TEAMS: Rd 12 vs Collingwood

[Cheesy D. Pun 1,762]

Just now, Lord Nev said:

The last 3 games (per game stats):

Hannan - 7.6 disposals, 0.7 tackles, 3 marks, 0.3 goals, 3 score involvements, 2 clangers, 2.6 turnovers

vandenBerg - 10 disposals, 3 tackles, 2.6 marks, 2 score involvements, 4.3 clangers, 4 turnovers

And if you wanted to include it, goals given to opposition with stupid errors:

Hannan - 0

vandenBerg - 0.7

I don't think he is helping the areas we need it, and for mine, 1.3 extra tackles a game doesn't make up for the huge clanger and turnover numbers. We all love his effort and intensity, but the bad things he does have been outweighing that, especially the last 2 weeks.

I get we may disagree on that, which is fine, but take all that out and just look at the discipline aspect. The bloke has cost us goals doing undisciplined, dumb things 2 games in a row. No player should be selected for a 3rd game after that. We see plenty of other players dropped for far less and to me it's poor culture standards if you let some players off but not others.

You can't honestly tell me you thought vandenBerg was far better than Hannan against the Roos?

These are interesting stats, but do you really think these two are battling for the same position?

[Demonland 70,269]

Not related to this week but ...

 

[Cheesy D. Pun 1,762]

8 minutes ago, dl4e said:

Sorry but I don't like the inclusion of Preuss. Can't play but I spose they feel the need for a ruckman.

Rivers should not have been dropped. 

I am wondering why Jones, Tomlinson and Harmes continue to get a game. It is a tragedy to watch Harmes at the momment so I hope he regains some form.

Lockhart and Viney are givens to come in.

It'd be a bold move to play no ruck against Grundy, even taking into account his average form.

[Lord Nev 13,512]

1 minute ago, Cheesy D. Pun said:

These are interesting stats, but do you really think these two are battling for the same position?

Not really, but more using the stats to illustrate the strengths and weaknesses of each player.

Hannan out takes away a genuine marking player in the forward line who can kick a goal and is pretty decent with inside 50 delivery. I don't think Viney is that, and he's the one being brought in.

vandenBerg gives us a hard at it tackler sure, but don't we get that from Viney? Plus, with Viney we also get better ball use and generally far less goals gifted to the opposition.

We've heard Goody talk week after week after week about connection, yet he drops a player providing that and leaves in a player damaging it. I like vandenBerg, don't get me wrong, I love the way he doesn't deviate off his line and runs straight at players, but his disposal, decision making and costly stupid frees the last 2 weeks absolutely should have seen him dropped.

[bing181 8,929]

No real surprises in the selections. Only surprise for me re Hannan's omission is that he was included last week in the first place. Goes missing too often.

[Pates 9,625]

18 minutes ago, dl4e said:

Sorry but I don't like the inclusion of Preuss. Can't play but I spose they feel the need for a ruckman.

Rivers should not have been dropped. 

I am wondering why Jones, Tomlinson and Harmes continue to get a game. It is a tragedy to watch Harmes at the momment so I hope he regains some form.

Lockhart and Viney are givens to come in.

I’m ok with Preuss coming in but I was equally keen for them to keep Tom as the main ruckman and bring in Brown as the second tall forward. My reason being that Grundy will likely win most taps regardless of who we have in there, with Tom at least we might have someone to run him off his feet. 

It’s entirely possibly they might choose to do that during certain stages of the game and use Preuss as a tall target (hopefully he’s learned how to clunk some marks). 

The Pies have brought some serious quality in, fingers crossed they may be a little underdone and won’t have the usual impact. I want Viney to go hard for Pendles and tackle/smash him with authority, legally of course ?. 

