1 hour ago, deelusions from afar said:

Not a personal attack as I've seen many others call for this... but I'm trying to understand why anyone would think TMac in the backline would be a good idea.  Can you help me out?

 

In my view, TMac is a terrible field kick.  Potentially this is more decision making.  But when he used to play in defence, TMac used to take it upon himself to take the low percentage kick into the corridor that only our best kicks could pull off regularly.  If he didn't do that, he try and run around someone and get caught regularly.  The benefit of playing him forward was that he could use his endurance and he could kick straight and was a revelation in late 2017 and 2018 with his goal kicking.

 

Since then he's had numerous injuries.  He seems to still have the endurance but appears to have lost some speed and agility.  His tackle count last night indicated his effort and desire but he will be a liability in defence at the moment with ball in hand and when defending.

And finally I think our defence is functioning pretty well at the moment... don't see how he could improve it.

 

 

He's a better field kick than you give him credit for and he's a better kick now than he was as a CHB.

It will be interesting to see the changes this week and to be honest, given the very strange structure of the season, I really have no idea how it will go.

We have a six day break coming off travel back from Adelaide and two games in 5 days as compared to the Pies that play after a 4 day break. 

Based on the selections in the last couple of games I would be bringing back Max for Tmac as long as he is good to go. If not, retain the structure as it was played against North.

Viney I would bring back in in place of Harmes. Harmes was not good form in the last few games he has played and has tended to drop/fumble the ball and has run into trouble a few times. Viney I would use as one of 4/5 rotations in the center or look to him to shut down problem opposition players,

those two changes I really think we will make as basic changes.

I could see another one or two changes based on how players pull up after the Adelaide games and also based on possible match ups.

I would give Rivers another run this week but might look closely at ABV.

 

9 minutes ago, WERRIDEE said:

Are you talking about Marty Hore? Too small.

Not as the 3rd tall W.  He's only 4cm shorter than Tomlinson (as per the original posters' discussions) and 3cm vs May but has a VG leap.  He plays tall and creates run off his opponent as well.  Damaging player when he's on and a difficult match up for the opp.

He was our 2nd best intercept and rebound player in 2019 (on averages) just behind Lever and Salem respectively and well ahead of May, Hibb, Nev, Fritta, Frosty and Oscar.  He did have some ordinary games on occasions but nothing unusual for a rookie.

1 minute ago, Rusty Nails said:

Not as the 3rd tall W.  He's only 4cm shorter than Tomlinson (as per the original posters' discussions) and 3cm vs May but has a VG leap.  He plays tall and creates run off his opponent as well.  Damaging player when he's on and a difficult match up for the opp.

He was our 2nd best intercept and rebound player in 2019 (on averages) just behind Lever and Salem respectively and well ahead of May, Hibb, Nev, Fritta, Frosty and Oscar.  He did have some ordinary games on occasions but nothing unusual for a rookie.

3rd best?

6 minutes ago, CHF said:

It will be interesting to see the changes this week and to be honest, given the very strange structure of the season, I really have no idea how it will go.

We have a six day break coming off travel back from Adelaide and two games in 5 days as compared to the Pies that play after a 4 day break. 

Based on the selections in the last couple of games I would be bringing back Max for Tmac as long as he is good to go. If not, retain the structure as it was played against North.

Viney I would bring back in in place of Harmes. Harmes was not good form in the last few games he has played and has tended to drop/fumble the ball and has run into trouble a few times. Viney I would use as one of 4/5 rotations in the center or look to him to shut down problem opposition players,

those two changes I really think we will make as basic changes.

I could see another one or two changes based on how players pull up after the Adelaide games and also based on possible match ups.

I would give Rivers another run this week but might look closely at ABV.

 

They won't replace a defender with a midfielder. For me it's Viney replaces either Jones or Vanders. Lockhart could replace Harmes.

2 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

3rd best?

No as in 2nd in both stats respectively behind each of those two players who lead those stats in 2019 LDC.  For a rookie he showed elite defensive results in some areas last season, these areas being two of them.

41 minutes ago, WERRIDEE said:

He's a better field kick than you give him credit for and he's a better kick now than he was as a CHB.

You are one the money here W.  This season he is currently kicking at roughly 6%* better than than AFL average kicking efficiency.  His career kicking is a little less running roughly 3% over the AFL average*.  Generally considered an above average kick*.

Unfortunately in the area he is ultimately there for, goal kicking, he is presently rated as below average, only averaging 0.6 goals per game*.

*data / views courtesy of afl.com.au

Edited August 10, 20205 yr by Rusty Nails

The FILTH.... 

 

I reckon some young players could use a game off to stay fresh. 
this week perhaps Jackson? He would sore after being 1st ruck

gawn for Jackson

viney for Harmes - or milkshake

3 minutes ago, DubDee said:

I reckon some young players could use a game off to stay fresh. 
this week perhaps Jackson? He would sore after being 1st ruck

gawn for Jackson

viney for Harmes - or milkshake

Milkshake is kicking  his goal game and usually sets up a 2 or 3, he won’t be dropped 

In: Gawn, Viney, Lockhart

Out: Tomlinson, Spargo, AVB

 

TMac to the wing.

Harmes forward.

Melksham to half back.

 

 

 

1 minute ago, Fat Tony said:

In: Gawn, Viney, Lockhart

Out: Tomlinson, Spargo, AVB

 

TMac to the wing.

Harmes forward.

Melksham to half back.

 

 

 

That's just stupid

17 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

In: Gawn, Viney, Lockhart

Out: Tomlinson, Spargo, AVB

 

TMac to the wing.

Harmes forward.

Melksham to half back.

 

 

 

?

9 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

Criminally underrated on here.

