Maynard to the Wolves in his 2nd game with a Selwood tag?

Nope. Let's try it again with Sparrow on Boak

 

Edited August 1, 20205 yr by John Demonic

4 hours ago, adonski said:

Bizarre inclusion

It was such a dumb selection move  and made not a shred of sense.

And thats nothing against Tom Sparrow,  its just that there is no place for him in the team right now but that didnt stop master coach Goody throwing him into some foreign role hes never played in just his 3rd AFL game

Tom had more impact than Brayshaw or Harmes so hard to day it was a selection or positional error. However it did appear Trac was in there less and surely if you want to play tight on Boak Harmes is the man for the job. Nothing wrong with Sparrow being the 5th mid with some flank time as well but solely middle in that role made little sense. 

13 minutes ago, big_red_fire_engine said:

Tom had more impact than Brayshaw or Harmes so hard to day it was a selection or positional error. However it did appear Trac was in there less and surely if you want to play tight on Boak Harmes is the man for the job. Nothing wrong with Sparrow being the 5th mid with some flank time as well but solely middle in that role made little sense. 

Take all of the points in the thread:
- Harmes excelled in 2018 as tagger

- so rather than use him on Boak, leave him hanging and losing confidence

- bring in untried 3rd gamer, Sparrow

- play him on oppositions star midfielder, Boak BOG

- when St Kilda successfully locked Boak down in preceding round

- hard to believe, seems like terrible selection! Coaching team would have to review and go that was a shocker didn’t work, put Harmes back as tagger or he has to be dropped.

- Sparrow, in middle ahead of Trac, Viney, Oliver, Brayshaw, Harmes, and would give another 5 guys a run in there ahead of him, seems a weird move.

 

 

31 minutes ago, big_red_fire_engine said:

Tom had more impact than Brayshaw or Harmes so hard to day it was a selection or positional error. However it did appear Trac was in there less and surely if you want to play tight on Boak Harmes is the man for the job. Nothing wrong with Sparrow being the 5th mid with some flank time as well but solely middle in that role made little sense. 

Along with the Tommy Mac selection we can say it was one of the poor selection moves.

His impact was negative, Boak took him to the cleaners.

...If anyone needed to step up in the middle it was Angus but yet again he was left on the outer.

We're often beaten at the selection table before we hit the ground...

It was very definitely a mistake...

Sorry but I am a Sparrow fan. I would play him in the midfield. Yes he young and lacks experience but watching him at casey ( before he got injured ) told me he is a natural midfielder. L;ook at the way our midfield gets first use of the ball then squanders it with dumb decisions and turnovers. 

12 minutes ago, dl4e said:

Sorry but I am a Sparrow fan. I would play him in the midfield. Yes he young and lacks experience but watching him at casey ( before he got injured ) told me he is a natural midfielder. L;ook at the way our midfield gets first use of the ball then squanders it with dumb decisions and turnovers. 

Sure, I like him too, but even the commentators who spend about 5 minutes doing research before a game zeroed in on Boak as a key for Port. 

1 hour ago, rjay said:

Along with the Tommy Mac selection we can say it was one of the poor selection moves.

His impact was negative, Boak took him to the cleaners.

...If anyone needed to step up in the middle it was Angus but yet again he was left on the outer.

We're often beaten at the selection table before we hit the ground...

It was very definitely a mistake...

rjay hasn't this been the consistent theme since Goodwin took over? Time and time again questionable selections on a Thursday have cost us games.

The fact we are still talking about this to this day is frustrating to say at least.

2 hours ago, big_red_fire_engine said:

Tom had more impact than Brayshaw or Harmes so hard to day it was a selection or positional error. However it did appear Trac was in there less and surely if you want to play tight on Boak Harmes is the man for the job. Nothing wrong with Sparrow being the 5th mid with some flank time as well but solely middle in that role made little sense. 

Sort of agree, in so far as sadly a third games was better than harmes and his- and even more damingly put in way more effort.

But when picked i assumed he would take jetts spot as we have too many inside mids as it is.

And as you say tracc played more foreard time as a result . Bizarre given we brought in a third tall.

We need more inside mids

5 minutes ago, binman said:

Sort of agree, in so far as sadly a third games was better than harmes and his- and even more damingly put in way more effort.

But when picked i assumed he would take jetts spot as we have too many inside mids as it is.

And as you say tracc played more foreard time as a result . Bizarre given we brought in a third tall.

What do u base good game on?

Stats only or just what you see on tv?

If your going to compare "games" and roles it'd probably be a good idea to have a widley accepted agreement on what is a good game. 

