2 hours ago, Deespicable said:

The logic of what Turner is suggesting is fine - at some point we need to bring Bowey in so he gets a taste and the longer he and Ben Brown go without games is a worry and will make it that much harder for them.

The other thing is that I suspect Salem will have the Pies game off to give him a chance to get over his injury and it's time either Bowey or Lockhart got a game instead of Nev. If Hunt's injury is more serious than I suspect then both could play.

As to the other changes, Ben Brown should come in for Weid. It's been frustrating watching how close Weid has gone to really nailing his marks and he should be brought back in again in a few weeks, but big Ben needs another shot - that's why we recruited him.

Finally Langdon has to play and there's only one underperforming player - so Melky has to go. As with Weid, Melky should come back in down the track, but he needs to go back and lay some tackles when VFL comp resumes hopefully the week after next.

If one of Hibberd, Salem, Rivers and Hunt are out then he should be first in line to debut but I expect them all to play Bowey will just have to bide his time.

18 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

Make that 5 Dazzle.  His last tackle inside fifty was against the Tigers in Rnd 6.

Here is a ranking of average tackles inside fifty up to and including last night so far this season.  It includes most players one would expect to be making a least a few occasional appearances (ruckman / wingman / mids / defenders pushing forward etc) inside fifty this season as part of their role.  Obviously some more so than others and some alot more than others who are playing a genuine forward role.  Note: probably should have excluded Salem who plays mostly behind the ball now so viewer discretion needed in select cases such as this...

Player	T i50
Mitch Brown*	3.000
K Pickett	1.750
T McDonald	1.500
Alex N-Bullen	1.417
Jack Viney	1.200
J Jordan	1.182
C Spargo	1.000
K Chandler*	1.000
L Jackson	0.909
T Sparrow	0.842
J Harmes	0.833
Ben Brown	0.667
C Oliver	0.583
B Fritsch	0.545
J Melksham	0.375
C Petracca	0.333
S Weideman	0.250
C Salem	0.182
Ed Langdon	0.182
Max Gawn	0.167
N Jones	0.143

* Only played one match not an average score

Stats courtesy of footywire.com

There you go.

He's an absolute passenger. I honestly rather Jones then if we want an experienced campaigner. At least he loves the physical and defensive side.

The sooner he's out of the team the better.

1 hour ago, —coach— said:

Hard to see on TV at times but I think the thing that bugs me about Weid is that he jogs when he needs to RUN to apply pressure to the player who is invariably in front of him attacking the ball. I went back and watched some of the second half of the game again and was just trying to find out what weid was doing when not in the direct marking contest, and it seems he spends a lot of time not running particularly hard to do something, even if it’s just keeping a little pressure on his opponent 

I’d like more pressure from Sam but a big part of our game plan when the opposition has the ball on slow plays from the back half is not to over pressure and get side stepped.

We want teams to jog it wider across half back and then kick to our waiting down the line defenders. 

Looking at the Pies, they have a very small forwardline. Wonder if Petty might be replaced for balance. 

Edited June 5, 20214 yr by SPC

10 hours ago, picket fence said:

Why "Rightly ... Just? He has had 5 and a half years to develop and apart from a cameo or so he hasn't. Time to make the change Get Side show IN!

That's fair as well. In my opinion though he's close be clicking, of course I could be wrong. I can remember Hawkins being similarly getting game on potential at the beginning of his career and it just grew.

 

Edit: Just checked those comparisons for same age, Hawkins in front in all categories, maybe I do have red and blue tinted glasses on ??‍♂️

Edited June 5, 20214 yr by Josh

If Melksham doesn't get dropped it's a disgrace. He offers nothing at the moment as much as he used to be one of my favourites. Weid has also had a few chances and still drops way too many marks and isn't having a big scoreboard impact.

IN: Ben Brown, Langdon

OUT: Weideman, Melksham

5 hours ago, SPC said:

Looking at the Pies, they have a very small forwardline. Wonder if Petty might be replaced for balance. 

No because May can play on a small like Elliot or DeGoey. 

1 hour ago, dazzledavey36 said:

No because May can play on a small like Elliot or DeGoey. 

