CHANGES: Rd 12 vs Sydney

[KingDingAling 3,596]

1 hour ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I assume there's something about Mitch Brown's game that both Essendon and Melbourne have observed that stops him from getting regular game time. We know he's an excellent kick and that he regularly scores goals when given the chance. I assume, therefore, that there's something else that negates those positives. I don't wish to disparage him unnecessarily, but surely there's an aspect that we can't see?  

He was good at Essendon. Not sure why they offloaded him, but in hindsight it was a mistake as he’d currently be their best forward. This is the same club who gave Cale Hooker time up forward ahead of Mitch Brown. They are a basket case for a reason.

Different story at Melbourne as he’s actually behind two reasonable forwards in BBB and TMAC. Not sure how much longer we’ll persist in playing Weideman. He doesn’t work overly hard on the defensive end. Mitch Brown would at the very least be an improvement in that regard.

[WERRIDEE 5,211]

2 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

You speak of Mitch Brown like he’s Nat Fyfe. 

He’s Mitch Brown. He’s played solely as a forward his entire time with us. Won’t play defence, and sure as [censored] won’t play small. 

If they had him as a sub last week he would have played defence. He gives us flexibility unlike a Dunstan who can only play midfield. He has played defence at VFL level. A better option than Weid. He can play small similar to Fritsch.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,397]

31 minutes ago, WERRIDEE said:

If they had him as a sub last week he would have played defence. He gives us flexibility unlike a Dunstan who can only play midfield. He has played defence at VFL level. A better option than Weid. He can play small similar to Fritsch.

I'll boldly predict that the AFL will from 2023 or perhaps 2024 onwards allow teams to have two medi-subs from which to choose. Initially only one will be allowed to play in any game and then this will be changed in a subsequent year to both being allowed. The AFL will do this to allow clubs to have a tall/key position sub and a small/on-ball sub to choose from.

Let's see how well this post ages.

[Smokey 4,126]

1 hour ago, WERRIDEE said:

If they had him as a sub last week he would have played defence. He gives us flexibility unlike a Dunstan who can only play midfield. He has played defence at VFL level. A better option than Weid. He can play small similar to Fritsch.

Perhaps they were more concerned with Viney's injury flaring up, ergo Dunstan the sub. These calls get made on a weekly basis and unfortunately they don't always pan out. Retrospectively deciding the medi-sub selection was wrong because a player got concussed is faulty at best.  

[rpfc 27,451]

If @tilly18’s mail is correct and an illness ran through the team - I wonder whether we will see some continued impacts from that this week. Langdon, TMac and Harmes to come back and Salem a chance, we may see them replace those that are ill, and less those that will be replaced in the best team.

Anyway, food for thought.

[rpfc 27,451]

I hope the Freo loss shows to teams that we are beatable, be better to watch teams try and win as opposed to avoid losing. The keepings off ‘Geelong’ style nonsense is hard to watch and so very boring.

Sydney will try to move it quick and through the corridor - they won’t win the majority of first possession but will prey on us coughing it up after we win it at the coalface.

[COOLX 140]

Petty playing forward has merits, he has kicked goals before . J.Smith has had many setbacks when he plays in defence. Sam Weid. may become a good defender but needs to do this at Casey level. 

[Demongirl35 815]

Out: may weids melks dunstan hunt

in: Tomlinson Langdon salem tmac Harmes 

 

[Turner 1,482]

OUT: Melksham, May, Dunstan, Weideman, Sparrow

IN: Harmes, Tomlinson, Salem, TMac, Langdon

controversial slightly, but i think bedford earnt his start and with him in harmes can pick up more of the inside minutes as he covers the HF minutes

[Demons11 6,404]

On 5/30/2022 at 2:08 PM, monoccular said:

Sorry to say but I think you are right - especially given the history of the tribunal and "star" vs "unknown" players.

He is no chance of getting off

[titan_uranus 22,351]

12 hours ago, old dee said:

How could Mitch Brown be worse than Weideman. At the least he has a bit of presence.

I didn't say he'd be worse than Weideman. What I said was that Werridee seems to think he's capable of almost anything, when in reality he is a fringe forward.

10 hours ago, WERRIDEE said:

If they had him as a sub last week he would have played defence. He gives us flexibility unlike a Dunstan who can only play midfield. He has played defence at VFL level. A better option than Weid. He can play small similar to Fritsch.