Edited August 14, 2020 by Pates

[titan_uranus 24,615]

11 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

The last 3 games (per game stats):

Hannan - 7.6 disposals, 0.7 tackles, 3 marks, 0.3 goals, 3 score involvements, 2 clangers, 2.6 turnovers

vandenBerg - 10 disposals, 3 tackles, 2.6 marks, 2 score involvements, 4.3 clangers, 4 turnovers

And if you wanted to include it, goals given to opposition with stupid errors:

Hannan - 0

vandenBerg - 0.7

I don't think he is helping the areas we need it, and for mine, the extra tackles a game doesn't make up for the huge clanger and turnover numbers. We all love his effort and intensity, but the bad things he does have been outweighing that, especially the last 2 weeks.

I get we may disagree on that, which is fine, but take all that out and just look at the discipline aspect. The bloke has cost us goals doing undisciplined, dumb things 2 games in a row. No player should be selected for a 3rd game after that. We see plenty of other players dropped for far less and to me it's poor culture standards if you let some players off but not others.

You can't honestly tell me you thought vandenBerg was far better than Hannan against the Roos?

I'd like to see the pressure acts stat, which I'm sure the FD is big on for both these players.

I'm guessing it shows vandenBerg higher than Hannan.

I'm not suggesting that's sufficient for him to retain his spot, though. Just a hunch as to what they're basing it off. I think they think Hannan's not doing enough when the ball hits the deck.

My main issue is the like-for-likeness of the swap. Obviously Preuss/Jackson and Lockhart/Rivers are like-for-like which leaves Viney for Hannan. IMO, Viney would be better suited to slotting into vandenBerg's role than Hannan's, based on how both played vs North.

That issue aside, we've seen some players this year keep their spot despite poor form (vandenBerg, Melksham, Brayshaw and Harmes) whilst others have lost their spot when their form hasn't necessarily warranted (Rivers, ANB, Bennell and arguably OMac and Hannan are the names that spring to mind). Goodwin is stubborn, we know that, and I think he views that former group as best 22 and wants them playing together as much as possible. Maybe the latter group is either not best 22 or might be in 2021 (Rivers/Bennell, for fitness reasons). 

[Lord Nev 13,512]

6 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

I'd like to see the pressure acts stat, which I'm sure the FD is big on for both these players.

I'm guessing it shows vandenBerg higher than Hannan.

I'm not suggesting that's sufficient for him to retain his spot, though. Just a hunch as to what they're basing it off. I think they think Hannan's not doing enough when the ball hits the deck.

My main issue is the like-for-likeness of the swap. Obviously Preuss/Jackson and Lockhart/Rivers are like-for-like which leaves Viney for Hannan. IMO, Viney would be better suited to slotting into vandenBerg's role than Hannan's, based on how both played vs North.

That issue aside, we've seen some players this year keep their spot despite poor form (vandenBerg, Melksham, Brayshaw and Harmes) whilst others have lost their spot when their form hasn't necessarily warranted (Rivers, ANB, Bennell and arguably OMac and Hannan are the names that spring to mind). Goodwin is stubborn, we know that, and I think he views that former group as best 22 and wants them playing together as much as possible. Maybe the latter group is either not best 22 or might be in 2021 (Rivers/Bennell, for fitness reasons). 

Yep, would be surprised if Hannan's pressure index was higher than vandenBerg's over the last 2 weeks. The point I'm making though is that we still need finishers and skillful players, that has to have a value as well. Plus, the dumb things vandenBerg has done the last 2 games outweighs the pressure IMO. Giving away goals, poor turnovers etc put more pressure on us.

Edit - Pressure acts don't have a huge difference this season..

vB - 13.7

Hannan - 10.4

Edited August 14, 2020 by Lord Nev

[binman 41,963]

9 minutes ago, bing181 said:

No real surprises in the selections. Only surprise for me re Hannan's omission is that he was included last week in the first place. Goes missing too often.

That's the knock on him isn't it.

The roos game was a great example. Had a strong first quarter. Then completely disappeared. 

Given how dominant we were in the ladt quarter, how many inside 50s we had and how stuffed the roos defenders appeared he should have been filling his boots.

