Jump to content

CHANGES: Rd 07 vs North Melbourne

Demonland
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

6 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Without getting ahead of ourselves, the next 3 games are an ideal opportunity to try out different ideas - nothing drastic  just one or max of two at at time. 

At some stage we need to get Brown into the side so vs North is the ideal time, then let him settle into the team dynamics vs Sydney and Carlton before facing Bulldogs and beyond.

Ditto the next three weeks is a good time to rotate any young or sore players or to try out players in the VFL knocking on the door. 

So a few changes in the next few weeks will strengthen our selection flexibility.

Play players on merit and form and health ( fitness) Don't flirt with selection for selection sake!!

    • Like 1
     
    4 hours ago, sisso said:

    Would also like to see what Chandler can do he looked in great form in the pre season....don’t think we’ve ever been in this position before so many players to try and fit in!

    The answer is you DONT TRY TO FIT IN players unless there is a good reason !!

    • Like 1
    2 minutes ago, 58er said:

    The answer is you DONT TRY TO FIT IN players unless there is a good reason !!

    Makes sense to manage the side as appropriate too though...no point flogging 22 blokes before finals then copping injuries and not having enough players who’ve been exposed at the top level 

    • Like 3
     

    Don't agree at all with the sentiment that next week's a good time to "experiment".

    We're bringing Brown in if we think it's a sustainable line up whether it's the Dogs or North Melbourne as the opponent. We're not doing it just because it's North.

    IMO Brown makes us better and we have to aim to get better. Premierships aren't won in April. Sides are going to put even more time into us now than ever before. We've got a fiendish back half of the year fixture wise. We need to continue to put what we think is our best 22 on the park and try to improve where we can. If that means Brown, then we need to work out how to make the side work with him in it, because right now TMac, Jackson and Fritsch are locked into the 22.

    So if he comes in, it has to be for one of the players closer to the bottom of the 22: Melksham, Jones, Spargo and Jordon. Can we make it work? I think we can: whether it's Melksham or Jones, I think we can make the 22 work replacing them with Brown. 

    • Like 14
    • Love 1
    3 minutes ago, sisso said:

    Makes sense to manage the side as appropriate too though...no point flogging 22 blokes before finals then copping injuries and not having enough players who’ve been exposed at the top level 

    Natural form and Injury Plus hopefully not suspension generally intervene so no use forcing an issue at present.

    Once you are also ensconced in say the top rungs you can look at health and niggles etc.  Or a player say like Chandler who I believe is really close to best 23 emerge as up to AFL standard then it's The time to reward this achievement. 

    • Like 1

    5 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

    Don't agree at all with the sentiment that next week's a good time to "experiment".

    We're bringing Brown in if we think it's a sustainable line up whether it's the Dogs or North Melbourne as the opponent. We're not doing it just because it's North.

    IMO Brown makes us better and we have to aim to get better. Premierships aren't won in April. Sides are going to put even more time into us now than ever before. We've got a fiendish back half of the year fixture wise. We need to continue to put what we think is our best 22 on the park and try to improve where we can. If that means Brown, then we need to work out how to make the side work with him in it, because right now TMac, Jackson and Fritsch are locked into the 22.

    So if he comes in, it has to be for one of the players closer to the bottom of the 22: Melksham, Jones, Spargo and Jordon. Can we make it work? I think we can: whether it's Melksham or Jones, I think we can make the 22 work replacing them with Brown. 

    Agree Titan 

    We need a proper full forward. Brown or the weed has to come in. Problem is they are both tall. I believe we need both of them and should be brought in. Melksham and 1 other rested is the way to go. If it is in Hobast then only 1 coz of weather.

    • Like 3
    7 hours ago, leave it to deever said:

    We have one of the best full fwds in the competition who has proved he is back in form.

    If Bbb does not come in against his old club then we may as well trade him.

    Im sure he will get a look.

    Out. Melksham.

    In. B. Brown.

    Go dees.

    Id keep Melksham as the Super Sub but other than that a whole heap of players are banging down the door for inclusion, Depending on soreness levels and perhaps wanting to freshen some players up a few might well be rested over the next weeks.

    In no particular order the following could easily come in Weeds, Nev, Harmes, Majak, Toby Bedford, Chandler, Sparrow, Jake Bowey has had two very good games and Deakyn Smith is no slouch either! How good is it that players who would ordinarily be walk up starts haqve to wait until either form of injury occurs

    Edited by picket fence

    • Like 1
     

    Definitely no experimentation or managing of players. I agree with Titan above - we have 4 games in a row against lowly opponents. We have a horrendous record of dropping games like these. So we power on with our best 22 until injury or form demands otherwise. 

    There might be individuals who appear to be playing without too much impact - Melksham and Jones -  but the team football across the 22 shouldn't be tampered with. 

    No change.

    Edited by Maldonboy38
    typos and grammar

    • Like 4
    28 minutes ago, 58er said:

    We don't need Tmac on the wing !

    How many times have you suggested this mythical change in our structure?

