Farewell Sam Weideman

[Travy14 1,486]

Weid had a "good" game, but isn't strong enough in marking contests.  which sides beat him in and start a rebound attack off it.

unfortunately i don't think he is ever going to become what we want.  but 3 goals is a good effort and deserves another go next week.

[BDA 19,978]

Just doesn't compete. It's a fatal flaw for a KPF. The rest of his game is pretty good so I believe he can find a spot on another AFL list as a leading 3rd forward perhaps

Comes across as a smashing bloke but he and the club need to move on from each other during the trade period

[Lord Nev 13,511]

6 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

Given the dogs don’t have dominant marking talls we could easily compete with mediums who provide better movement and defensive pressure.

Yet we had 0 tackles inside 50?

[dazzledavey36 48,619]

6 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

Gawn 92%
Weid 72%
Jackson 69%
Melk 80
Fritsch 87

That adds up to always having at least 1 tall forward and 2 mediums. Or 2 talls for 30%.

Given the dogs don’t have dominant marking talls we could easily compete with mediums who provide better movement and defensive pressure.

Big Harry chases, tackles and hits up on the lead as well as halving long contests.

Keeping Weid’s game time low should’ve allowed him to give maximum effort per minute, and be fresh to be powerful in his attack on the ball. Sadly that wasn’t the case 

Pressure was non existent last night. The zero tackles inside 50 proves that.

 

[Willmoy1947 3,758]

I'll put it out there. Weideman will be a better player with Benny back in the team come Finals, not necessarily in goals, Ben will get the goals, but in contests. In other words we need to do the same MO, it works.

[Redleg 37,447]

3 hours ago, Lord Nev said:

Yet we had 0 tackles inside 50?

I am stunned at that. Does that mean that we didn’t try to tackle, or just couldn’t get near enough to them?

Treloar got a lot of his possessions inside our forward 50 and then set them up to score.

Edited July 24, 2022 by Redleg

[loges 5,992]

Played a very good 1st quarter and his 3 goals were important but still allows himself to drift out of the game 

[Lord Travis 10,135]

Zero tackles inside 50 was the result of two things.

The first is actually a positive, we were very very efficient last night when going inside 50 until late in the game. Our efficiency is what kept us ahead for most of the match, as we weren’t winning key stats. Every time  we went inside 50 we were scoring. The Dogs were nearly +20 inside 50s, yet behind on the scoreboard due to our efficiency. Hard to lay a tackle when you’re scoring so well.

The second is a negative, and it’s our smalls pushing further up the ground and becoming ineffective. Guys like Spargo and Nibbler were all the way up into defense at times, which meant they’re not laying tackles inside 50 or creating scoring opportunities. Kozzie was just plain ineffective last night. The balance of our gamestyle is off at present. We’re struggling to defend as well as we have previously, yet have players pushed further up the ground getting caught in no man’s land. The coaches need to address our structures and shape as we’re coming apart when under pressure. 

IMO Brayshaw back to defensive wing role would help. As good as he’s been down back, the team was better balanced when we had another defender like Hunt to lock down on smaller types. Gus when playing wing covered the corridor really well and teams would actively avoid going up the middle or his wing as he would intercept. In essence his presence forced them to one side of the ground and enabled us to setup behind play to counter that. 

Back on Weid, he did his bit last night and was not one of the problems or reasons we lost. 3 goals and a presence most of the night. Decent game from Weid.

Edited July 24, 2022 by Lord Travis

[Diamond_Jim 11,670]

53 minutes ago, willmoy said:

I'll put it out there. Weideman will be a better player with Benny back in the team come Finals, not necessarily in goals, Ben will get the goals, but in contests. In other words we need to do the same MO, it works.

Agree

It's either him or Chandler with Melksham out.

Unfortunately I think it's all a little too late

[poita 3,571]

I was so disappointed in Sam after quarter time on Saturday. After two goals in the first quarter, he should have been feeling great about himself and his chances of having a big game against ordinary opposition. Thereafter he simply failed to compete.

