CHANGES: Rd 06 vs Richmond

[Old Man Rivers 326]

1 hour ago, David-Demon said:

Surely a player gets selected for the senior side based on his VFL performance first and foremost. I thought BBB was rather lazy last weekend in the VFL. As for Petty, he had a good limited timed game against Willie and in fact had 13 possessions. 

Watch this space. 

Disagree with your first sentence DD. In fact I’ll take it one step further & suggest it’s very old school yesterday thinking. Sure if a young player is attempting to break into the AFL starting 23 then it’s relevant but BBB ‘s circumstance was completely different. The dynamics & personal in the 2 competition’s are completely different. BBB was there to maintain match fitness only. He has plenty of credit’s & runs on the board to return ASAP. The bloke was a critical piece in delivering our Premiership & you want him running around at Casey, getting targeted off the ball by VFL thugs? Extraordinary thinking really. 

[Sir Why You Little 36,894]

The Tempo between AFL and VFL is a huge difference. Many AFL players struggle playing in the 2’s for that reason 

Ben Brown comes straight in. 

[dazzledavey36 54,087]

1 hour ago, David-Demon said:

No way will T Mc get dropped.  No Changes... for Round 6 I predict.

Think you're in for a rude shock.

Hearing Goodwin after match press conference it certainly won't be Weideman who gets dropped.

Edited April 19, 2022 by dazzledavey36

[binman 42,468]

In my opinion tbere is zero doubt Brown will get selected.

I'm also of the opinion tmac should and will will keep his spot, but harder to argue there is zero doubt he will.

Apart from the fact tmac is the incumbent, plays his role and, in my opinion, is the better option  the likely continued selection of Bedford as the menu sub is a factor in his favour.

In the event of Toby being activated he is likely to play as a forward - meaning a forward has to be moved to another position.

If we lose a defender, big or small  tmac can go back as occurred when Salem was injured against the doggies.

If a ruck goes out tmac can take that role.

Hell, if a winger goes out tmac can even play that role.

That flexibility is important and I don't think weed offers it, or at least nor to tbe same degree.

 

 

 

 

[adonski 11,608]

3 minutes ago, binman said:

In my opinion tbere is zero doubt Brown will get selected.

I'm also of the opinion tmac should and will will keep his spot, but harder to argue there is zero doubt he will.

Apart from the fact tmac is the incumbent, plays his role and, in my opinion, is the better option  the likely continued selection of Bedford as the menu sub is a factor in his favour.

In the event of Toby being activated he is likely to play as a forward - meaning a forward has to be moved to another position.

If we lose a defender, big or small  tmac can go back as occurred when Salem was injured against the doggies.

If a ruck goes out tmac can take that role.

Hell, if a winger goes out tmac can even play that role.

That flexibility is important and I don't think weed offers it, or at least nor to tbe same degree.

 

 

 

 

I'm not sure T Macs flexibility is a big enough argument when you could simply have him as the sub in case injury occurs 

 

[PaulRB 6,328]

BBB in is a given.

So, how do we assess which of TMac or Weid we should keep and why? Tmas seems to have plateaued at an average level (not bad, not great) and Weid seems to have a higher potential but is struggling to reach or hit it consistently... So in terms of our preparation and build to winning in September, I would give Weid another month alongside Brown, to find his mojo. With a clear understanding that TMac would have time to slot back in should Weids continued elevation go pear shaped.

Weid stays TMac out (for the moment)...

 

 

[Crompton's the man 659]

I remember when Jeff White was the unchallenged no.1 ruckman and there wasn’t room for/services thereof were surplus to our requirements in respect of Stefan Martin, who as it turns out had quite a bit of useful footy left in him - even though we decided to trade him out.

So at the risk of sounding  ignorant, can it be suggested that Weideman  should keep his place for these two reasons: he will be a required player of the future and secondly that he is showing development and increasing confidence as he plays more games?

Supplementary to the above is the not-all-eggs-in-one-basket benefit of possibly having interchangeable forwards and something about more arrows in the quiver 

 

Apologies to  T Mac

[DeeSpencer 25,365]

You can drop Weid

You can rest Tom - his chronic knee could do with a tune up now. 5 weeks in a row is probably the right workload for a veteran.

