CHANGES: Rd 08 vs Sydney

[Bates Mate 4,510]

39 minutes ago, Dannyz said:

I dont believe we have a match up for Papley. 

I'll back Hibberd to cover him

[Gawndy the Great 9,011]

Petty for Tomo

Chandler for Melk

Sparrow for Baker

If Fritta goes bring in Bedford or Weed depending on matchups and weather

[DeeSpencer 26,090]

11 minutes ago, Doug Reemer said:

I wouldn't call weideman a lumbering forward, after what I've seen at casey. Even his field kicking has gone up a notch!

In that last 3 weeks he's had a grand total of 2 tackles. He's moving well against VFL opponents but he's a poor pressure player, we've got years of evidence of that.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,910]

I must have been watching a different game to just about everyone else. I thought Melksham played well - not well enough for me to give him votes, but certainly in the top 10-12 players. The only questions for me are:

• does Weideman come in for Tomlinson with McDonald going back or does Petty come in?
• does Baker get another week? He wasn't good, but he wasn't awful, either. The answer may be decided by the Petty question. If Petty comes in McDonald might go to the wing and take Baker's place
• does Jones get "rested", replaced by either Sparrow, Harmes or Bedford?
• does Fritsch get suspended? 

[Altona-demon 321]

Agree @DeeSpencer he's not a pressure forward, that is not what he brings to this forward line.  At the moment based on watching the Casey games his role (in that system), is more of CHF roving quite far up the ground.  His work rate was more impressive (in terms of Ks run) in the 2s then Ben Brown was in the 1s.  However, that can be system related.  His efforts to get up the wing and then back to the square to split contests where a notable part of Weid's game against Norf.  I wasn't seeing similar efforts from BBB, and I am not sure he has that tank and speed anyway to do that. 

Second thing I think that Weid probably does slightly better than BBB is protect the drop zone of the ball and body up on a defender a bit better - but again small sample size to see whether BBB can do this.  For now Sam probably stays in the twos. 

Only change I can see is Petty coming in for Tomlinson and Sparrow should play. Cannot state enough for those who watched the Casey game last week how good Sparrow was - not only is he tough on ball, his entries into forward 50 where bullets to advantage.  The comparison watching Oskar Baker enter forward 50 this weekend was stark.  Not only that, he is silk inside and outside - with his decision making, he is a real Viney replacement. Would love to see him get a game. 

[Left Foot Snap 2,491]

19 minutes ago, Altona-demon said:

@DeeSpencer (sorry couldn't delete that bit)

Only change I can see is Petty coming in for Tomlinson and Sparrow should play. Cannot state enough for those who watched the Casey game last week how good Sparrow was - not only is he tough on ball, his entries into forward 50 where bullets to advantage.  The comparison watching Oskar Baker enter forward 50 this weekend was stark.  Not only that, he is silk inside and outside - with his decision making, he is a real Viney replacement. Would love to see him get a game. 

I really like Sparrow, especially his intensity. Direct replacement for Viney for mine, with Brayshaw going back to the wing.

Edited May 3, 2021 by Left Foot Snap
Correcting auto correct

[Dr.D 1,771]

whatever it is, we can't put Tom Mcdonald in the backline. I was hoping these experimental days were over. We've done the experiment, his decision making is too poor to play in the backline and he already dropped an easy mark down there (that he would never drop in the forward line) which almost cost us an important goal. He must stay forward, ideally at the expense of Brown who was well off the pace. 

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,910]

2 minutes ago, Dr.D said:

whatever it is, we can't put Tom Mcdonald in the backline. I was hoping these experimental days were over. We've done the experiment, his decision making is too poor to play in the backline and he already dropped an easy mark down there (that he would never drop in the forward line) which almost cost us an important goal. He must stay forward, ideally at the expense of Brown who was well off the pace. 

As Lesley Neilson would say, "Surely you can't be serious".

[titan_uranus 25,046]

1 hour ago, Dannyz said:

I dont believe we have a match up for Papley. 

Does any club?

Might be Hunt for us.

[Dr.D 1,771]

Just now, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

As Lesley Neilson would say, "Surely you can't be serious".

I'm honestly happy to have a discussion about Brown. I thought he was very average and I'm not going to understate his missed mark in the last quarter that would've sealed the game or the sloppy high tackle he gave away in the clutch moment of the last quarter as well. couple this with the fact that we kicked away from North Melbourne as soon as Brown went off the ground with the blood rule. Throw in the fact that Weideman was playing better in the Vfl despite Brown being promoted. And throw in the fact that this was our worst performance of the season. Also throw in the fact that Tom Mcdonald wasn't played forward due to Brown (and Tomlinson going down) which is never going to be a long term solution.  So there's about 5 reasons right off the bat. 

[Altona-demon 321]

I think maybe Hibberd to Papley - similarly explosive in first 20 yards. Rivers is also very quick. 