After seven years, how is it that we can't get him to attack the ball with any degree of intensity and desire?

I thought Melksham's ability to nullify contests on Saturday when outnumbered or outsized was infinitely better than Weideman's.

[loges 5,992]

11 minutes ago, poita said:

I was so disappointed in Sam after quarter time on Saturday. After two goals in the first quarter, he should have been feeling great about himself and his chances of having a big game against ordinary opposition. Thereafter he simply failed to compete.

After seven years, how is it that we can't get him to attack the ball with any degree of intensity and desire?

I thought Melksham's ability to nullify contests on Saturday when outnumbered or outsized was infinitely better than Weideman's.

Puzzling because I thought in the first quarter he was absolutely trying to impact marking contests, don't know why he just lapses.

[Stu 843]

I think he was outnumber 3 or 4 to 1 on many occasions, and on several of them he managed to effect the spoil to at least keep the contest alive. But he was certainly much more quiet in the second and fourth quarters in particular. 

[Redleg 37,447]

10 minutes ago, Stu said:

I think he was outnumber 3 or 4 to 1 on many occasions, and on several of them he managed to effect the spoil to at least keep the contest alive. But he was certainly much more quiet in the second and fourth quarters in particular. 

Its the old problem of having one key tall forward to kick to and he gets numbers back on him.

Makes it impossible with the big bombing kicks then. Having another tall like Tom, spreads the defenders and allows one on one contests, which increases your chance of marking the ball.

[Lord Travis 10,135]

It's an interesting one with Weid as he's clearly a bit of a whipping boy and posters on here are still having a go. While he didn't impact the game across four quarters, none of our players really did.

A bit of perspective on his output might re-align expectations. He kicked 3 goals, and if he replicated his game on the weekend every week he'd win the Coleman. 

I'm not saying he's a superstar or had a brilliant game, but his output was decent in the scheme of things and he shouldn't be singled out from the Bulldogs match. He had a few team mates far more deserving of such focused criticism (Jackson, Harmes, Spargo to name a few).

Edited July 25, 2022 by Lord Travis

[layzie 28,473]

To be fair he was off forward fair bit of that second half but I do see what people are saying. Thought he took a reasonable step in the right direction but is it enough?

[ChaserJ 3,956]

On 7/24/2022 at 12:37 PM, Lord Travis said:

Zero tackles inside 50 was the result of two things.

The first is actually a positive, we were very very efficient last night when going inside 50 until late in the game. Our efficiency is what kept us ahead for most of the match, as we weren’t winning key stats. Every time  we went inside 50 we were scoring. The Dogs were nearly +20 inside 50s, yet behind on the scoreboard due to our efficiency. Hard to lay a tackle when you’re scoring so well.

The second is a negative, and it’s our smalls pushing further up the ground and becoming ineffective. Guys like Spargo and Nibbler were all the way up into defense at times, which meant they’re not laying tackles inside 50 or creating scoring opportunities. Kozzie was just plain ineffective last night. The balance of our gamestyle is off at present. We’re struggling to defend as well as we have previously, yet have players pushed further up the ground getting caught in no man’s land. The coaches need to address our structures and shape as we’re coming apart when under pressure. 

IMO Brayshaw back to defensive wing role would help. As good as he’s been down back, the team was better balanced when we had another defender like Hunt to lock down on smaller types. Gus when playing wing covered the corridor really well and teams would actively avoid going up the middle or his wing as he would intercept. In essence his presence forced them to one side of the ground and enabled us to setup behind play to counter that. 

Back on Weid, he did his bit last night and was not one of the problems or reasons we lost. 3 goals and a presence most of the night. Decent game from Weid.

I had some similar thoughts when trying to work out how we could get one of Bowey or Hunt back in against Freo. I’m concerned that their smaller types (Schulz, Walters, Frederick & Switkowski)  could be too mobile for our backline as it’s currently selected.