That isn't necessarily true, and doesn't mean he'd be any good in defence. We put Weideman down there and he failed. Brown likely would too, given he hasn't trained in defence for years.

So when you say "he gives us flexibility", you're just making that up because you like him. He's as inflexible as Weideman - the two of them are depth forwards. He also doesn't "play small".

You can argue that he's a better option for Weideman's spot, fine, but that's not because he's flexible or because he can be put into defence or play small. It's solely because he's a tall forward, Weideman's a tall forward, Weideman's out of form and Brown's possibly capable of doing better as a tall forward.

[old dee 22,851]

7 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

I didn't say he'd be worse than Weideman. What I said was that Werridee seems to think he's capable of almost anything, when in reality he is a fringe forward.

That isn't necessarily true, and doesn't mean he'd be any good in defence. We put Weideman down there and he failed. Brown likely would too, given he hasn't trained in defence for years.

So when you say "he gives us flexibility", you're just making that up because you like him. He's as inflexible as Weideman - the two of them are depth forwards. He also doesn't "play small".

You can argue that he's a better option for Weideman's spot, fine, but that's not because he's flexible or because he can be put into defence or play small. It's solely because he's a tall forward, Weideman's a tall forward, Weideman's out of form and Brown's possibly capable of doing better as a tall forward.

That was my thought TU. 

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,397]

13 hours ago, Demongirl35 said:

Out: may weids melks dunstan hunt

in: Tomlinson Langdon salem tmac Harmes 

 

Why Hunt? Until the Freo game has played on small forwards and kept them quiet all year. By necessity, was required to play on Freo's tall forwards (because he's stronger and taller than Bowey, and Rivers is struggling) until Weideman was transferred back. Yes, he was outpointed by Darcy but at 187cm and 88kg, Hunt is still 16cm shorter and 24kg lighter than Darcy. 

If a defender has to make way for Salem, I suspect it will be Rivers. Of course, if Langdon doesn't play, Brayshaw could return to the wing instead.

[Lord Nev 13,511]

 

[adonski 9,144]

IN: Tomlinson, Salem, McDonald, Langdon, Harmes

OUT: May, Rivers, Weid, Dunstan, Melk

[rpfc 27,451]

26 minutes ago, adonski said:

IN: Tomlinson, Salem, McDonald, Langdon, Harmes

OUT: May, Rivers, Weid, Dunstan, Melk

You might be right with Rivers. At some point they are going to have to fit May, Lever, Petty, Salem, Brayshaw, Bowey, Hunt,  and Rivers into that back 7. Someone misses out unless Brayshaw moves Jordan out of the wing and the team. Another one if Hibberd is needed for the medium sized power player that will come later in the season.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,397]

16 minutes ago, rpfc said:

You might be right with Rivers. At some point they are going to have to fit May, Lever, Petty, Salem, Brayshaw, Bowey, Hunt,  and Rivers into that back 7. Someone misses out unless Brayshaw moves Jordan out of the wing and the team. Another one if Hibberd is needed for the medium sized power player that will come later in the season.

It may boil down to whether Jordon or Rivers keeps their spot. At the moment, I'd say Jordon is well ahead, so the team would be better balanced with Jordon on a wing and Brayshaw as a defender rather than last year's structure of Brayshaw on a wing and Rivers as a defender. Of course, injuries have a way of interfering with the best laid plans.

[binman 38,019]

I can't see Weed behind any good as a defender becuase with his size it would have to be in a key post, and he is simply not good enough in the sort of one on one wrestle situations against big forward he would find himself in regularly down back. 

And i can't see him being a natural intercept type like Liam Jones - the pin up boy for a forward to a defender shift.

So, if he can't make it as a key forward the sad reality is he is a bust - at least for us. 

Which means we have problem in that second tall forward role. 

Even the biggest Tmac critics and/or Weed fans would surely  acknowledge the Tmac v Weed debate is over and the second tall forward role is Tmacs. 

If Tmac is injured again i think they have to look past Weed as a fill in. JVR is not ready yet, and i don't think will be until next year.

So, if not Weed, who comes in?

What do people think about Tomlinson playing the second tall forward role?

Tomlinson is only slightly shorter and lighter than Weed, is much stronger and much, much better one on one. And crucially he plays with much more intensity than Sam and would halve more contests. 