Spot on. 
I would play May on DeGoey and Hibbo on Elliot. Do not mess with the backline. It’s too important for finals. Need to keep the three talls working together every week. 
Also the improvement in Petty week on week has been amazing. He needs all the game time he can get to build confidence in his game. 

Edited June 5, 20214 yr by Jaded

8 hours ago, Simon Port said:

If Melksham doesn't get dropped it's a disgrace. He offers nothing at the moment as much as he used to be one of my favourites. Weid has also had a few chances and still drops way too many marks and isn't having a big scoreboard impact.

IN: Ben Brown, Langdon

OUT: Weideman, Melksham

‘It’s a disgrace’? 

To whom or what? Why is this role player getting games so abhorrent?

I would argue that with the restrictions on interchanges and our desire to keep our best 18 out on the ground - the player in Jake’s role is only going to play a certain amount of time and that is hard to get consistency in your game. So the MC will have to take into account whether a player can fill that role and be given the best chance to succeed if they are only getting 60% game time.

On 6/5/2021 at 1:12 AM, Turner said:

ones averaging 20+ and ones averaging 11ish over the last month of games played u tell me who should get to whose level. bowey won't know how to compete at afl level if he never gets to play there. and if u are so against the bowey call i'd rather lockhart played than hunt, zac bailey another 4g from a small forward tonight

I agree sort of with Locky We need a smaller defender and Locky is the go at this stage not Bowery I reckon. 
Bowey is a player no doubt but just not yet . 

18 minutes ago, rpfc said:

‘It’s a disgrace’? 

To whom or what? Why is this role player getting games so abhorrent?

I would argue that with the restrictions on interchanges and our desire to keep our best 18 out on the ground - the player in Jake’s role is only going to play a certain amount of time and that is hard to get consistency in your game. So the MC will have to take into account whether a player can fill that role and be given the best chance to succeed if they are only getting 60% game time.

That no argument for playing players for 60% and not picking your best team.

Players are used on a day to day basis depending upon Circs so this should have no bearing unless a player is deliberately being managed. 

6 minutes ago, 58er said:

That no argument for playing players for 60% and not picking your best team.

Players are used on a day to day basis depending upon Circs so this should have no bearing unless a player is deliberately being managed. 

Some players can’t perform being off the ground for so long - I have seen it as a player and a coach. 

For example, I wouldn’t play a kid in a role where I knew he would be just facilitating rest for our best players. No consistency, 4 mins here and there, 1 min of organising the switch of players to get you forward - it isn’t easy.

And our best team - is every role fulfilled to the highest possible standard.

2 minutes ago, rpfc said:

Some players can’t perform being off the ground for so long - I have seen it as a player and a coach. 

For example, I wouldn’t play a kid in a role where I knew he would be just facilitating rest for our best players. No consistency, 4 mins here and there, 1 min of organising the switch of players to get you forward - it isn’t easy.

And our best team - is every role fulfilled to the highest possible standard.

It's still in our hands on game day The  best laid plans are always going to be ( OR should be)  flexible.

23 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

He steps past the ball because he knows if he blocks Rich he’s got 3 team mates ready to gather and run it through the corridor. Rather than picking it up and being tackled by Rich. It’s not like he’s chosen thuggery over playing the ball.

Rich milks it for all it’s worth then springs right back up. If they’re evaluating what truly happened then it’s below the force required for a reportable offence.

More probable report Rich for acting

9 hours ago, Simon Port said:

If Melksham doesn't get dropped it's a disgrace. He offers nothing at the moment as much as he used to be one of my favourites. Weid has also had a few chances and still drops way too many marks and isn't having a big scoreboard impact.

IN: Ben Brown, Langdon

OUT: Weideman, Melksham

IMelks was very quiet not sure what his role was. Weed hit packs the marks didn't stick and missed 2 he should've got. It's confidence with him, he knows if doesn't perform Brown is in. He needs to be told we will play you for a block of 4/5 games and then see him click. I'd also experiment with having him and Brown closer to Sept in the same forward line. Tommy can play wing resting in forward line, Jackson can rotate through the wing as well. It's not like playing 4 talls because Jackson is so good below his knees and Tom is an endurance machine. Also Brown is a lead up FF, whereas Sammy can bust a pack and ruck. 

