On Brown, and weed for that matter, it is a very long season.

And as is the case every injuries will play a huge part in which club wins the flag.

We are fit, in good shape injury wise. And playing well.

And I'm firmly of the view that the next four games are critical for our chances of winning a flag. 

Why?  We need to win all four. Failing to do so would be a huge missed opportunity. 

If we go 10 zip, before we have to play port and dogs, we are a lock for top 4.

With what our percentage would be and how the ladder is shaping up, 15 wins will get us top 4.

Meaning from 10 zip we will only need to win 5 of our remaining 12 games. 

Now is not the the time to make any major changes.

Sure some minor management changes. But Iets bank these four wins and then at the mid season mark and around the bye we can give some players a chop out. Particularly the younger ones.

Brown and weed will get their chance.

We have a run of games, probably the best run for the remainder of the season, where we can tweak and play around with different options. I don’t like jeopardising form and get the logic of not changing a winning team. But form loss and injuries will happen. Better to have looked at options in different positions now through experimentation rather than enforced.

We have got to get BB into this team. He is A-grade. Makes zero sense leaving him to play at Casey waiting for form loss or injury to get his chance. Get him in now.

5 minutes ago, Better days ahead said:

We have a run of games, probably the best run for the remainder of the season, where we can tweak and play around with different options. I don’t like jeopardising form and get the logic of not changing a winning team. But form loss and injuries will happen. Better to have looked at options in different positions now through experimentation rather than enforced.

We have got to get BB into this team. He is A-grade. Makes zero sense leaving him to play at Casey waiting for form loss or injury to get his chance. Get him in now.

@Binman I rarely disagree with you but in this case I agree with BDA.
I would look at the best team for the finals. Assuming  BB is fit and in form he’s got to be in that team. He’s going to be a huge bonus with the change in rules. We’re playing a KPH short. You can’t compare Jacko to him as a FF. This next 4 games is the best run we’re going to have for the rest of the season. it’s the best chance there will be to build the synergy with him in the team. We won’t lose because he’s brought in. IMO it will be a big mistake not to do it now. 
The Doggies have growing injuries and have a short backline. He could make a massive difference. Imagine if we beat them. That lid will be wizzing into the stratosphere. Bring BB in. Just do it. 

21 minutes ago, 58er said:

Ridiculous did U watch The game ?

Or replay.

Does  things so Unobtrusively that you don't notice inc. handballs tackles and fits in with the mids as scpoibbof difference.

Yes watched the whole game and absolutely loved it. Saw Jordon do the small things and could not find fault in his game.  Indeed didn’t see much wrong with any of the group.  
 

Apart from resting Jonesy, I really couldn’t find anyone to make room for Ben Brown. Given Jonesy just played 300th, didn’t necessarily look to rest him. 

Thought we might rest Jordon for this one v Kangas , as he has been good but looking at balance and long year, the youngster could do with a break.
 

It’s an opinion so did not need a vitriolic response.  

3 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Yes watched the whole game and absolutely loved it. Saw Jordon do the small things and could not find fault in his game.  Indeed didn’t see much wrong with any of the group.  
 

Apart from resting Jonesy, I really couldn’t find anyone to make room for Ben Brown. Given Jonesy just played 300th, didn’t necessarily look to rest him. 

Thought we might rest Jordon for this one v Kangas , as he has been good but looking at balance and long year, the youngster could do with a break.
 

It’s an opinion so did not need a vitriolic response.  

Just feels it sends the wrong message to young players when playing well.

Melksham is the elephant still but it's hard work fir BBB and Weid as Tmac Snd LJ are performing a pivotal role as well as a team first role and no way should this be tampered with.
 

Strange combo Tommy marks at  a high Level as his long arms are straight up and Jacko has those ground skills plus improvement in marking potential  now as a forward.

Then where do we start with his ruck role priceless for the Gawn effect all over the ground!!!

 

11 hours ago, binman said:

Like nibbler, spargo is going nowhere. Both best 22 locks. All season.

Both are critical factors in our system. Critical.

On 360 last week goody was asked about improvement. He emphasised leadership - and when listing the leaders he included the usual suspects, max, Jack etc. And nibbler.

He sure did  ;)

On 4/19/2021 at 8:43 PM, Lord Nev said:

Goody gave a special mention to ANB tonight on 360. Was talking about the leaders in the club, he brought up the core group around Gawn being Viney, Lever, May and ANB.

 

On 4/25/2021 at 11:56 PM, A F said:

I'm hearing Brown comes in this week, but not sure who will make way just yet. I'd say it'll be Melksham.

Chandler to play a full game at Casey, Melksham to be Medical Sub and BBB Into the side is the way I would go!

We're talking about professional footballers whom, we presume, won't sulk if they don't get picked to play. Their chance will come That applies equally to Brown and Weidemann  and Jetta as it does to Jordon, Chandler or Sparrow. Selections are being carefully considered by people who know what they're doing.

Let's leave it to Goodwin.