[Pates 9,625]

3 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Yep, would be surprised if Hannan's pressure index was higher than vandenBerg's over the last 2 weeks. The point I'm making though is that we still need finishers and skillful players, that has to have a value as well. Plus, the dumb things vandenBerg has done the last 2 games outweighs the pressure IMO. Giving away goals, poor turnovers etc put more pressure on us.

Edit - Pressure acts don't have a huge difference this season..

vB - 13.7

Hannan - 10.4

Those two stupid acts deserve an absolute scolding and he is very lucky he’s survived the chop on the back of them. 

For an impact player he isn’t making enough of an impact. 

[Demons11 6,708]

26 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

The last 3 games (per game stats):

Hannan - 7.6 disposals, 0.7 tackles, 3 marks, 0.3 goals, 3 score involvements, 2 clangers, 2.6 turnovers

vandenBerg - 10 disposals, 3 tackles, 2.6 marks, 2 score involvements, 4.3 clangers, 4 turnovers

And if you wanted to include it, goals given to opposition with stupid errors:

Hannan - 0

vandenBerg - 0.7

I don't think he is helping the areas we need it, and for mine, the extra tackles a game doesn't make up for the huge clanger and turnover numbers. We all love his effort and intensity, but the bad things he does have been outweighing that, especially the last 2 weeks.

I get we may disagree on that, which is fine, but take all that out and just look at the discipline aspect. The bloke has cost us goals doing undisciplined, dumb things 2 games in a row. No player should be selected for a 3rd game after that. We see plenty of other players dropped for far less and to me it's poor culture standards if you let some players off but not others.

You can't honestly tell me you thought vandenBerg was far better than Hannan against the Roos?

No but I see the method in the madness with the weather predicted 

[cantstandyasam 700]

1 hour ago, Pates said:

Don’t understand Rivers getting dropped, looked good to me. 

Would've omitted Jones, VDB and Harmes before I would've dropped Rivers. Not sure what the go is with Jones he can't get to 300 this year unless we play 3 or 4 finals. Harmes has been incredibly fumbly and VDB too often kicks to the opposition.Hope I'm wrong and all 3 play blinders.

[Deemania since 56 6,550]

32 minutes ago, CBDees said:

Did you read the report on the Round 11 practice game this week? They seemed quite pleased with Preuss (who dominated in the hit-outs)! I am happy to give him a run and suspect that he may surprise the pundits.

Might surprise a few Filth players, as well. There is every chance that some of them will fall over a few times with Preuss in our team, in the wet conditions. 

[Cards13 9,117]

1 hour ago, Redleg said:

Who would you want in a predicted wet game, Hannan or bash and crash VDB?

Hannan at the moment, VdB has been very average crash and bash or not you need skills and finishing, he ain’t got either. 

[Lord Nev 13,512]

2 minutes ago, Cards13 said:

Hannan at the moment, VdB has been very average crash and bash or not you need skills and finishing, he ain’t got either. 

Kicking efficiency of 53.1 for vB. Yikes.

 

[Cards13 9,117]

1 hour ago, DemonLad5 said:

Vandenberg is a barometer so I understand keeping him in. Hope Harmes staying in means he’s tagging Sidebottom because he was terrible last week 

Jones lucky

like our team much better with Hannan in it! 

Steele will get maximum Brownlow votes if that does happen. His ability to gut run all night is top 5 in the league, I don’t think one of our players can go with him let alone Harmes who’s been terrible of late. 

[loges 6,767]

38 minutes ago, bing181 said:

No real surprises in the selections. Only surprise for me re Hannan's omission is that he was included last week in the first place. Goes missing too often.

You're spot on here, really think Hannan has plenty of ability but needs to play 4 quarters each game and perform every week , way too inconsistent.