    Isn't his form good  enough ? Let the bloke do what he does best . The Mark McLure role in the forward line Marking kicking goals and making ways for and protecting our smalls. 
     

    It's going well and honestly both Weid and BBB are not that same type of player to assist others.

    Just wanting to play certain players to fit them in is not team football. They must all gel and right now Melksham is probably the elephant in the room.

    Plus Angus is owning his wing with great support for the defenders and also a good feeder to the leads from Our forwards.

    We don't need to experiment and risk mucking up Tmac'a form and the Forward line and centre line synergy.

    Yes we do. Brown is our FF.

    If TMac can’t fit into that then that is a problem. He trained in the summer for a wing and while his kicking would be heart in mouth stuff when he runs defensively he will be up there with Langdon with kms covered and would be a dangerous threat running forward and taking grabs overlapping with the forwards.

    And lastly, injuries will impact ‘synergy’ we should experiment within reason to make sure we are prepared for the inevitable forced changes that will have to come if we are to play 26 weeks this season.

    • Like 3

    FWIW, BB must have played more games at Blundstone than any other Demon. If we need a bit of ground experience and expertise, to go with his height and ability, he is a possible in.

    • Like 1
    47 minutes ago, rpfc said:

    Yes we do. Brown is our FF.

    If TMac can’t fit into that then that is a problem. He trained in the summer for a wing and while his kicking would be heart in mouth stuff when he runs defensively he will be up there with Langdon with kms covered and would be a dangerous threat running forward and taking grabs overlapping with the forwards.

    If Brown comes in for someone like Melksham, the vacancy in the team will be on the HFF, not the wing. Can TMac do that role? I guess it’s not dissimilar to wing.

    I’m not sure why Fritsch isn’t in the conversation for a higher role and keep TMac deeper.

    46 minutes ago, Redleg said:

    FWIW, BB must have played more games at Blundstone than any other Demon. If we need a bit of ground experience and expertise, to go with his height and ability, he is a possible in.

    He has a 14-4 record there. Happy hunting ground for him traditionally.

    • Like 1
    1 hour ago, dl4e said:

    We need a proper full forward. Brown or the weed has to come in. Problem is they are both tall. I believe we need both of them and should be brought in. Melksham and 1 other rested is the way to go. If it is in Hobast then only 1 coz of weather.

    Agreed on this.

    Bringing in Ben Brown is not experimenting. It is bringing in a proven 60 goal a year full forward. It wont ruin the chemistry. Tom McDonald is a workhorse all up the ground, Fritsch is a mid sized forward and LJ can do anything anywhere, theres plenty of room for BBB and all of them to operate.

    • Like 2

    I remember one of the players being discussed having a crucial shot at game end that didn’t end well.

    if I can remember it it’s likely he hasn’t forgotten 

    Bringing him back to the senior level in a game like the next one could be the right time to reinstate his place in the firsts and build the confidence that will be necessary later in the year (likely)

    1 hour ago, 58er said:

    We don't need Tmac on the wing !

    How many times have you suggested this mythical change in our structure?

    Isn't his form good  enough ? Let the bloke do what he does best . The Mark McLure role in the forward line Marking kicking goals and making ways for and protecting our smalls. 
     

    It's going well and honestly both Weid and BBB are not that same type of player to assist others.

    Just wanting to play certain players to fit them in is not team football. They must all gel and right now Melksham is probably the elephant in the room.

    Plus Angus is owning his wing with great support for the defenders and also a good feeder to the leads from Our forwards.

    We don't need to experiment and risk mucking up Tmac'a form and the Forward line and centre line synergy.

    Umm, are you confusing me with someone else? Because this would literally be the first time I've suggested this change.

    I am loving McDonalds form and couldn't be happier for him. But Brown is better, he just is. We didn't recruit him to play at Casey so when there is an opportunity to improve your team you look at it. McDonald was touted for time on the wing during pre-season and that's where he spent most of his time training prior to the injuries to Weideman and Brown. That's the main reason I bring up that move. Plus with his endurance base and ability to present up and down the ground as a legitimate marking target he could absolute own a wing. 

    Perhaps there is a way we could accommodate one of Brown and Weideman into the forward 50 to partner McDonald as well.

     

    • Like 1

    3 hours ago, Chook said:

    I'd be very surprised if Wiedeman is still at Melbourne next year if he can't somehow break into the side.

    Probably true. We can't keep them all on the list and clearly we didn't want to going into 2021.

    1 hour ago, rpfc said:

    Yes we do. Brown is our FF.

    If TMac can’t fit into that then that is a problem. He trained in the summer for a wing and while his kicking would be heart in mouth stuff when he runs defensively he will be up there with Langdon with kms covered and would be a dangerous threat running forward and taking grabs overlapping with the forwards.

    And lastly, injuries will impact ‘synergy’ we should experiment within reason to make sure we are prepared for the inevitable forced changes that will have to come if we are to play 26 weeks this season.

    Goodwin has made it clear at his pressers that Tom M is playing great footy up forward & is NOT going to a wing.