Yes, he fumbles it. But his positioning on the wing and his exceptional gut-running mean he's routinely available to provide assistance in both defence and offence.

He is so, so important. If he improves the fumbling and starts kicking goals, he becomes elite IMO.

I will not be able to appreciate him until I watch him from my wing spot at the G. The TV coverage gives you little clue at the ground coverage.

28 minutes ago, Demons11 said:

Milkshake is kicking  his goal game and usually sets up a 2 or 3, he won’t be dropped 

He is averaging 1 tackle per game and 9 touches. Also less than 1 assist per game.
Not doing enough team things in my opinion. Especially considering how talented he is and he is in his prime. 
he does have 12 goals which is keeping him just ticking over. I think he needs a rocket

Tomlinson out

Tommy Mac stays in @ CHB or on the wing - he looked fine in his running action and covered ground quite quickly

After thinking about it for a long time I've decided to change my changes

IN: GAWN, VINEY, LOCKHART

OUT: JONES, VANDENBERG, TOMLINSON

Jones and Vandenberg turn the ball over too much and Tomlinson is a very ordinary player.

 

Harmes back into the midfield to solely tag Pendlebury if he is playing if not Sidebottom.

Tommy to go back to CHB.

 

B: LOCKHART, MAY, LEVER

HB: SALEM, T.MCDONALD, HIBBERD

C : LANGDON, PETRACCA, HARMES

HF: MELKSHAM, JACKSON, HANNAN

F: PICKETT, WEIDEMAN, FRITSCH

FOLL: GAWN, OLIVER, VINEY

IC: BRAYSHAW, SPARROW, SPARGO, RIVERS

EMERG: JONES, VANDENBERG, TOMLINSON, BENNELL

7 minutes ago, WERRIDEE said:

After thinking about it for a long time I've decided to change my changes

IN: GAWN, VINEY, LOCKHART

OUT: JONES, VANDENBERG, TOMLINSON

Jones and Vandenberg turn the ball over too much and Tomlinson is a very ordinary player.

 

Harmes back into the midfield to solely tag Pendlebury if he is playing if not Sidebottom.

Tommy to go back to CHB.

 

B: LOCKHART, MAY, LEVER

HB: SALEM, T.MCDONALD, HIBBERD

C : LANGDON, PETRACCA, HARMES

HF: MELKSHAM, JACKSON, HANNAN

F: PICKETT, WEIDEMAN, FRITSCH

FOLL: GAWN, OLIVER, VINEY

IC: BRAYSHAW, SPARROW, SPARGO, RIVERS

EMERG: JONES, VANDENBERG, TOMLINSON, BENNELL

That’s just stupid. 

1 hour ago, Fat Tony said:

In: Gawn, Viney, Lockhart

Out: Tomlinson, Spargo, AVB

TMac to the wing.

Harmes forward.

Melksham to half back.

No chance of Spargo being dropped. AVB similarly unlikely.

I'll tell ya what, It's good to see Sparrow holding his own and earning his spot in the side. The easy one would be Viney in for Sparrow but he is playing some good footy. Like what I am seeing! 

18 minutes ago, WERRIDEE said:

....

Tommy to go back to CHB.

 

Talk of TMac moving to the back line is simply pointless. It will never happen.

We've given up, in effect, three first round draft picks to get Lever and May.
We have Tomlinson who could play as a tall backman. The FD like Omac.

Last point: Tmac hasn't played on the back line for, at least, 4 years.

2 minutes ago, M_9 said:

Talk of TMac moving to the back line is simply pointless. It will never happen.

We've given up, in effect, three first round draft picks to get Lever and May.
We have Tomlinson who could play as a tall backman. The FD like Omac.

Last point: Tmac hasn't played on the back line for, at least, 4 years.

He's barely played in the forward line for the past 2 years, either!

5 hours ago, deelusions from afar said:

Not a personal attack as I've seen many others call for this... but I'm trying to understand why anyone would think TMac in the backline would be a good idea.  Can you help me out?

 

In my view, TMac is a terrible field kick.  Potentially this is more decision making.  But when he used to play in defence, TMac used to take it upon himself to take the low percentage kick into the corridor that only our best kicks could pull off regularly.  If he didn't do that, he try and run around someone and get caught regularly.  The benefit of playing him forward was that he could use his endurance and he could kick straight and was a revelation in late 2017 and 2018 with his goal kicking.

 

Since then he's had numerous injuries.  He seems to still have the endurance but appears to have lost some speed and agility.  His tackle count last night indicated his effort and desire but he will be a liability in defence at the moment with ball in hand and when defending.

And finally I think our defence is functioning pretty well at the moment... don't see how he could improve it.

 

 

Because Tomlinson is not a CHB, and never will be. TMac is a better player than anyone else we've tried there this year, including his brother. Good key position players are rare, but I can think of various players who have moved from attack to defence and vice versa to suit their team's needs, e.g. Hardeman, Neitz, Knights, Glendinning. If TMac and May take the opposition talls, Lever becomes free to play his intercept role. I agree that it's unlikely to happen, but I reckon it's worth a try.

2 hours ago, Fat Tony said:

In: Gawn, Viney, Lockhart

Out: Tomlinson, Spargo, AVB

 

TMac to the wing.

Harmes forward.

Melksham to half back.

 

 

 

Agree on the in row, but TMac, Jones and AVB our for me.

TMac played okay but straight swap for Max.

Jones fair, bit looking slow and getting caught to often.

AVB disposal poor.

Lockhart into backline and would have Harmes tag Sbum!

Viney 50:50 or 60/40 between middle and forward pocket.

 

Probably a bit self-indulgent but I'd like Vanders in the team just to make a few Maggots look over their shoulders this week.

He's a bit like Max Rooke when he played in those good Geelong teams. Makes our guys walk taller and makes the opposition think twice.