Take Lockhart for example. Has had very little impact on tv or stats wise. But if u watch any Melb media you might have seen to why he is important to the team.

Anyway just saying the ratings system without insight is very limited 

2 hours ago, rjay said:

Along with the Tommy Mac selection we can say it was one of the poor selection moves.

His impact was negative, Boak took him to the cleaners.

...If anyone needed to step up in the middle it was Angus but yet again he was left on the outer.

We're often beaten at the selection table before we hit the ground...

It was very definitely a mistake...

Tommy Mac was not a poor selection move necessarily.  Playing 3 talls was a poor selection move. 

Sparrow playing was not a poor selection move. Playing him as a close checking mid on Boak was ahead of Harmes.

Its not the people chosen its the roles and structure. 

21 minutes ago, Unleash Hell said:

What do u base good game on?

Stats only or just what you see on tv?

If your going to compare "games" and roles it'd probably be a good idea to have a widley accepted agreement on what is a good game. 

Take Lockhart for example. Has had very little impact on tv or stats wise. But if u watch any Melb media you might have seen to why he is important to the team.

Anyway just saying the ratings system without insight is very limited 

Just watch i see on tv.

And what i hear from 'experts' like gaddy Lyon.

Thats why I know the first goal of the game was Oscar McDonald's fault, not as I assumed from watching it on tv a break down of their zone.

Gary was a champion. He knows stuff. So I believe him.

Edited August 2, 20205 yr by binman

Young Sparrow did ok he got to the ball and had some time in the middle and played a role on Boak that is good experience and it was a gain for him as the game was done early in the piece. He battled on well.

The body language on our guys didn't look right from as early in the 1ST quarter they certainly looked done.

Sparrow was involved in a chain of handballs from halfback that ended up in the best passage of play for a goal in the game  so atleast he can gain some confidence and that will do him good for the next game. He  looks solid and could be a big improver for us. I can see him playing next game.. 

Edited August 2, 20205 yr by nosoupforme

2 hours ago, Half forward flank said:

Sure, I like him too, but even the commentators who spend about 5 minutes doing research before a game zeroed in on Boak as a key for Port. 

And boak was. I am not saying using Sparrow as a tagger though. He needs to play his style of footy.

5 minutes ago, dl4e said:

And boak was. I am not saying using Sparrow as a tagger though. He needs to play his style of footy.

Sure, I agree. Happy for Jordan and Sparrow to get some games. Also like to see Kossie do a bit of roving. He is a natural mover through traffic. 

3 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

rjay hasn't this been the consistent theme since Goodwin took over? Time and time again questionable selections on a Thursday have cost us games.

The fact we are still talking about this to this day is frustrating to say at least.

I thought he finally got it a few weeks back but...

Yep, it's very frustrating.

I wonder if/how it effects the players.

3 hours ago, big_red_fire_engine said:

Tommy Mac was not a poor selection move necessarily.  Playing 3 talls was a poor selection move. 

Sparrow playing was not a poor selection move. Playing him as a close checking mid on Boak was ahead of Harmes.

Its not the people chosen its the roles and structure. 

Sorry 'big', but I totally disagree on Tommy Mac.

That was a very poor selection.

Sparrow's selection was ok but he was playing the wrong role, no doubt and I've expressed that a number of times.

Why Goodwin played him as he did was just plain dumb.

Edited August 2, 20205 yr by rjay

4 hours ago, dl4e said:

Sorry but I am a Sparrow fan. I would play him in the midfield. Yes he young and lacks experience but watching him at casey ( before he got injured ) told me he is a natural midfielder. L;ook at the way our midfield gets first use of the ball then squanders it with dumb decisions and turnovers. 

Personal opinion but I don't think he is.

I think he's more suited to the small defender role...

3 hours ago, big_red_fire_engine said:

Tommy Mac was not a poor selection move necessarily.  Playing 3 talls was a poor selection move. 

Sparrow playing was not a poor selection move. Playing him as a close checking mid on Boak was ahead of Harmes.

Its not the people chosen its the roles and structure. 

Come on mate. If anything it was the other way round. Tommy Mac clearly wasn't fit. If we were going to try 3 talls, we should have played Brown or someone fit. Mind you, I don't think 3 talls works when we have Melksham, Fritsch and Hannan too.

4 hours ago, binman said:

Just watch i see on tv.

And what i hear from 'experts' like gaddy Lyon.

Thats why I know the first goal of the game was Oscar McDonald's fault, not as I assumed from watching it on tv a break down of their zone.

Gary was a champion. He knows stuff. So I believe him.

Wow you've changed you're tune.

In Garry we trust