For what it's worth, I would give Pickett a rest because he's been buffeted these last couple of weeks and copped some sideways pressure on his knee last Saturday. Let Jordon have a break too to keep him fresh and focussed. Lastly, though he's done nothing wrong either, give Jackson a bit of respite and bring in Brown or Weidemann for him.

 

I can understand the Brown for Melk wish. I believe Melk is definitely off the pace at the moment. He's decision making the last two weeks has been ordinary and hasn't seemed to find a clear role in the forward half. Just not sure of the balance with so many talls.

Only thing is Brown in most likely means Tmac spending more time on the wing and further up the field. My two issues with this are:

- We currently have a good balance on the wings. Langdon provides elite coverage across the far wing, always creating an option exiting the backline and pushing hard forward. Brayshaw gives us some toughness on the other wing with good ball use and floods back to play safety in the backline especially in turnover situations. Not keen to unsettle this balance/strategy which is clearly working.

- Tmac definitely did a fair bit on Saturday night to prove me wrong in my criticism of him. His intensity, attack on the contest and general movement with and without the ball was much improved, he looked so switched on. Played well a truly like a man whose job was on the line and was fantastic. I still fear that more time further up the field with expose him. Huge tank and obviously creates excellent marking options through the middle of the ground but his agility and mobility in and around more contests will hurt us I think.

Given that there are fewer rotations, and that our game plan relies on locking the ball in the forward half (for which we rank #1), we have be careful about balancing player capabilities.
 

Part of the success of our forward line to date has been Jackson’s ability to compete in the air, but just as importantly win ground balls, and McDonald’s ability to run and run for 4 quarters (and take marks/be useful when the ball goes to ground). 

Brown and Weiderman are known for their marking and goal kicking, with Brown a useful forward line ruck. At the moment, due to this narrower skill set, I prefer not to have both in the side. They have the opportunity to work on ground ball/tackling/endurance in the twos. 
 

Given that McDonald and Jackson are utilities as much as forwards, I think we can bring in a Mark/goal forward without upsetting the balance too much. I noted with interest that when Weideman kicked 7 goals last week, Brown was seen all over the ground, popping up in the backline and ruck, as well as forward. As such, I would have Brown in not just because he is proven, but also because he has more strings to his bow around the ground than the Weid. We have the luxury of really giving Weideman time in the twos to really develop his game. 

I’m wondering if we don’t end up rotating Gawn, Jackson, Brown and McDonald around the ground, with TMac and Brown closer to goal. Brayshaw is going well on the wing, and I think Tmac stays predominantly as forward until Weid forces him out. 
 

If Brown comes in, the question as to who comes out is the interesting one. Low rotations make his a potential liability compared to runners like Jones and Melksham. All of the current roles fit nicely.

However, given that Melksham only played 65% of game time suggests that taking him out of the side would not make a huge difference to our run.
 

I’ll be comfortable bringing Brown in and dropping Melksham. If not Melksham, Jones would be next. 
 

Other than that, I would agree that if any of our younger players are really sore, one of them might have a week off as it’s a long season. 

 

 

1 hour ago, Yung Blood said:

I can understand the Brown for Melk wish. I believe Melk is definitely off the pace at the moment. He's decision making the last two weeks has been ordinary and hasn't seemed to find a clear role in the forward half. Just not sure of the balance with so many talls.

Only thing is Brown in most likely means Tmac spending more time on the wing and further up the field. My two issues with this are:

- We currently have a good balance on the wings. Langdon provides elite coverage across the far wing, always creating an option exiting the backline and pushing hard forward. Brayshaw gives us some toughness on the other wing with good ball use and floods back to play safety in the backline especially in turnover situations. Not keen to unsettle this balance/strategy which is clearly working.

- Tmac definitely did a fair bit on Saturday night to prove me wrong in my criticism of him. His intensity, attack on the contest and general movement with and without the ball was much improved, he looked so switched on. Played well a truly like a man whose job was on the line and was fantastic. I still fear that more time further up the field with expose him. Huge tank and obviously creates excellent marking options through the middle of the ground but his agility and mobility in and around more contests will hurt us I think.

At least it gives us an opportunity to test some things against a lesser side

2 hours ago, It's Time said:

@Binman I rarely disagree with you but in this case I agree with BDA.
I would look at the best team for the finals. Assuming  BB is fit and in form he’s got to be in that team. He’s going to be a huge bonus with the change in rules. We’re playing a KPH short. You can’t compare Jacko to him as a FF. This next 4 games is the best run we’re going to have for the rest of the season. it’s the best chance there will be to build the synergy with him in the team. We won’t lose because he’s brought in. IMO it will be a big mistake not to do it now. 
The Doggies have growing injuries and have a short backline. He could make a massive difference. Imagine if we beat them. That lid will be wizzing into the stratosphere. Bring BB in. Just do it. 

Fair points IT.

But i don't think we are in disagreement as such.

I'm not averse to them bringing Brown in. I see the logic for doing so, which you make a good case for, but granted, I won't be too fussed if they don't. 