You can make BBB earn his spot back after losing it through ill-discipline.

I haven’t really seen anything that changes my mind on Weid. He needs time down back at Casey to learn more skills and develop as a footballer. With his current skill set he has to clunk marks to truly contribute and without the height or athleticism to do so he’s unlikely to just flick the switch. So I’d drop him. But I’d understand if Goody went with him for another week.

[58er 6,331]

11 minutes ago, Crompton's the man said:

I remember when Jeff White was the unchallenged no.1 ruckman and there wasn’t room for/services thereof were surplus to our requirements in respect of Stefan Martin, who as it turns out had quite a bit of useful footy left in him - even though we decided to trade him out.

So at the risk of sounding  ignorant, can it be suggested that Weideman  should keep his place for these two reasons: he will be a required player of the future and secondly that he is showing development and increasing confidence as he plays more games?

Supplementary to the above is the not-all-eggs-in-one-basket benefit of possibly having interchangeable forwards and something about more arrows in the quiver 

 

Apologies to  T Mac

Perhaps a little bit of lateral thinking here! 
Who would you want to least play against you  if either Tmac or Weid were to line up against you in the GF.

T Mac presents greater problems I reckon in that he has a bigger physical presence although Weid may be more dangerous potentially I kicking goals. 

But for us I reckon Tmac suits our forward  line ( look at the win /loss ratio it doesn't lie when T Mac is there. He bullocks and clunks around slightly awkwardly then his skills take over snd the small forwards reap the benefits.

Both don't one grab the ball always in fact two grabbers or chances to Kossie ANB and Charlie are constant with either 

Slso Tmac can go down back for that extra tall player and ruck with some presence. Weid is a better round the ground mark and sort of handy op forward rucking.

By the end if the year Weid if given 15 games could  be just as handy forward and rucking.

Somehow Weid just manages to disappear  snd not get into the play so that's his problem yo sort out ie impose himself on the game fir the team. 

It could go either way but  I just feel more comfortable with Tmac in the team and his experience and solidity being on offer for all the forwards and as a reserve back man. 

Either way we are lucky to have both for our use and both will play their role I suspect as all Dees players do. 
 

[drysdale demon 4,823]

1 hour ago, Crompton's the man said:

I remember when Jeff White was the unchallenged no.1 ruckman and there wasn’t room for/services thereof were surplus to our requirements in respect of Stefan Martin, who as it turns out had quite a bit of useful footy left in him - even though we decided to trade him out.

I think you mean Mark Jamar, White retired in 2008 and Martin was drafted in 2008

[leave it to deever 17,506]

2 hours ago, PaulRB said:

BBB in is a given.

So, how do we assess which of TMac or Weid we should keep and why? Tmas seems to have plateaued at an average level (not bad, not great) and Weid seems to have a higher potential but is struggling to reach or hit it consistently... So in terms of our preparation and build to winning in September, I would give Weid another month alongside Brown, to find his mojo. With a clear understanding that TMac would have time to slot back in should Weids continued elevation go pear shaped.

Weid stays TMac out (for the moment)...

 

 

Weid has improved and Tmac has been in a long slump.

But Tmac was a huge part of our wins first half of our flag year so he stays.

Its runs on the board to a yet established player.

Sw goes out for BBb

 

 

 

[Fritta and Turner 4,286]

20 minutes ago, drysdale demon said:

I think you mean Mark Jamar, White retired in 2008 and Martin was drafted in 2008

Wasn't it Jolly?  we had White, Jolly and Jamar, one of them had to go.

[DeeSpencer 25,365]

5 minutes ago, Jontee said:

Wasn't it Jolly?  we had White, Jolly and Jamar, one of them had to go.

Jolly left because we had White and Jamar as his successor.

Martin left because we had Jamar and Gawn as his successor.

And partially because we preferred to bring in Pedersen as a forward/ruck to play alongside a number 1 ruck.

I don’t think Weid is the same comparison though. Every club had a chance to get him last year. None wanted him. If he started playing well he’d draw interest, but if that was the case we’d play him every week and probably keep him. 

