6 minutes ago, Action Jackson said:

I think 100% in AFL terms more relates to is there a chance of extra injury.

All players play sore most of the year and most have injections before each game.

Can anyone fact check this assertion?

If Jackson and Gawn are available why would we leave Weid in the team ?

11 minutes ago, loges said:

If Jackson and Gawn are available why would we leave Weid in the team ?

Retaining our structure of two talls rather than continuing with the smaller forward line that we have used in recent weeks. I get the sense that Goody and co still believe that this is our best forward structure, and, until TMac is fit and firing, our only option is Weid

M. Brown does not have the strength or size to play the role we want him to effectively, and like it or not we need to develop Weid so that if we pursue with this structure in finals, he has had enough game time to be match-ready if TMac can't get up.

Edited July 6, 20223 yr by demoncat

Excellent news, with Geelong light on defenders - makes me wonder if we'll go tall with

Out: M Brown, T. Bedford
In: Gawn, Jackson

One for the selection committee

Bedford would be unlucky, but he also had a tremendous miss on the weekend that still baffles me. 

26 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

I stole the quote from Clint Stanaway.

Either way, I think we all know Goody has told a white lie in the past.

Christian Petracca playing sick against Fremantle is a prime example. He left it to Christian to make the decision on the day and it back fired. Goody contradicts himself there.

In saying that, I'm glad both LJ and Gawn are playing this week.

Not to mention may playing a grand final with grade three tear to his hammy!

21 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Can anyone fact check this assertion?

I got my info from a Dees player. He played a lot of last year with a sore back and had either injections or painkillers before games and said a lot of players do.

The Doctors are careful to monitor the amounts they have to ensure they minimise the risk of adverse health issues.

I won't give his name, but he was in the premiership team.

38 minutes ago, demoncat said:

Retaining our structure of two talls rather than continuing with the smaller forward line that we have used in recent weeks. I get the sense that Goody and co still believe that this is our best forward structure, and, until TMac is fit and firing, our only option is Weid

M. Brown does not have the strength or size to play the role we want him to effectively, and like it or not we need to develop Weid so that if we pursue with this structure in finals, he has had enough game time to be match-ready if TMac can't get up.

Exactly.

They may decide not to go with Weed this week given it looks like it might be a bit wet and slippery and Kardinia park is a narrow ground with tight pockets.

But I have zero doubt we will ultimately go with three talls (two key forwards and the resting ruck). And as you say if Tmac is not in the side, the second key forward really has to be Weed.

JVR is too small for that role, not to mention probably not AFL ready - yet. And Mitch Brown is simply not strong or big enough for the role.

But, whilst ive not listened to the presser, i suspect they will go with Weed tomorrow night as goody will want to trial the set up against a contender.

Edited July 6, 20223 yr by binman

Heading up to Bright today. Anyone know if the game will be on FTA up there? Or is a pub needed?

cheers

12 minutes ago, demoncat said:

Retaining our structure of two talls rather than continuing with the smaller forward line that we have used in recent weeks. I get the sense that Goody and co still believe that this is our best forward structure, and, until TMac is fit and firing, our only option is Weid

M. Brown does not have the strength or size to play the role we want him to effectively, and like it or not we need to develop Weid so that if we pursue with this structure in finals, he has had enough game time to be match-ready if TMac can't get up.

Can you tell me how many more years of development do you think Weid needs ?

1 minute ago, DubDee said:

Heading up to Bright today. Anyone know if the game will be on FTA up there? Or is a pub needed?

cheers

It's FTA up this way.

Just now, loges said:

Can you tell me how many more years of development do you think Weid needs ?

I didn’t say whether or not keeping Weid was a good idea, rather that if Goody wants to keep that forward structure then we don’t have any other options. 
 

Like any Dees fan I have been frustrated by his lack of development, but rehashing this debate doesn’t change the fact that he is the only choice we currently have to fill this role. 

5 minutes ago, demoncat said:

I didn’t say whether or not keeping Weid was a good idea, rather that if Goody wants to keep that forward structure then we don’t have any other options. 
 

Like any Dees fan I have been frustrated by his lack of development, but rehashing this debate doesn’t change the fact that he is the only choice we currently have to fill this role. 