[nosoupforme 3,085]

1 hour ago, Demonland said:

Massive ins for the Pies

B: Jack Crisp, Lynden Dunn, John Noble
HB: Brayden Maynard, Darcy Moore, Chris Mayne
?Tom Phillips, Scott Pendlebury, Steele Sidebottom
HF: Josh Thomas, Brody Mihocek, Will Hoskin-Elliott
F: Ben Reid, Darcy Cameron, Josh Daicos
Foll: Brodie Grundy, Taylor Adams, Jamie Elliott
Int: Josh Daicos, Jack Madgen, Travis Varcoe, Rupert Wills

In: Jamie Elliott, Scott Pendlebury, Ben Reid, Darcy Moore, Will Hoskin-Elliott

Out: Brayden Sier (quad), Jaidyn Stephenson (omitted), Jordan Roughead (concussion), Tim Broomhead (omitted), Chris Mayne (omitted)

Emerg: Tim Broomhead, Chris Mayne, Matt Scharenberg, Mark Keane

Massive ins??????   What about MASSIVE OUTS?   Treloar ,Howe , Stephenson, DeGoey, Roughead.

[Graeme Yeats' Mullet 6,721]

Disappointed Hannan out, think he adds a bit of zip and option to mark inside 50

[Cards13 9,117]

2 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Kicking efficiency of 53.1 for vB. Yikes.

 

Good counter points above about pressure acts and Hannan not quite getting enough of it though. It’s a tough one as per most weeks, you just hope Vanders can improve his Clanger count. 

[Dee Zephyr 19,158]

Like some others, Rivers and Hannan unlucky. Thought Hannan was really good early against North.

Congrats to Salem and good luck to him in his 100th. 

[Adam The God 29,372]

1 hour ago, Lord Nev said:

Hannan out and vandenBerg still in.

Tell me the absolute lie that Goody doesn't play favourites despite form.

 

Hannan played one quarter last week and then disappeared. Vandenberg, who I haven't been the biggest fan of over the journey, constantly brings pressure at the contest. I'd have consistent pressure versus flakiness every day of the week, particularly as our game is reliant on pressure.

Edited August 14, 2020 by A F

[Forest Demon 4,681]

Collingwood still have plenty of quality out. Their side on paper doesn’t strike fear into me at all.

Hopefully Pendlebury is underdone, he is absolutely top shelf.

Moore and Maynard are both having very good years and our forwards will have to keep a very close eye on them.

[Lord Nev 13,512]

1 minute ago, A F said:

Hannan played one quarter last week; Vandenberg, who I haven't been the biggest fan of over the journey, constantly brings pressure at the contest. I'd have consistent pressure versus flakiness every day of the week, particularly as our game is founded on pressure.

Consistent pressure is fine, but I don't think it adds up to say that because Hannan can drift in and out that vandenBerg doesn't. vandenBerg isn't a consistent contributor either and his clangers, turnovers and kicking efficiency more than undo his good work.

As already mentioned, they're pressure acts numbers don't have a huge difference. I think a lot of what people see in vandenBerg is the image of him rather than the reality at the moment. Not sure if it's reflected glory of his previous good games or just that we all love the hard at it players, but the whole pressure argument doesn't stack up for mine when you look at the whole picture.

All fine to have a game focused on pressure, but when you have players consistently giving the ball away you're evening out that pressure by your own actions.

Just find it strange that if our whole system is built on pressure that we pick a player whose only talent is pressure. Shouldn't that be the base for everyone? It strikes me as a bit like picking a tagger, which isn't really done anymore because teams realized you had to do more than just one specific basic thing.

Sorry, ranting a bit. just frustrated that a team that is STILL lacking in forward connection would drop a player who can provide that but leave in a player who consistently destroys it.

[Lord Nev 13,512]

42 minutes ago, binman said:

That's the knock on him isn't it.

The roos game was a great example. Had a strong first quarter. Then completely disappeared. 

Given how dominant we were in the ladt quarter, how many inside 50s we had and how stuffed the roos defenders appeared he should have been filling his boots.

Kicked a goal and a behind in the last quarter.