If memory serves, whilst predominately a winger and defender with the Giants, Tomlinson played some games at CHF for the them. Having a look at his record he kicked 12 goals in 2018, so perhaps he played forward a bit that year. 

And having Tomlinson in the team would provide the positional flexibility Tmac provides as he could go back if required (and even, like Tom, to the wing)

Thoughts?

 

[Deespicable 2,545]

Been a while since I've been interested in posting a comment - such has been our regular winning scenario, but alas all good things come to and end and the selection microscope is now upon us.

First point I'll make is the surprise at the number of people who don't seem to yet fully understand that five outs and five ins doesn't really add up if you include the sub as one of your outs - ie: Dunstan. 

I think we all get that, if they pass their fitness test, there will be five ins with Tomlinson replacing May and the fab four - Langdon, Harmes, T.Mac and Salem all back.

Melksham is clearly going to be out and sadly a couple of hard calls on premiership players have to be made.

The first is Rivers, who unless you have forgotten, was on Freo's matchwinner Frederick in the second half. Rivers has been solid all year, but never great and never in our best five or six. He needs to go back to the magoos and he needs the club to decide if he is a swingman who can play on the bigs or a swingman who can just play on the smalls. Effectively his spot has been taken by Angus this year. Rivers needs to dominate for Casey and if he does, he will come back a better player. He is young and I still think he has some Corey Enright type qualities, but he has to realise he can do even more. Steve Waugh was eventually dropped and it was the making of him.

The second is Tom Sparrow, who was ineffectual against Freo's mids and when playing as a high half-forward barely sighted. We all know Tom works his butt off and he's been pretty handy in heaps of games, how can anyone forget his game against Richmond. But like Rivers he needs to go back and dominate the VFL, so that he takes that dominate attitude into the AFL. He is also young and now is the time to make him earn his spot. 

Some of you have tipped Hunt to be dropped instead of Rivers but he is exactly the player to match up on Papley, as he has been on Bolton and other lively small forwards that play near the goalsquare this season and has played heaps tighter than in the past. The argument would be that Salem can play on Papley, but I just don't reckon Salem needs that added pressure in his first game back and he will more than have his hands full with others anyway - most likely Hayward who was the Swans best against Richmond.

That leaves Bowey on Wicks (who might yet be dropped for Stephens) and Angus on Heeney. With Franklin out (barring the AFL intervening), they will bring in Amartey to go with Reid and McDonald. Petty (if fit), Tomlinson and Lever will mark them.

The tricky decision for our selectors is which of Ben Brown and the Weid is omitted for T.Mac. It's a tough choice because McCartin has been terrific as a marking interceptor and Brown has been out of form in recent weeks and Weid quiet but he showed some smarts in defence in a couple of key plays when sent back last week.

Keeping Bedford ahead of Sparrow also alters our balance a tad, but I reckon we have to send Sparrow and Rivers back to the VFL for a few weeks for their development and having each other down there will be an added spur.

I also would have liked to see Laurie play, but he had a quiet one against the Frangers last week and Van Rooyen was injured/ill.

Anyway for me it's:

In: Salem, Langdon, Harmes, T.Macdonald, Tomlinson

Out: May (inj), Sparrow, Rivers, Melksham, Weid plus Dunstan, last week's sub.

And given we are already playing an extra small with Toby, I'd make Weid the sub.

 

    

[Fritta and Turner 3,652]

12 minutes ago, binman said:

What do people think about Tomlinson playing the second tall forward role?

Smacks of desperation, but worth a try.  I like Tommo but he doesn't have a leap.  Would have to play a real physical game.

[Lord Nev 13,511]

27 minutes ago, binman said:

So, if he can't make it as a key forward the sad reality is he is a bust - at least for us.

Find this talk of him being a 'bust' pretty strange tbh. He's a depth forward whose key averages for his position almost mirror our primary key forward this year. He's only a 'bust' if you're still expecting him to be a best 22 player, which by now I would have thought most fans would understand is not where he's at from a list perspective.

 

27 minutes ago, binman said:

If Tmac is injured again i think they have to look past Weed as a fill in. JVR is not ready yet, and i don't think will be until next year.

So, if not Weed, who comes in?

Has played 6 games this year as our first picked replacement forward, hardly think he'll be overlooked for Tomlinson now as an option. You could make an argument for Mitch Brown, but clutching at straws with suggesting Tomo IMO.

