5 hours ago, Win4theAges said:

If Weed plays well against the Crows it might be hard to drop him going forward, as he has had to wait for his opportunity again.

Injuries are part and parcel of the game and young Jacko might have to bide his time unfortunately.

This is professional football were talking about here not kids footy where young Jimmy gets injured and his old man cuts the oranges for the game and the coach is obliged to play him.

Just like Tmac had to during the off season. Tmac took his opportunity by the scruff of the neck and hasn't let go.

This is how it should always be, i can't remember a time where we have been flush with so much playing depth in multiple positions.

No way. Jackson is first 22 already.

You pick sides around players like Jackson, not Weidemann.

 

3 minutes ago, faultydet said:

No way. Jackson is first 22 already.

You pick sides around players like Jackson, not Weidemann.

You have my vote fd. 

3 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

 

Good to hear he's made really good progress, but personally I'd be holding him back another week to make sure he's cherry ripe for the Dogs. Otherwise if we bring him in give him limited minutes playing mainly as a pressure half forward.

45 minutes ago, Pates said:

Good to hear he's made really good progress, but personally I'd be holding him back another week to make sure he's cherry ripe for the Dogs. Otherwise if we bring him in give him limited minutes playing mainly as a pressure half forward.

Would you really have the courage to tell Viney that you’re not selecting him...

Edited May 17, 20214 yr by bringbackthebiff

1 hour ago, Pates said:

Good to hear he's made really good progress, but personally I'd be holding him back another week to make sure he's cherry ripe for the Dogs. Otherwise if we bring him in give him limited minutes playing mainly as a pressure half forward

half a game at Casey and then in for Footscray

Goody just said on 360 that JV still has some boxes to tick to play against the Crows, but if he misses, he’ll definitely be ready vs the Doggies.

5 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

........

His holding the ball was a bit unlucky, he bounced out of the pack nicely but ran in to a good tackle. And his 50 was rubbish. Saad was in the protected area and mucking around to draw a free. The correct umpiring is to reset the mark and remove Saad from the 5m area or just ignore it. Our players adapted afterwards and bullocked Saad away from the mark to prevent a similar incident. 

........

The umpires need to be reminded that a player taking a kick with a man on the mark cannot handball to a team mate within the protected area. over the last couple of rounds a number of goals have been scored by this technique and umpires allowed it

if it was enforced it would cutout this needless byplay.

i'd go further and just say that if a team mate goes into the protected area the ump stops play until the player leaves the protected zone 

Just now, Deeoldfart said:

Goody just said on 360 that JV still has some boxes to tick to play against the Crows, but if he misses, he’ll definitely be ready vs the Doggies.

I'd personally keep him in cotton wool u till the doggies game. 

No rush to play him against the Crows.

3 minutes ago, Deeoldfart said:

Goody just said on 360 that JV still has some boxes to tick to play against the Crows, but if he misses, he’ll definitely be ready vs the Doggies.

Honestly if there are boxes to be ticked I would much prefer they just take things really slow with him. 

4 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

half a game at Casey and then in for Footscray

I get where you're coming from but Viney has shown time and time again that he doesn't need to have the VFL "match-fitness" week before he comes back. I'd rather he do his duties in training and be totally ready against the dogs.

1 hour ago, faultydet said:

No way. Jackson is first 22 already.

You pick sides around players like Jackson, not Weidemann.

I thought Weed's commitment to the contest was good, given how long he'd been out of the ones.  His endeavour and positioning was far better than BBB.  Weed at least positioned himself well for the contest, even if he couldn't clunk the marks.  That said, the weather and delivery into the forward did not help his cause.

I would be happy to have both LJ and the Weed this week.  As a result, BBB, unfortunately, will be dropped.

 

Just now, Pates said:

Honestly if there are boxes to be ticked I would much prefer they just take things really slow with him. 

I get where you're coming from but Viney has shown time and time again that he doesn't need to have the VFL "match-fitness" week before he comes back. I'd rather he do his duties in training and be totally ready against the dogs.

It’s less about match fitness in the VFL and more about seeing how the foot pulls up after a game. 

13 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

The umpires need to be reminded that a player taking a kick with a man on the mark cannot handball to a team mate within the protected area. over the last couple of rounds a number of goals have been scored by this technique and umpires allowed it

if it was enforced it would cutout this needless byplay.

i'd go further and just say that if a team mate goes into the protected area the ump stops play until the player leaves the protected zone 

I agree. You can't allow players in to the space then penalise their opponents. That's ignoring 1 rule then enforcing the next. Poor Chandler had a choice to follow Saad and disturb the play or to go boundary side and get out of the way. He ended up getting penalised for going to the boundary which didn't disturb McKay at all.

The problem with the stand rule and protected area is if it was umpired to the letter of the law the mark would have to be reset constantly. And/or players would have to be moved back on their line.

