CHANGES: Rd 13 vs Collingwood

[Demons11 7,051]

9 hours ago, Turner said:

OUT: Weideman, Hunt, Melksham

IN: BBrown, Bowey, Langdon

On what basis are you bringing Bowey in? 
 

We just beat the 3rd place with a 40 pt turnaround and you want to make 3 changes - spare me.  Langdon the only change for either Melksham or Sparrow. 

Edited June 4, 2021 by Demons11

[Undeeterred 3,124]

Langdon has to come in.

Hunt might go and Salem, if they don’t come up. Otherwise it’s really tough but probably Sparrow if he’s only up to 58% time. 

[dazzledavey36 55,318]

9 minutes ago, Demons11 said:

On what basis are you bringing Bowey in? 
 

We just beat the 3rd place with a 40 pt turnaround and you want to make 3 changes - spare me.  Langdon the only change for either Melksham or Sparrow. 

I'm guessing he's named purely that he might battle to get up with his shoulder injury.

[Demons11 7,051]

7 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

I'm guessing he's named purely that he might battle to get up with his shoulder injury.

?

[spirit of norm smith 16,588]

In. Langdon

out. Melksham 

Sparrow deserves to stay in 

possibly look at Ben Brown in for Weideman but hard given no VFL action and Brown didn’t exactly fire in his last VFL outing.  

[Kiss of Death 755]

Sparrow shouldn’t go.  If his name was Lance Franklin, we would still be hearing about how good the hit/block was, and I’d put money on James Brayshaw voice’s still being an octave too high this morning.

No change.
 

Give Langdon another week, so he can come in and destroy the second half of the season cherry ripe, Melksham to continue holding Viney’s spot until he comes back, Weed to hold his place in a winning team (you can see how hard his teammates are trying to build his  confidence, at the start and end of games as well as during the game), and the only question is on somebody like Hunt from an injury perspective.  
 

I agree with another poster on here, in that Hunt looked very, very average in the first half, but Goodwin praised him so there must have been a job he performed that I missed 

 

[DeeSpencer 26,080]

4 hours ago, Kit Walker said:

He's in some strife. Steps past the ball, elects to bump and gets him high with shoulder. Fine if he's lucky but wouldn't be surprised if he gets a week.

So should Zorko btw too.

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.

[Jaded No More 68,973]

Lol at people saying no change. 
Langdon is arguably our most important player. If he’s passed his concussion protocol he will come in. 
 

Would you look at resting Salem? Give him a really good block of rest? Could be the last chance before finals to get him right. 

[Nasher 33,617]

In: Langdon 

Out: Sparrow 

I don’t want to drop Sparrow but I’m in a state where I don’t want to see any new configurations. What we’re doing works, leave it alone.

[Graeme Yeats' Mullet 6,778]

48 minutes ago, Jaded said:

Lol at people saying no change. 
Langdon is arguably our most important player. If he’s passed his concussion protocol he will come in. 
 

Would you look at resting Salem? Give him a really good block of rest? Could be the last chance before finals to get him right. 

22 days would be a good rest

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

10 hours ago, whatwhat say what said:

OUT: weed, milkshake

IN: sideshow bob, #positivelingers

What What What say what said ?

[WERRIDEE 5,504]

9 minutes ago, Nasher said:

In: Langdon 

Out: Sparrow 

I don’t want to drop Sparrow but I’m in a state where I don’t want to see any new configurations. What we’re doing works, leave it alone.

Sparrow can't be dropped played a great game. Melksham must be dropped only 5 disposals. Chandler got dropped for only 4 disposals I expect the same goes with Melksham.

[dazzledavey36 55,318]

17 minutes ago, Nasher said:

In: Langdon 

Out: Sparrow 

I don’t want to drop Sparrow but I’m in a state where I don’t want to see any new configurations. What we’re doing works, leave it alone.

Sparrow?

Exactly he contributed and added another element to our midfield rotations.. Played 58% game and laid 6 tackles for 19 disposals and a goal.

Justify how Melksham stays in the side on the back of that performance?

[monoccular 17,573]

11 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Exactly my changes.

Is Sparrow in trouble? He was bloody brilliant.

I guess the “independent” (I would say inept and clueless) MRO may see Sparrow as a “soft target” to make a point about head high (even neck high) contact, though I thought it was all in the contest. 
If he is cited then we should appeal it. 

11 hours ago, 4_Kent_Watts said:

 Jordan due for a rest....Nah.

Bye the following week, and a 9day break before that.  NO

11 hours ago, Boots and all said:

Hunt may be a forced out, with his shoulder dramas.

Langdon an obvious IN  - out would be Hunt if injured, Sparrow IF suspended ??, other use Melksham though that is unlikely. 
Weed IS playing a role in the forward structure and IMVHO he should stay. 

[Lord Nev 13,512]

19 minutes ago, Nasher said:

In: Langdon 

Out: Sparrow 

I don’t want to drop Sparrow but I’m in a state where I don’t want to see any new configurations. What we’re doing works, leave it alone.

Now, I know they played different roles, but...

Sparrow - 19 disposals, 4 marks, 5 tackles and a goal

Melksham - 5 disposals, 2 marks, 2 tackles, no score

Sparrow didn't play on the wing in Langdon's role, so I don't reckon there's much of a configuration change.