Maybe Jordon to the bench, Brayshaw to the wing allows us to defend the ground ball a bit better in D50. Harmes is the potentially the one to move out, he’s been down since the Brisbane game.

[ChaserJ 3,956]

5 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

It's an interesting one with Weid as he's clearly a bit of a whipping boy and posters on here are still having a go. While he didn't impact the game across four quarters, none of our players really did.

A bit of perspective on his output might re-align expectations. He kicked 3 goals, and if he replicated his game on the weekend every week he'd win the Coleman. 

I'm not saying he's a superstar or had a brilliant game, but his output was decent in the scheme of things and he shouldn't be singled out from the Bulldogs match. He had a few team mates far more deserving of such focused criticism (Jackson, Harmes, Spargo to name a few).

He also set up a couple of scoring opportunities, one which Max fluffed & the other which Melksham converted after a 50m penalty. Weid was far from the problem on Saturday.

[In Harmes Way 7,477]

On 7/24/2022 at 12:37 PM, Lord Travis said:

IMO Brayshaw back to defensive wing role would help. As good as he’s been down back, the team was better balanced when we had another defender like Hunt to lock down on smaller types. Gus when playing wing covered the corridor really well and teams would actively avoid going up the middle or his wing as he would intercept. In essence his presence forced them to one side of the ground and enabled us to setup behind play to counter that. 

Probably in the wrong thread, but I agree with this. Stats insider is a website that allows good graphical comparisons between players. This is the chart for Jordon vs Brayshaw (admittedly playing two different positions this year). It shows my view that Brayshaw much stronger in the rebounds and contested marks, and Jordon in clearances and inside 50's (same same for contested possessions) - i.e. defensive vs offensive focus. I reckon last year Brayshaw in Jordon's role was just as strong in these defensive stats and controlling the fat side of the ground which is why he's now back in defence. I'd agree we'd be a better team with him back on the wing.

[Little Goffy 12,489]

Any time the ball actually made it to our forward 50 we did pretty well, particularly from the two talls despite neither of them being a classic beast forward.

Our game failed because we appeared to specifically drive towards mud to get bogged in any time we were coming out of defensive 50. Little patience, little vision, almost no switching of play. Basically frightened, timid, self-defeating attitude.

And then the one time May tries something a little tricky it is to Petracca (who should never have called for it) 10m away with two opponents around him and the kick is flawed, giving away a goal and momentum.

I actually think there's more than a bit of mental fraying going on at the moment and it is really damaging our play.

Big test of leadership.

[Melb16 458]

I’m not sure that he just doesn’t compete. I think it’s more of a technical issue.

Watching from the top level on Saturday, it was clear that he runs under the ball a fair bit. There were at least 2 at the end I was at where the kick was fine but he ran straight under it making it easy for the defender to spoil. His timing needs to improve. 

Might also explain why he double grabs marks often.

[spirit of norm smith 12,829]

3 minutes ago, Melb16 said:

I’m not sure that he just doesn’t compete. I think it’s more of a technical issue.

Watching from the top level on Saturday, it was clear that he runs under the ball a fair bit. There were at least 2 at the end I was at where the kick was fine but he ran straight under it making it easy for the defender to spoil. His timing needs to improve. 

Might also explain why he double grabs marks often.

Agreed. But long bombs just don’t help anyone ( can’t believe that I’m looking at you Salem ). We look so much better with quicker ball movement and lowering eyes to a sharper pass. 

[loges 5,992]

1 hour ago, Lord Travis said:

It's an interesting one with Weid as he's clearly a bit of a whipping boy and posters on here are still having a go. While he didn't impact the game across four quarters, none of our players really did.

A bit of perspective on his output might re-align expectations. He kicked 3 goals, and if he replicated his game on the weekend every week he'd win the Coleman. 

I'm not saying he's a superstar or had a brilliant game, but his output was decent in the scheme of things and he shouldn't be singled out from the Bulldogs match. He had a few team mates far more deserving of such focused criticism (Jackson, Harmes, Spargo to name a few).

