CHANGES: Rd 17 vs Geelong

[picket fence 15,091]

1 hour ago, Lord Nev said:

Mitch Brown can't and won't play the forward/ruck role. If Jackson doesn't come back in then Weid will absolutely stay in and Mitch will make way.

Remember the original lineup before Jackson pulled out by any chance?

You would reward a perenially underperforming Weeds. Over a guy that at least was competitive in the ruck and kicked 2 Goals in Mitch Brown... Hnmmm!🙄

[Thehardtackler 785]

In Gawn out Ben Brown. Jackson will probably still be injured. Weideman tried his guts out and will be rewarded. He ‘played his role’. That is a favourite Goodwinism! Mitch Brown looked dangerous in patches. Kade Chandler will get a regular run next year.

[Demon Dynasty 15,358]

13 hours ago, Fat Tony said:

Hibberd, for example, might be rested for Hunt or Rivers. Petracca also looked pretty sore at the end last night. 

Probably unlikely on their performances at Casey this week FT.  Backing the FD / SC to stay with Hibb for this Thurs, barring injury.

[58er 5,607]

5 hours ago, Demon Dynasty said:

Probably unlikely on their performances at Casey this week FT.  Backing the FD / SC to stay with Hibb for this Thurs, barring injury.

We don't rest  players Tony ! Goody doesn't do that so Trac who just hit form and confidence and kicked goals and Hibbo won't be rested.  

[layzie 28,654]

Keep Weid in. It's not a matter of rewarding him for poor performances its that we have bollocks for other options. 

[picket fence 15,091]

10 minutes ago, layzie said:

Keep Weid in. It's not a matter of rewarding him for poor performances its that we have bollocks for other options. 

So who goes out for Max?

[titan_uranus 22,272]

I didn't see anything from the game to suggest to me that M Brown is a better ruck option than Weideman.

If both Gawn and Jackson are right to come in, M Brown is the first out. Then the question is whether we go back to having the additional tall, which is what we had prior to the bye (Bedford presumably misses, which is harsh, but would be done for structural reasons), or we continue to play with one fewer tall, in which case it's likely Weideman who makes way.

I'll be interested to see which way we lean with Geelong - do we want height in our forward line to avoid them intercept marking against us too much, or do we want pace to see if we can pressure them and out-run them when it hits the deck.

[monoccular 16,042]

9 hours ago, Thehardtackler said:

In Gawn out Ben Brown. Jackson will probably still be injured. Weideman tried his guts out and will be rewarded. He ‘played his role’. That is a favourite Goodwinism! Mitch Brown looked dangerous in patches. Kade Chandler will get a regular run next year.

“…..Jackson will probably still be injured. ..”
Just wondering on what basis do you say this?  Knowledge or speculation or MFCSS?

[Thehardtackler 785]

2 minutes ago, monoccular said:

“…..Jackson will probably still be injured. ..”
Just wondering on what basis do you say this?  Knowledge or speculation or MFCSS?

The word ‘probably’ is based upon a supposition. Probably is nearly always speculation. It is more of you can’t have too much good news and Goodwin talked about Gawn coming back in his presser but Jackson was never mentioned.

[Lord Nev 13,511]

9 hours ago, picket fence said:

You would reward a perenially underperforming Weeds. Over a guy that at least was competitive in the ruck and kicked 2 Goals in Mitch Brown... Hnmmm!🙄

Weid is a ruck/forward, Mitch Brown is not. If Jackson doesn't play then we need a ruck/forward.

As already proven, Brown wasn't competitive in the ruck at all and Weid didn't play forward so your point is moot.

 

[Lord Nev 13,511]

50 minutes ago, picket fence said:

So who goes out for Max?

Mitch Brown. Then Weid plays the backup (Jackson) role as he has before.

[BigFez 1,388]

35 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

I didn't see anything from the game to suggest to me that M Brown is a better ruck option than Weideman.

If both Gawn and Jackson are right to come in, M Brown is the first out. Then the question is whether we go back to having the additional tall, which is what we had prior to the bye (Bedford presumably misses, which is harsh, but would be done for structural reasons), or we continue to play with one fewer tall, in which case it's likely Weideman who makes way.

I'll be interested to see which way we lean with Geelong - do we want height in our forward line to avoid them intercept marking against us too much, or do we want pace to see if we can pressure them and out-run them when it hits the deck.

No Stewart and no Kolodjashnij limits their intercept ability, my prediction is they'll stick with the smaller setup.  Weideman and Brown out for Gawn and Jackson.  If Jackson isn't available I suspect it will be M. Brown out for Gawn, but wouldn't bother me if it was Weid for Gawn.

[Damo 2,988]

If I were Geelong Id worry about Mitch Brown more than the Weid. 

[Pates 9,536]

10 hours ago, Thehardtackler said:

In Gawn out Ben Brown. Jackson will probably still be injured. Weideman tried his guts out and will be rewarded. He ‘played his role’. That is a favourite Goodwinism! Mitch Brown looked dangerous in patches. Kade Chandler will get a regular run next year.

Completely agree with this, I get the dislike of Weid as he hasn’t come on as we would like but jeez he had to be the number one ruck against guys he’s was giving size and height, and battled as best he could. If it’s just Max back in, M Brown will make way. He didn’t do much wrong but match ups/positions wise it just makes sense.