    • Like 3

    At some stage I think we have to work out a structure to get Brown in. A top power forward is the last piece of the puzzle for our push towards September. The magnets might need to be shifted around but I think it can be done. 

    This might end up being Weiderman’s last year with Melbourne if he doesn’t see first team action. He’s too good to be wasting away in the VFL. 

    • Like 1

    I (and the club) never would have expected Weid and Brown to succumb to injuries before we begun. The T-Mac wing role was probably a last straw type deal. I doubt the club ever considered this scenario occurring but it really is a conundrum.

    For the latter half of the year, I believe Weid and Ben Brown are more important than T-Mac, however I commend him for making it difficult to get them in. He’s had a great start.

    Still believe we need to roll guys through in the middle third of the year so we have every base covered for a proper tilt at finals and going deep in them 

    I worry about Jones just going, Melky will have one good game and 6 nothing games. Feel like those 2 are the obvious targets to go out, but as mentioned their positions would mean a definite shift in structure/setup

    • Like 1

    4 hours ago, Grr-owl said:

    A little bell is ringing in my head.... Weid out, Merrett in?

    t what l was thinking. Who do we swap for him?

    2 hours ago, rpfc said:

    Yes we do. Brown is our FF.

    If TMac can’t fit into that then that is a problem. He trained in the summer for a wing and while his kicking would be heart in mouth stuff when he runs defensively he will be up there with Langdon with kms covered and would be a dangerous threat running forward and taking grabs overlapping with the forwards.

    And lastly, injuries will impact ‘synergy’ we should experiment within reason to make sure we are prepared for the inevitable forced changes that will have to come if we are to play 26 weeks this season.

    TMac is the best middle distance runner on our list, and given his size and football skill would be a headache for all oppositions on the wing. He sort of played a floating wingman in 2018 and that turned out “ok”.

    • Like 1

    I think we made selection for the tigs game which valued proven team dynamic, wet weather conditions and need for pressure to play against tigs system. 

    If I was selecting to play the dogs I'd want to exploit their shallow key def. posts. 

    • Like 3
     

    BBB for Jones (rested) is the go. Melksham at least has the potential to whip a couple goals out of his [censored], or hit team mates with bullet passes, which Jones does not. No one else will be dropped on current form. Melksham's upside over Jones keeps him in.

    T Mac's up the ground marking ability keeps him in the side over Weid. 

    Edited by adonski

    • Like 3
    1 hour ago, Cranky Franky said:

    Goodwin has made it clear at his pressers that Tom M is playing great footy up forward & is NOT going to a wing.

    No he hasn’t. He said he isn’t getting dropped and isn’t going to the backline.

    • Like 8
    • Thanks 1

    Guest
    This topic is now closed to further replies.
    Go to topic listing

    Featured Content

    • GAMEDAY: Collingwood

      It's Game Day and the Demons face a monumental task as they take on the top-of-the-table Magpies in one of the biggest games on the Dees calendar: the King's Birthday Big Freeze MND match. Can the Demons defy the odds and claim a massive scalp to keep their finals hopes alive?

        • Love
        • Like
      • 60 replies
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Collingwood

      It was freezing cold at Mission Whitten Stadium where only the brave came out in the rain to watch a game that turned out to be as miserable as the weather.
      The Casey Demons secured their third consecutive victory, earning the four premiership points and credit for defeating a highly regarded Collingwood side, but achieved little else. Apart perhaps from setting the scene for Monday’s big game at the MCG and the Ice Challenge that precedes it.
      Neither team showcased significant skill in the bleak and greasy conditions, at a location that was far from either’s home territory. Even the field umpires forgot where they were and experienced a challenging evening, but no further comment is necessary.

        • Like
      • 4 replies
      Demonland

    • NON-MFC: Round 13

      Follow all the action from every Round 13 clash excluding the Dees as the 2025 AFL Premiership Season rolls on. With Melbourne playing in the final match of the round on King's Birthday, all eyes turn to the rest of the competition. Who are you tipping to win? And more importantly, which results best serve the Demons’ finals aspirations? Join the discussion and keep track of the matches that could shape the ladder and impact our run to September.

      • 216 replies
      Demonland

    • PREVIEW: Collingwood

      Having convincingly defeated last year’s premier and decisively outplayed the runner-up with 8.2 in the final quarter, nothing epitomized the Melbourne Football Club’s performance more than its 1.12 final half, particularly the eight consecutive behinds in the last term, against a struggling St Kilda team in the midst of a dismal losing streak. Just when stability and consistency were anticipated within the Demon ranks, they delivered a quintessential performance marked by instability and ill-conceived decisions, with the most striking aspect being their inaccuracy in kicking for goal, which suggested a lack of preparation (instead of sleeping in their hotel in Alice, were they having a night on the turps) rather than a well-rested team. Let’s face it - this kicking disease that makes them look like raw amateurs is becoming a millstone around the team’s neck.

      • 1 reply
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Sydney

      The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

      • 1 reply
      Demonland

    • REPORT: St. Kilda

      Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
      This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

      • 4 replies
      Demonland
    View All