[forever demons 2,245]

Looks like a few changes this week Viney,Tomo,possibly Brayshaw all injured.So Melksham will stay in along with Jones.Big chance for Sparrow to come in withe Chandler and Petty (if he is not injured)

[forever demons 2,245]

Sparrow to go with Papley

[PaulRB 6,411]

6 minutes ago, Dr.D said:

I'm honestly happy to have a discussion about Brown. I thought he was very average and I'm not going to understate his missed mark in the last quarter that would've sealed the game or the sloppy high tackle he gave away in the clutch moment of the last quarter as well. couple this with the fact that we kicked away from North Melbourne as soon as Brown went off the ground with the blood rule. Throw in the fact that Weideman was playing better in the Vfl despite Brown being promoted. And throw in the fact that this was our worst performance of the season. Also throw in the fact that Tom Mcdonald wasn't played forward due to Brown (and Tomlinson going down) which is never going to be a long term solution.  So there's about 5 reasons right off the bat. 

... and don’t call me Shirley! 

[godees 873]

1 hour ago, Dannyz said:

I dont believe we have a match up for Papley. 

Rivers

[Sydney_Demon 1,175]

7 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I must have been watching a different game to just about everyone else. I thought Melksham played well - not well enough for me to give him votes, but certainly in the top 10-12 players. The only questions for me are:

• does Weideman come in for Tomlinson with McDonald going back or does Petty come in?
• does Baker get another week? He wasn't good, but he wasn't awful, either. The answer may be decided by the Petty question. If Petty comes in McDonald might go to the wing and take Baker's place
• does Jones get "rested", replaced by either Sparrow, Harmes or Bedford?
• does Fritsch get suspended? 

I agree Melksham wasn't bad. 17 disposals from the half-forward flank. Melksham is just one of those players supporters love to hate. Don't expect any rationality. Having said that, someone has to be dropped from the side to accommodate Harmes who has to come in this week, especially if Viney isn't fit.

If Fritsch gets suspended, then surely Weideman has to come in. This might have repercussions for the rest of the team make-up as we could then be too tall if Petty comes in. I think there's a risk bringing Petty in this week anyway. He didn't play last weekend as he. Jones, Mitch Brown, and Baker were all held over from Casey's team to cover potential injuries etc.   

I don't know how you can possibly keep Jones in given he had a mediocre game, and only played as sub because Viney was a late withdrawal. And I don't think Baker deserves to be dropped after a pretty good game, including 4 tackles.

So, in a nutshell:

Weideman for Fritsch (If Fritsch is suspended)
Harmes for Melksham
Tmac down back, Baker stays in. 

[leave it to deever 17,531]

1 hour ago, Sydney_Demon said:

We've got one of the best mid-fields in the AFL. Harmes is now back. Kozzie can play midfield. Sparrow, Jordon, Brayshaw could move there. I can't believe the negativity in these posts. We're 7 zip and we actually beat North Melbourne by 5 goals in Tassie despite playing fairly ordinarily for most of the game. North played by far their best game this year and in this comp if you're slightly off your game you're in trouble. Even the best sides have the odd bad game. For God's sake let's jump on rather than off. Go 

 

Perhaps you jumped the gun a little.

I think our team is awesome.

Its not about how we played or Nm played.

I do believe that Viney out is a big factor.

I do believe Jordan is a great player.

I just want to make sure that we continue to grow.

The club has been fantastic stocking itself with forwards and defenders and its why we are so successful.

I just want the midfield to be extra special as well.

Im not saying its not. Nobody can fault our two champions in Trac and Oliver.Im wrapped with Kozzies efforts. Im just not sure that Gus and Harmes are great midfielders. I really hope Im wrong.

Maybe Sparrow will step up.

A small defender and a proven midfielder should be on our agenda given that Jack may always have a foot issue.

Premier teams have lots of players knocking on the door for selection.

If there is one area we can improve on with recruiting then its in the middle.

Just saying. 

 

Edited May 3, 2021 by leave it to deever
Humility

[Sydney_Demon 1,175]

16 minutes ago, Dr.D said:

I'm honestly happy to have a discussion about Brown. I thought he was very average and I'm not going to understate his missed mark in the last quarter that would've sealed the game or the sloppy high tackle he gave away in the clutch moment of the last quarter as well. couple this with the fact that we kicked away from North Melbourne as soon as Brown went off the ground with the blood rule. Throw in the fact that Weideman was playing better in the Vfl despite Brown being promoted. And throw in the fact that this was our worst performance of the season. Also throw in the fact that Tom Mcdonald wasn't played forward due to Brown (and Tomlinson going down) which is never going to be a long term solution.  So there's about 5 reasons right off the bat. 

I think there was a fair argument that Weideman should have been picked ahead of Brown last week, but you can't pick a player for one week, he kicks 2 goals, and then you drop him. Give the bloke a chance! He needs to be given at least 4 weeks to settle into the team. The problem may be solved for this week anyway if Fritsch gets suspended. If that happens, Weideman comes in and Brown stays in.