And don't even start me on the defenders being stuck on set shots. Forward takes a set shot has to mean the defender can move sideways with them. It's only fair. McKay was getting a stack of extra metres going to the side of the mark on his set shots.

In Viney

Out Chandler

Viney will tick the boxes, hopefully he has no soreness post training

Bit harsh on Chandler but he'll get more chances in the future

If Viney is to replace Chandler, it will imbalance the smalls in the forward line. More time for mids who have to go through there - it is not a massive issue but one I would avoid if possible but the MC may see that as the desired set up at the end of the year.

At the end of the day - your best players will work it out...

...provided they play their role.

13 minutes ago, rpfc said:

If Viney is to replace Chandler, it will imbalance the smalls in the forward line. More time for mids who have to go through there - it is not a massive issue but one I would avoid if possible but the MC may see that as the desired set up at the end of the year.

At the end of the day - your best players will work it out...

...provided they play their role.

Chandler replaced Melksham who was playing a fair bit of midfield anyway. So it restores the balance to 5 inside mids which is the right number. Instead of 4 guys playing 75% we can lower it down to 5 guys playing 60%. Allows Petracca to play more forward time and for more rotations forward and on ball for all those guys. If they're really clever they might be able to rotate the backs and small forwards more frequently and keep them fresher.

On 5/16/2021 at 6:31 PM, Clint Bizkit said:

I liked the idea of Chandler but I think he makes way for Sparrow.

It will be interesting to see if Jackson is available because I did like what Weideman brought to the team.

I agree. I thought Weideman was good. Looked better than Brown and just failed to clunk a few marks.

6 hours ago, Pates said:

Brayshaw will not be dropped, simple. He is playing an important role in the team and is covering stupid amounts of territory. 

Such calls from dees fans, who i assume actually watch our games. are headache inducing.

Add calls for nibbler to be dropped to that mix.

And I needed a pack of panadol to deal with the suggestion fritter should be dropped after the swans game.

 

I would find it tough to drop either Chandler or Weideman after just one seniors game. I know that Jackson is a young gun but Weideman did his job and I think Max's game improved a bit on the lat couple of weeks and it may be because he was asked to spend a bit more time in the ruck. Chandler to get a second game to allow him to settle in. Chandler also allowed Spargo to move up the ground a lot more.

Only change I would make would be to bring Sparrow in as the med sub instead of Melk.

15 minutes ago, binman said:

Such calls from dees fans, who i assume actually watch our games. are headache inducing.

Add calls for nibbler to be dropped to that mix.

And I needed a pack of panadol to deal with the suggestion fritter should be dropped after the swans game.

 

I agree. Nibbler should definitely be dropped. Good work Binners.

No change. Lets see how the forward line works this week. I bet it works it out ok.

28 minutes ago, binman said:

Such calls from dees fans, who i assume actually watch our games. are headache inducing.

Add calls for nibbler to be dropped to that mix.

And I needed a pack of panadol to deal with the suggestion fritter should be dropped after the swans game.

 

How many people on here wanted to drop Fritsch? I was probably the most vehement on here of the posters worth any salt about how bad his performance was and I didn’t say to drop him. Credit to him - he did lift (it wouldn’t be hard) - he chased harder and tackled and got to more contests.

We all laud our new selfless buy in to ‘The System’ and the Demon Web and all that and if you are not playing your role in that you are on borrowed time. 

ANB, Spargo, Kosi, Fritsch, Jackson, Hibberd, Rivers, Harmes, Brown, Jordon, Brayshaw, Hunt, Petty, and TMac are all best 22 in 2021 if they are in form AND bought in. But if they do not buy in - there are players available who would be selected to replace them who would be happy to play that role.

On 5/16/2021 at 6:12 PM, Alex Flood said:

If Viney’s fit then you can bring him in for Chandler but other than that no changes.

Yep, this is what I'd do. I'd play Viney majority forward with only a few centre bounce stoppages, to keep him fresh for the Bulldogs, but also to give our centre stoppages a bit of extra zip and improve our inside 50 tackles.

13 hours ago, Dr.D said:

Same thing could be said for all the demonlanders that wanted Mcdonald moved back. Those people should deactivate their demonland account, go and watch the first 6 years of McDonalds career as a backman and then create a new account. 'Move him back'? jesus christ. 

Have you just finished reading “How to Make Friends and Influence People” Dr? Chapter 6 (“berating random people and sounding like a know it all”) is my favourite chapter. 

I don't like the narrative about keeping viney out until the dogs etc. The 4 points against Adelaide are worth just as much as against the bulldogs. We have been getting hammered in centre clearances so if he is deemed fit he comes straight back into the guts. We don't want to lose to adelaide with bulldogs and lions following.