[old dee 23,682]

2 hours ago, PaulRB said:

BBB in is a given.

So, how do we assess which of TMac or Weid we should keep and why? Tmas seems to have plateaued at an average level (not bad, not great) and Weid seems to have a higher potential but is struggling to reach or hit it consistently... So in terms of our preparation and build to winning in September, I would give Weid another month alongside Brown, to find his mojo. With a clear understanding that TMac would have time to slot back in should Weids continued elevation go pear shaped.

Weid stays TMac out (for the moment)...

 

 

Tmacs plateau is way above what the weid gives which is two or three efforts a game. In Jack Dyers words he gets where the ball ain't

[binman 42,468]

3 hours ago, adonski said:

I'm not sure T Macs flexibility is a big enough argument when you could simply have him as the sub in case injury occurs 

 

No of course not, not in isolation

It is the icing on the 'tmac is a better player and option right now than weed' cake.

Which by the by is why he is a premiership player and weed isnt and why round one he was selected ahead of weed.

[Demonstone 22,182]

48 minutes ago, leave it to deever said:

But Tmac was a huge part of our wins first half of our flag year so he stays.

I don't reckon his form 12 months ago should have any bearing on selection this week.

[binman 42,468]

24 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

I don't reckon his form 12 months ago should have any bearing on selection this week.

Luckily for weed the same is true for him.

[picket fence 16,982]

10 hours ago, David-Demon said:

Knowing Goody and the Team balance I think that there will be no changes for Round six against The Tigers.

BBB has not impressed me in his two outings so far in the VFL.

VFL Form is a pointless form guide. BBB Is a proven 60 plus goal forward , multiple times Weeds and T Mac are not. BBB Finals series was excellent and his GF was superb! Stuff VFL Form he comes back in and I don't really care who he replaces!

[rpfc 28,220]

6 hours ago, David-Demon said:

Surely a player gets selected for the senior side based on his VFL performance first and foremost. I thought BBB was rather lazy last weekend in the VFL. As for Petty, he had a good limited timed game against Willie and in fact had 13 possessions. 

Watch this space. 

I just find this a naive stance. 6 games ago he won a flag as an effective FF.

You bring back your best players as son as you can. 

Are we a ruthless club or do we gift games and ‘share’ positions?

[drysdale demon 4,823]

1 hour ago, DeeSpencer said:

Jolly left because we had White and Jamar as his successor.

Martin left because we had Jamar and Gawn as his successor.

And partially because we preferred to bring in Pedersen as a forward/ruck to play alongside a number 1 ruck.

I don’t think Weid is the same comparison though. Every club had a chance to get him last year. None wanted him. If he started playing well he’d draw interest, but if that was the case we’d play him every week and probably keep him. 

That is it.

[leave it to deever 17,506]

59 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

I don't reckon his form 12 months ago should have any bearing on selection this week.

My reasoning was that he and Weid had similar games, so experience and most proven success leaves Tmac in.

Plus Tmac is stronger and a very accurate shot on goal.

I think BBB in is a must.and sw out.

Edited April 19, 2022 by leave it to deever

[leave it to deever 17,506]

4 hours ago, binman said:

Hell, if a winger goes out tmac can even play that role.

Tmac is still one of my faves but the old wing argument doesn't hold. He would need to strap on a jet pack. He also has the turning circle of my old front wheel drive Magna. God love him.

Hope he stays in though.

[Jaded No More 68,835]

We haven’t seen enough of the Brown Weideman combo. Personally I want us to give it a go for the next few weeks. 
I know what we get out of the Brown Tmac combo. It’s effective, but can it be better?

[At Least I Saw a Flag 5,204]

5 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

Jolly left because we had White and Jamar as his successor.

Martin left because we had Jamar and Gawn as his successor.

And partially because we preferred to bring in Pedersen as a forward/ruck to play alongside a number 1 ruck.

I don’t think Weid is the same comparison though. Every club had a chance to get him last year. None wanted him. If he started playing well he’d draw interest, but if that was the case we’d play him every week and probably keep him. 

Martin had other reasons too ... [MC]

[Macca 16,900]

In: Ben Brown

Out: T-Mac or Weideman

 

Another gutsy prediction!