[Deemania since 56 6,723]

15 hours ago, The Swimming Dee said:

Sparrow is the answer in place of Viney. I watched him the other night for Casey and he was a class above...dominant. He is hard at the ball and has good defensive pressure.

Sydney will be a tough game. I thought we looked lethargic today and might be due for a loss.

Melksham should get dropped. Taking the easy option in every contest and trying to take on the tackler all the time is infuriating. I don’t care how good a deliverer you are if you cannot provide any defensive effort...his half tackle, half bump thing is stupid...sorry for the rant

The Swans at the G? There's going to be a good deal of space on the flanks - particularly HFwd and Hback. I think we are going to need Swallow and Melksham for entry and exploitation of these pathways as runners, and also as key links to forward deliveries. 

[DeeSpencer 26,090]

25 minutes ago, Dr.D said:

I'm honestly happy to have a discussion about Brown. I thought he was very average and I'm not going to understate his missed mark in the last quarter that would've sealed the game or the sloppy high tackle he gave away in the clutch moment of the last quarter as well. couple this with the fact that we kicked away from North Melbourne as soon as Brown went off the ground with the blood rule. Throw in the fact that Weideman was playing better in the Vfl despite Brown being promoted. And throw in the fact that this was our worst performance of the season. Also throw in the fact that Tom Mcdonald wasn't played forward due to Brown (and Tomlinson going down) which is never going to be a long term solution.  So there's about 5 reasons right off the bat. 

Brown also means we can’t rest Gawn forward efficiently, the two of them in the same forward line is a disaster. So we have to either ruck Jackson less or decrease Gawn’s game time. Having a key forward who does absolutely nothing after he contests just limits the structure.

The counter is he kicked 2, had one touched by an inch from outside 50 and had easy chances - mostly that one in the last.

But if he doesn’t pressure he has to be a great lead up forward and start getting the ball up the ground. 

I’d drop him, but we’re 7-0 and he’s a 60 goal a year forward so maybe we stick with him to see how he improves and how we play around him. 

[Dr.D 1,771]

4 minutes ago, Sydney_Demon said:

I think there was a fair argument that Weideman should have been picked ahead of Brown last week, but you can't pick a player for one week, he kicks 2 goals, and then you drop him. Give the bloke a chance! He needs to be given at least 4 weeks to settle into the team. The problem may be solved for this week anyway if Fritsch gets suspended. If that happens, Weideman comes in and Brown stays in.

You just described exactly what happened to Mitch brown. Played one game, kicked 2 goals and got dropped despite looking better than Brown. So 100% we can drop someone after one game. 

[binman 43,921]

14 minutes ago, godees said:

Rivers

I'm not sure he is the right option.

I don't think he is great one on one, and his go his is running of half back and metres gained. 

Medium/small goal kickers is our Achilles heel defensively since Jetts lost a yard of pace.  And Papley just about the best in the business.

I reckon Hibbo is the go.

Strong enough to beat him one on one and fast enough to go with him on lead. And after locking down Dusty is in the right headspace for the job. 

And as bonus, i don't think it would need to be hard lockdown as Papley doesn't get that many possessions. keep him quiet and limit his output to a couple of goals and job done.

Also they will be loathe to make more than one change to the backline i suspect so i can't see them brining in Jetts or another small defender..

Ultimately Lockhart is the go you'd think.  

[drysdale demon 4,837]

40 minutes ago, Dr.D said:

He must stay forward, ideally at the expense of Brown who was well off the pace. 

Brown isn't getting dropped.

[Ouch! 2,267]

Ins: Weideman, Sparrow and Harmes

Out: Tomlinson, Baker and Jones.

(Petty in if Fritsch is rubbed out)  

Baker and Jones didn't play badly, but I think Baker coming in for Viney affected our midfield, Sparrow & Harmes can play in that role. Jones was being dropped, and again didn't play badly but wasn't great.

ANB on notice.... Chandler and Bedford looking ok in the VFL to put pressure on his place in the team.

[binman 43,921]

1 hour ago, DeeSpencer said:

If Brown and T Mc was top heavy and didn't function why is anyone signing up for the idea of Brown and Weid together at AFL level? Even if Fritsch is out that's 2 big lumbering forwards which is at least 1, probably 2 too many.

 

I signed up to the the possibility Brown, Weed, Tmac and Jackson could work idea

But also signed up to the it is unlikely the club would run with it idea.

I would like to formally resign and remove my signature from the Brown, Weed, Tmac and Jackson could work idea.

And 15 minutes into the North game i signed up to the brown and weed must never play in the same team club.

 Lets see how Brown goes on the more open spaces of the g - and to be fair it was his first game in a new system after a long lay off (and he did kick 2 goals - and set up a couple more up!) - but I have to say i was a little underwhelmed and i wonder if Weed might not be a better option. He's not the most mobile of cats is he.