On 6/5/2021 at 1:50 AM, binman said:

At 11-1, and a bye after the pies game, I would be happy for them to give langdon a week off and Salem too ( carrying a niggle). 

Would give both players a really good breK, langdon in particular.

Tbey won't want to make too many changes, as much as anything to respect the mnd game.

And he probably wouldn't want to not play, but giving maxy a mini break wouldn't be such a bad thing too. 3 week spell so he can get set for a big second half of the year.

Id bring bowey in for Salem. Like for like and he gets a taste of afl, which might be important if he is needed at at a later point.

 

It’s a 10 day break until the Queen’s birthday, by then Langdon would’ve had 17 days rest. He’ll be raring to go.

Agree with Salem to rest if he’s still got a niggle

In Langdon 

Out Melksham (not that l hate him like so many posters, he’s just not performing)

 

Those that say. Melksham wont get dropped should consider he has been once this season already. Goody’s comments on radio confirmed he is not in form and had a quiet game. There is also no way we dont bring Lingers in. I do wonder on the postage stamp ground that is Sydney whether we consider playing one less tall. I cant see anyway that Lingers does not play and the omission is not one of Melksham or Weid for the one change. 

21 minutes ago, big_red_fire_engine said:

Those that say. Melksham wont get dropped should consider he has been once this season already. Goody’s comments on radio confirmed he is not in form and had a quiet game. There is also no way we dont bring Lingers in. I do wonder on the postage stamp ground that is Sydney whether we consider playing one less tall. I cant see anyway that Lingers does not play and the omission is not one of Melksham or Weid for the one change. 

Being a short ground .... the kicks from outside 50 will be going a little deeper into the 30 zone more often.  Keep the same number of talls but go taller IMV.  Bring in your tallest forward.  Big M pushes forward at times also.  Stretch the opponent.

It's a no brainer for mine.  BB in for Weid and instruct him to play deep.  T-Mac plays the CHF role other than when BB is resting.  Fritschlrieg mostly leads out to the flanks.  Leaving BB and/or at times (when benched) Big M & T-Mac one out with Kozzie at the drop.

2 hours ago, 58er said:

It's still in our hands on game day The  best laid plans are always going to be ( OR should be)  flexible.

I don’t really know what you are saying. Melksham from what I can see is playing a role across a number of line areas (fwd, wing, little mid) and then 40% on the bench. That is not an easy instruction for a kid to follow and succeed at.

Thats my point widen it comes to the hatred that Jake has to put up with on here - do we really want to get Chandler/whoever into replace those minutes? That is not setting someone up to succeed.

Ironically enough, it is that flexibility that Jake has that is beneficial to him staying in the team and seemingly, be ok with 45 mins of game time.

My only knock on Sam Weideman is his goal kicking. Needs to hit the scoreboard. His set shots on Friday weren’t great, missed very gettable shots (hitting the point post from 40?). If he can’t kick 3+ against the pies (assuming TMac gets Darcy Moore) then we need to give BBB another block of 3-4 games to see if he’s the answer.

23 hours ago, whatwhat say what said:

this is all insane and will, thankfully, not happen while we are 11-1 and playing well

I was taking the [censored] demon Andrew. Started subtly at first, kind of like rain. But then surely you noticed the post was golden and smelled of asparagus.

(I blame lockdown for my weird posts)

Very easy Langdon for Melksham for mine

18 hours ago, Simon Port said:

If Melksham doesn't get dropped it's a disgrace. He offers nothing at the moment as much as he used to be one of my favourites. Weid has also had a few chances and still drops way too many marks and isn't having a big scoreboard impact.

IN: Ben Brown, Langdon

OUT: Weideman, Melksham

Listening to Goodwin on Saturday he didn’t sound like he was unhappy with Melksham, he was specifically asked and said he had been building form the last month till Friday. Not sure y he get to build form in the seniors but obviously Goodwin thinks he is central to our plans 

Edited June 6, 20214 yr by Garbo

Melksham is a Finals player. I think he will peak at the right time! Weideman may do the same!

If Melksham stays and Sparrow is omitted I’m calling for a Royal Commission