[Nasher 33,617]

4 minutes ago, WERRIDEE said:

Sparrow can't be dropped played a great game. Melksham must be dropped only 5 disposals. Chandler got dropped for only 4 disposals I expect the same goes with Melksham.

Mate, I got nailed to the cross earlier in the season for suggesting Spargo *might* be in the conversation after a 6 possession game earlier in the year. I wasn’t even saying drop him, just that he should be in the conversation. Possession count is apparently irrelevant. If you see anyone brandishing a hammer, I’d run. Oh but it’s Melksham, so he’s fair game.

Sarcasm aside, Chandler was dropped because he was hopeless in that game. His one contribution was spoil a certain Weideman mark 15 out. I thought Melksham seemed to be playing a defensive role and as such possessions might not be the determining factor, but it’s hard to tell on TV. He’s in the conversation though and I wouldn’t be surprised if he was dropped. 

[Lord Nev 13,512]

Just now, Nasher said:

Mate, I got nailed to the cross earlier in the season for suggesting Spargo *might* be in the conversation after a 6 possession game earlier in the year. I wasn’t even saying drop him, just that he should be in the conversation. Possession count is apparently irrelevant. If you see anyone brandishing a hammer, I’d run. Oh but it’s Melksham, so he’s fair game.

Possession count can be irrelevant depending on the role though. Spargo was bringing the forward pressure, tackles, goal assists that were really important. Melksham had 2 tackles and 0 goal assists.

If Melksham had had 8 tackles and a few goal assists I'd agree with you mate, but he didn't, and you need to contribute something else if not getting the ball.

[Nasher 33,617]

1 minute ago, Lord Nev said:

Now, I know they played different roles, but...

Sparrow - 19 disposals, 4 marks, 5 tackles and a goal

Melksham - 5 disposals, 2 marks, 2 tackles, no score

Sparrow didn't play on the wing in Langdon's role, so I don't reckon there's much of a configuration change.

Jordon played Langdon’s wing role and Sparrow played Jordon’s mid/forward role. Unless you’re suggesting Jordon goes out for Langdon, then any selection that has all three of them is indeed a new configuration. 

[Nasher 33,617]

5 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Sparrow?

Exactly he contributed and added another element to our midfield rotations.. Played 58% game and laid 6 tackles for 19 disposals and a goal.

Justify how Melksham stays in the side on the back of that performance?

Roles, is how.

I don’t know why people take it so personally when others suggest particularly changes. Being left out for Langdon is no criticism of Sparrow. I thought he was great. Langdon is better and plays in the same part of the field, Melksham doesn’t.

[Lord Nev 13,512]

2 minutes ago, Nasher said:

Jordon played Langdon’s wing role and Sparrow played Jordon’s mid/forward role. Unless you’re suggesting Jordon goes out for Langdon, then any selection that has all three of them is indeed a new configuration. 

Not really. Melksham goes out, Langdon comes in. They go back to the roles they played when they all played together in the Freo or Saints games.

[godees 873]

1 minute ago, Nasher said:

Roles, is how.

I don’t know why people take it so personally when others suggest particularly changes. Being left out for Langdon is no criticism of Sparrow. I thought he was great. Langdon is better and plays in the same part of the field, Melksham doesn’t.

Sparrow can play the defensive forward role melksham is playing as he did in the first few rounds of this year. Sparrow must stay in at Melksham’s expense.

Regarding the Sparrow v Rich, he was trying to block rather than bump but it ended up somewhere in between. Should be a fine as the impact was very low. Fine for Zorko too

[dazzledavey36 55,318]

3 minutes ago, Nasher said:

Roles, is how.

I don’t know why people take it so personally when others suggest particularly changes. Being left out for Langdon is no criticism of Sparrow. I thought he was great. Langdon is better and plays in the same part of the field, Melksham doesn’t.

But Melksham was playing wing and half forward last night? Whereas Sparrow played inside Mid/half forward.

So technically going off your theory Melksham is the obvious out for Langdon as he was playing wing at stages of the game.

[Mr Steve 3,820]

Very tough to change the side after that second half but Langdon has to come back in. Even Weideman competed and brought the ball to ground. 

[dazzledavey36 55,318]

2 minutes ago, godees said:

Sparrow can play the defensive forward role melksham is playing as he did in the first few rounds of this year. Sparrow must stay in at Melksham’s expense.

Regarding the Sparrow v Rich, he was trying to block rather than bump but it ended up somewhere in between. Should be a fine as the impact was very low. Fine for Zorko too

Not only that Sparrows adds great forward pressure in our front half. Melksham is non existent. In fact he didn't lay a single tackle for the past 3 games in a row.

Let that sink in.

[Nasher 33,617]

8 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

But Melksham was playing wing and half forward last night? Whereas Sparrow played inside Mid/half forward.

So technically going off your theory Melksham is the obvious out for Langdon as he was playing wing at stages of the game.

Melksham might go out and it would be understandable if he did. I already said in my OP that the main basis of my selection is keeping the structure of the side as stable as possible. 

The bias against Melksham on here frustrates and me fuels my bias towards him. The truth probably lies somewhere in the middle. I guess we’ll see.