Just don't understand why so many Demonlanders think Weid needs to be a starting forward or nothing. Didn't we use to talk about how important depth was? It's not all or nothing.

Edited June 1, 2022 by Lord Nev

[binman 38,019]

14 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Find this talk of him being a 'bust' pretty strange tbh. He's a depth forward whose key averages for his position almost mirror our primary key forward this year. He's only a 'bust' if you're still expecting him to be a best 22 player, which by now I would have thought most fans would understand is not where he's at from a list perspective.

Has played 6 games this year as our first picked replacement forward, hardly think he'll be overlooked for Tomlinson now as an option. You could make an argument for Mitch Brown, but clutching at straws with suggesting Tomo IMO.

Just don't understand why so many Demonlanders think Weid needs to be a starting forward or nothing. Didn't we use to talk about how important depth was? It's not all or nothing.

I didn't say he was a bust.

I said if he can't make it as a key forward he is a bust. A big difference. 

The club has resigned him so one assumes they think he can make it. And are obviously ok with him being depth, as Weed must be as well (or at least prepared to be at Cassy for significant periods) - at least for this season.

But surely part of their thinking is he will replace Tmac as the second key forward as Tmac nears retirement.

Let's not forget we used a top ten draft pick on Sam, and as such clearly our hope was that we get a top ten forward. Weed bouncing between Casey and the occasional game in the ones, and being little more than depth, whilst perhaps not a bust as such, is hardly a great return on our investment

My own opinion is he won't make it as a key forward. And to be honest that is not a particularly outlandish opinion.  

 

 

Edited June 1, 2022 by binman

[Lord Nev 13,511]

4 minutes ago, binman said:

I didn't say he was a bust.

I said if he can't make it as a key forward he is a bust. A big difference.

The club has resigned him so one assumes they think he can make it. And are obviously ok with him being depth, as Weed must be as well (or at least prepared to be at Casy for significant periods).

But surely part of their thinking is he will replace Tmac as the second key forward as Tmac nears retirement

My own opinion is he won't make it as a key forward. And to be honest that is not a particularly outlandish opinion. 

Played 6 games as a backup key forward for the reigning premiers who are 10-1, define 'making it'. It's not all or nothing, people will define 'making it' off their own expectations, but clearly given team selection and his contract status the club consider him to be 'making it' right now.

The amount of commentary about him this week given his place on our list has been over the top but sadly also expected here.

[binman 38,019]

19 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

 people will define 'making it' off their own expectations, but clearly given team selection and his contract status the club consider him to be 'making it' right now.

 

Sure.

So to be clear, i define Sam as 'making it' as being a best 22 selection who holds down a key forward position in the seniors week in, week out.

That is not going to happen this year, and that is ok - he can still be on the path to being a first choice selection. I am talking his career, not this year. 

But if it doesn't happen next season, or at the latest the 2024 season, then by MY definition of making it he hasn't.

And it is worth noting that next season, and certainly by the 2024 season, there is a real chance he will behind JVR in the pecking order (though of course BB and Tmac may drop off).

If Sam (and others) define making it as being depth and playing VFL football with the occasional run in the ones as making it then he is on track. But i suspect Sam's definition of making it aligns with mine.

Edited June 1, 2022 by binman

[Lord Nev 13,511]

6 minutes ago, binman said:

Sure.

So to be clear, i define Sam as 'making it' as being a best 22 selection who holds down a key forward position in the seniors week in, week out.

That is not going to happen this year, and that is ok - he can still be on the path to being a first choice selection. I am talking his career, not this year. 

But if it doesn't happen next season, or at the latest the 2024 season, then by MY definition of making it he hasn't.

And it is worth noting that next season, and certainly by the 2024 season, there is a real chance he will behind JVR in the pecking order (though of course BB and Tmac may drop off).

If Sam (and others) define making it as being depth and playing VFL football with the occasional run in the ones as making it then he is on track. But i suspect Sam's definition of making it aligns with mine.

Yep, all fair mate, and you are absolutely not alone in your expectations for him.

I'm just resigned/accepting of him always being a depth player for us. I think there's always a need for that and if he manages to kick a few (albeit smaller) bags every now and then like he has this year in a couple of games then that's a bonus.

I think given his likely contract amount and list positioning; he won't be preventing us from bringing in another first choice key forward when the time comes (if he's still around).