I thought his game was reasonable on the weekend, 3 goals is always handy, problem is he's not reliable

[mo64 5,208]

1 hour ago, Lord Travis said:

It's an interesting one with Weid as he's clearly a bit of a whipping boy and posters on here are still having a go. While he didn't impact the game across four quarters, none of our players really did.

A bit of perspective on his output might re-align expectations. He kicked 3 goals, and if he replicated his game on the weekend every week he'd win the Coleman. 

I'm not saying he's a superstar or had a brilliant game, but his output was decent in the scheme of things and he shouldn't be singled out from the Bulldogs match. He had a few team mates far more deserving of such focused criticism (Jackson, Harmes, Spargo to name a few).

I agree that his output was decent, and deserves a game next week hopefully with BBB. But the elephant in the room with Weid is his lack of competitiveness at the contest, and that was still on show against the Dogs. Goody wasn't enraptured with Weid's game, and no doubt it was for the same reason. 

He's been in the system long enough, so his physical development shouldn't be an issue. As others have mentioned, what's impressive with JVR is that he's hard at the contest. He didn't have a great game for Casey, but he was still putting his body on the line at marking contests.

To say he's a whipping boy is nonsense. He's been in and out of the side his whole career, so clearly our match committee aren't satisfied with his output. The criticisms of him on Demonland are warranted.

[Sydee 3,612]

4 hours ago, mo64 said:

I agree that his output was decent, and deserves a game next week hopefully with BBB. But the elephant in the room with Weid is his lack of competitiveness at the contest, and that was still on show against the Dogs. Goody wasn't enraptured with Weid's game, and no doubt it was for the same reason. 

He's been in the system long enough, so his physical development shouldn't be an issue. As others have mentioned, what's impressive with JVR is that he's hard at the contest. He didn't have a great game for Casey, but he was still putting his body on the line at marking contests.

To say he's a whipping boy is nonsense. He's been in and out of the side his whole career, so clearly our match committee aren't satisfied with his output. The criticisms of him on Demonland are warranted.

That’s a pretty fair assessment of where things are at for Sam. He has the tools but doesn’t know how to use them - still too easy to defend and still lacks any real physical presence 

One of his goals came from a blocking free which we see happen in almost every pack situation - he was pushed aside like a feather in the breeze - BBB isn’t a lot better in this area 

I don’t think we are asking him to be David Neitz and the raging bull but a physical contest and commitment to every contest is expected. At present our forward half isn’t getting this part of the game right - it’s not just Sam’s fault but he doesn’t help fix it 

[Go the Biff 3,124]

44 minutes ago, Sydee said:

That’s a pretty fair assessment of where things are at for Sam. He has the tools but doesn’t know how to use them - still too easy to defend and still lacks any real physical presence.........

 

I kinda agree with this. He's contracted for another year and failing a miraculous return from TMac we have to keep playing him this year.

His main issues as I see it.

1) He's too easily outbodied. So either he lacks core strength - which is possible as he's only put on semi decent size in the last couple of years - or his technique is poor. If the former then he's got a summer of squats & dead lifts ahead of him if he wants to make the most of his final contracted year. If the latter, he needs some specialized coaching. The Ox is a great example of someone who turned into a great "body" player. It needs addressing because at the moment he has a 95kg body being driven by a 70kg brain.

2) He needs to mark with his hands out in front of his face. Take the ball where its harder for defenders to spoil it. Too often he tries to take the ball almost directly above his head. Easy meat for any half decent defender to spoil without infringing.

3) Get the boy to Specsavers ! Have we tested his bloody eyesight ? The double grabbing, the running under the flight path - can he actually see the damn pill properly ?

FWIW I gave him a bare pass on Saturday but he turned a fantastic start into a barely adequate game. Someone should also tell him that just because Max is in the pack doesn't mean he can't fly for it as well.