But for me bringing Brown in would be not be a major change, although it would result in some changes to the forward structure. 

As i said i'm fine with some minor management changes. By that i mean keep the changes to a minimum numbers wise. I don't want them to suddenly make four or five changes.

And i certainly hope they don't  experiment with players in different positions as Better days ahead suggests.

We need to take the opportunity over the next four games to solidify our system and maximize the likelihood of going 10 zip.

Leaving aside what that means for out top 4 chances, the psychological boost that will give the players, the club and the fans is pure gold. You don't mess with that alchemy.

Look at the Dogs. They made four unforced changes to their side against the Giants. Sure they still won (and pretty easily in the end), but it was scrappy game and the Giants were in it at 3/4 time.

And one of the players they brought in to get up to speed with a view to their best 22 comes finals, Lin Jong, did his hammy and is our for 6-8 weeks. 

The concern I'd have if i was a dogs fan is their system looked out of whack for most of the game, which is not great preparation for a game against the reigning premiers coming up.

The final thing i'd say is that sure we should beat North. But the Swans are currently a top 8 team, the blues are competitive (but for horrid 2nd quarter against the lions might well have beaten them) and the Crows at home will be a challenge.

We are nowhere near in the position to flirt with selections or make fundamental structural changes (Brown isn't one. Brown AND Weed is). Doing so would send the wrong message to the players and opposition teams.

Doing whatever it takes to win these next four games has to be the sole focus. 

 

The AFL should force clubs to make clubs go back to publishing team lists on Thursdays.

Melk or Jones comes out for BBB this week. 

As much as I love Jones, he can be the medical sub (I would also put it to him to be vocal as the medical sub and instruct the team like he would on gameday). 

Melk can be more damaging than Jones 

We can play BBB alongside Tmac. 

Tmac plays higher up the ground and BBB deep. 

LJ probably gets less TOG. 

With regards to selection integrity, would it not show a lack thereof, to keep Jones in the side after his poorest game for the year but then to drop him after his best?

 

2 hours ago, Jymothy said:

The AFL should force clubs to make clubs go back to publishing team lists on Thursdays.

They would lie. There would be late changes so we would be none the wiser.

Edited April 27, 20213 yr by ManDee
I wish it would print what I type not what it thinks.

OUT: Tasmania

IN: Marvel.

We've got the rolls royce collection of deck chairs, I'm sure the selection committee will get it right no matter what they do.

What an epic problem to have

on the age footy podcast today -  good listen with bartel’s take on the MFC - one of them said they would not swap Melbourne’s list for anyone’s. Best in the league by far.

3 hours ago, roy11 said:

At least it gives us an opportunity to test some things against a lesser side

Upsets happen fairly often in AFL. I wouldn't be bringing guys in just to tinker around, it can cost you a game on the wrong day. Go too tall and it could really upset the balance.

We've seen this team really struggle on windy/rainy smaller unknown grounds. I wouldn't be choosing this week to risk it against a young North team wanting a scalp after a really poor start.

1 hour ago, Yung Blood said:

Upsets happen fairly often in AFL. I wouldn't be bringing guys in just to tinker around, it can cost you a game on the wrong day. Go too tall and it could really upset the balance.

We've seen this team really struggle on windy/rainy smaller unknown grounds. I wouldn't be choosing this week to risk it against a young North team wanting a scalp after a really poor start.

100% agree with this. We haven’t won a game in Hobart ever (despite being so close so many times), and we have shown a vulnerability to windy conditions in the past. I think tinkering with the list and not respecting the opposition can blow up in your face big time. 

By all means give players weeks off if they have niggles but I really believe each player doesn’t want to give up their spot because they’d be worried about getting it back. 

How I would love to take this thread through a wormhole and back 8 weeks.  Just been kicked by the dogs in the preseason game.  Imagine suggesting a fit and firing Ben Brown could even be considered as not up for selection.  And t-Mac keeping him out?  Or the only players we could think of dropping are milkshake and Jones - when we have so many whipping boys?

a lot has changed in 6 weeks.....

I just found out it is only Tuesday, is this the slowest week of all time?

5 days til the game still!!

Weather is also a factor. Hobart's Sunday forecast is for a high of 20, low of 12, isolated thunderstorms, breaks of sun late.

MFCSS kicks in...could B. Brown become a lightening rod?

7 minutes ago, TRIGON said:

Weather is also a factor. Hobart's Sunday forecast is for a high of 20, low of 12, isolated thunderstorms, breaks of sun late.

 

Thought it was going to be a dry day.   Thats a shame.

On 4/24/2021 at 11:02 PM, Nasher said:

Jones, Melksham and Spargo are our clear bottom 3 at present. I think a case can be made for any of those three to go - but only one of them. I’d pick Brown ahead of Weid.

I’d be really tempted to go no change though. The present mix is working. The risk of breaking it has to be a consideration.

I really don’t get the negative vibes towards Spargo.