I would argue that Mitch Brown would be every chance to have as much impact as Weid playing as a forward. If not more

Edited July 6, 20223 yr by loges
incomplete

Ideally we'd love to have the same structure as our Premiership team, but Weid hasn't shown he can play the T Mac role. So the selection panel need to decide whether Bedford offers more than Weid, regardless of structure. Against the Cats they'll go with Bedford IMO.

4 minutes ago, loges said:

I would argue that Mitch Brown would be every chance to have as much impact as Weid playing as a forward. If not more

I don’t disagree that in terms of scoreboard impact that M Brown could have as much impact as Weid, but I don’t think M Brown can offer the same physical presence in marking contents either down the line or in the forward 50. Kicking to contests is clearly a strategy that we are committed to, and I think Weid is better able to impact this area than M Brown.

All that said I do like M Brown and you could argue that he is a “better” footballer than Weid, but I think their roles in the team are different. 

6 minutes ago, mo64 said:

Ideally we'd love to have the same structure as our Premiership team, but Weid hasn't shown he can play the T Mac role. So the selection panel need to decide whether Bedford offers more than Weid, regardless of structure. Against the Cats they'll go with Bedford IMO.

And I also think this is true. It will come down to whether Goody wants to retain structure at the expense of keeping an underperforming Weid in, or would rather go for the smaller forward line. Time will tell!

1 minute ago, demoncat said:

And I also think this is true. It will come down to whether Goody wants to retain structure at the expense of keeping an underperforming Weid in, or would rather go for the smaller forward line. Time will tell!

Are your loyalties split this week Demoncat? Asking for a friend. 

10 minutes ago, ManDee said:

Are your loyalties split this week Demoncat? Asking for a friend. 

Nah mate no split loyalties for me. Not all cats are Geelong supporters!

33 minutes ago, DubDee said:

Heading up to Bright today. Anyone know if the game will be on FTA up there? Or is a pub needed?

cheers

So jealous, love Bright. Beautiful spot

18 minutes ago, demoncat said:

I don’t disagree that in terms of scoreboard impact that M Brown could have as much impact as Weid, but I don’t think M Brown can offer the same physical presence in marking contents either down the line or in the forward 50. Kicking to contests is clearly a strategy that we are committed to, and I think Weid is better able to impact this area than M Brown.

All that said I do like M Brown and you could argue that he is a “better” footballer than Weid, but I think their roles in the team are different. 

Their ability to play roles is different.  Bedford for me and Weid  medi sub 

1 minute ago, dees189227 said:

So jealous, love Bright. Beautiful spot

Look up the Hun today with its weekly guide out for next 7 days and it should be on 7 HD  or 7 mate on Thursday night. In NE a Vic. 

I would prefer if we persevere with Toby Bedford. He has shown enough to be given a run of games. The Weid has had plenty of chances. He played his role last week so i'm not bashing him but Toby deserves a fair go as well

2 hours ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Yes I think it’s talls out for talls. Seems like some want Weid to stay in.  With BBB and Weid, frees Fritsch up and probably allows him not to have to compete in contested pack marks.  Bedford would be stiff to miss but didn’t quite nail his opportunities last week. 

Gonna be wet so probably better to stay with the current composition of smalls and talls. 

I watched last week's game and afterwards entrusted myself to @Sir Why You Little . I have no recollection of subsequent events so have just caught up with this thread.

As it appears Max and Dogga are coming in then I imagine Weid and M Brown will go out. If only one of them goes (unlikely) then I would drop Weid. In my view he did not provide enough physical pressure in the ruck. M Brown is a better forward option.

Bedford has been patchy but that is to be expected given his age and inexperience. What he does have is pace and not many of the Cat geriatrics could outrun him.

In. Jackson, Max.

Out. Weid,  M. Brown.

Disagree with calls for BBB to be dropped - he is fundamental to our set up.

46 minutes ago, loges said:

Can you tell me how many more years of development do you think Weid needs ?

As long as it takes.It took Hawkins until he was about 26/27 to really start performing ,I think that is why he is playing into his 30s

1 hour ago, binman said:

Except the actual quote is:

“I wouldn’t be playing them if they weren’t 100 per cent. They’re ready to go,”

Semantically, a very big difference. 

So 100% of 80%?