BBB would be the only other potential change, he looked ginger at one stage. Can’t picture any other changes, Bedford was down but he deserves a lengthy run in the seniors. I’d have Tomlinson as the sub, in case Hawkins decides to take out one of our key defenders again. 

Edited July 3, 2022 by Pates

[Jaded No More 57,768]

12 hours ago, dee-tox said:

As mentioned, Mitch Brown's game was far superior to Weideman's. Weed goes out for Gawn.

Bedford was disappointing but they might like his pace against Geelong.

How can you compare their game? 
Weideman played first ruck against a proper recognized experienced ruckman. It is a foreign role and he battled manfully. Did you expect him to win the hit outs? 
Would you expect Walker to win the hit outs versus Gawn? It’s just unrealistic. 
 

I think Weideman was quite good at ground level. He has good hands and is a smart user of the footy. Where he annoys most I think is his inability to impact an aerial contest. 

[Lucifers Hero 36,991]

Geelong are also on a 5 day break.  If we flew back after the Crows game dees players would be home about the same time as Geelong's.  All equal there.

Dangerfield played only 62% game time so it was just a training session for him.  They have rested a lot of players but we have had multiple back to back 8/9 day breaks should be equally fresh.

Other than the obvious changes one I would consider is who takes Stengle.   Is it Hibberd, Salem, Gus or bring in Hunt who has an outstanding record on small forwards this year?   

Edited July 3, 2022 by Lucifers Hero

[Lucifers Hero 36,991]

Looks like Geelong have a few outs:  Stewart, Kolodjashnij and possibly Stanley.

 

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,392]

13 hours ago, dee-tox said:

As mentioned, Mitch Brown's game was far superior to Weideman's. Weed goes out for Gawn.

Bedford was disappointing but they might like his pace against Geelong.

A few people on here have said they thought M Brown played better than Weideman. I disagree with that view. However, I wasn't at the ground and I know from experience that TV viewing does not give the whole picture. I'd be interested in the opinions of anyone who was at the Adelaide Oval.

Neither Weideman or M Brown set the world on fire, but the season is about winning the Premiership, not worrying so much about each individual game. I believe Weideman is a better option than M Brown to that end, so if only one loses his spot this week, it should be M Brown. 

Bedford also seemed to have a shocker, but Chandler has been tried and shown me little to enthuse each time, so I'd keep Bedford in, unless we want to go back to a taller forward line. 

[Lucifers Hero 36,991]

13 hours ago, dee-tox said:

As mentioned, Mitch Brown's game was far superior to Weideman's. Weed goes out for Gawn.

Bedford was disappointing but they might like his pace against Geelong.

Not sure either will be selected this week but I just don't see Brown's 'superiority':  A few of the Crow's goals came while Brown was in the ruck and they got some quick CB clearances and his field work wasn't as good.

[Sydee 3,613]

If both Gawn and Jacko are fit to play

I would replace B Brown for Gawn

Jacko replaces M Brown

Weid stays in as ruck support for Jacko

Gawn to play mostly deep forward 

[Deestar9 1,402]

This is a part of an article written by The Mongrel Punt  on the Adelaide v Melb game.  I found it interesting reading comments by independent commentators.

"Matching them up, they attended a similar number of ruck contests, but that is where the comparison stops. ROB got 48 hit outs from his 70 contests, 16 to advantage while Weideman's 73 contests. netted only 11 hit outs with four to the advantage of his own team.

The story is the same for practically all key stats, with O'Brien pantsing Weideman in clearances, tackles, marks, disposals, metres gained, intercepts and even free kicks.

Having said all that, Weideman would have known that he was probably not going to win the taps going into the game, so it looked like he intentionally put his body into spaces that O'Brien was looking to use to tap to his mids, while the Melbourne midfield looked to steal the ball as it was tapped down, which they did so very effectively.

So while I'm giving O'Brien the nod as a pure ruckman,  the way Weideman was able to work with his midfield was everything that Melbourne could have wanted from him in terms of outcome. He still needs to watch some undisciplined play that gave away free kicks, but as a role player, he did very well and will likely be congratulated in the Monday game review."

 

[jnrmac 18,940]

2 hours ago, Jaded No More said:

Weideman played first ruck against a proper recognized experienced ruckman. It is a foreign role and he battled manfully. Did you expect him to win the hit outs? 
He has good hands and is a smart user of the footy. Where he annoys most I think is his inability to impact an aerial contest. 

a) Its not a foreign role. He plays this role often at Casey

b) He has good hands? OMG that is simply laughable. He is the greatest two grabber since Chris 'Concrete Hands' Dawes except he cant even take the second grab!

[picket fence 15,091]

2 hours ago, Lord Nev said:

Mitch Brown. Then Weid plays the backup (Jackson) role as he has before.

Can I say it again Mitch Brown kicked 2 vital goals and could have had another, and some would have him in front of an again disappionting Weeds!?Now come on!

Edited July 4, 2022 by picket fence

[Lord Nev 13,511]

Just now, picket fence said:

Can I say it again Mitch Brown kicked 2 vital goals and could have had another, and some would have him in front of an again disappionting Weeds@

Can I say it again, they played different roles and if Gawn comes back and Jackson doesn't then it's the Weid role we need.

[loges 6,014]

4 minutes ago, picket fence said:

Can I say it again Mitch Brown kicked 2 vital goals and could have had another, and some would have him in front of an again disappionting Weeds!?Now come on!

You're wasting your time Picket.