PREGAME: Rd 18 vs Brisbane

[leave it to deever 17,518]

3 hours ago, Demon Dynasty said:

wrong, but the extra ruck means you have given up a place for a potential very good KF

And not like our forward line is killing it. Need to put some more goals on the board without having to sacrifice Trac when Oliver is out. I say that despite his form Jvr  goes back on with with Bbb. It's also true that we have carried other players who haven't been up to par this year. Ideally I would like to see a Petty/ Bbb forward structure but I think Goody has scrapped the Petty experience.

We can't depend on Tmac. I think he's cooked.  I'm not sure Jvr is 100 % ready yet. Milk is really only a good sub for Fritta as we cant play two medium size fwd.

The Saints game for me showed why we one tall doesn't quite work even with Trac playing a Dusty type role.

It's going to have to be a 2 combo from Bbb, Petty, Jvr and Smith.

I have hope as Petty showed some great form in his last game forward as did Bbb last week. 

It's also necessary that our smalls get going. Did a spell in the twos make Chandler lift?

I think 3 smalls from Anb, Kozzie, Spargo and Chandler is plenty.

If Chandler didn't lift in the Magoo's then maybe that's it.

It's crunch time now to get this sorted. Goody needs to send a clear message that players need to lift or book their holiday tix.

Since Bbb showed some good signs last week. I'd prefer him at ff. So who is our best CHF going to be?

For me as it stands it's Bbb and Petty / Jvr.  With Tommo or Smith in defence of Petty gets the nod. Smith proves more flexibility but Tommo seems the better player. Perhaps Smith makes the ultimate sub.

For our smalls it's Anb, Spargo and Kozzie.

Maybe we just roll the dice and play this now and stick with it and hope it all works out with the limited time left.

And definitely go shopping for at least one big bodied forward afterwards. The writing was on the wall with Tmacs body last year, Jackson leaving and Bbbs form slump. The double ruck has not covered these so let's please find someone.

Edited July 13, 2023 by leave it to deever

[jnrmac 20,189]

1 minute ago, rpfc said:

Jackson will be around for a decade post Gawn.

Or he may not. Or he may get injured

We don't have any idea. Grundy is a great get at a good price to replace Jacko while we are in our 'window' and while we are grooming another young ruckman.

Our club has a good record in generating highly competitive ruckmen and I suspect it will continue.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,909]

7 hours ago, Hawny for Gawny said:

He always has been, Max has been an average to slightly above average tap ruck but his value around the ground has been what's made him insane. I don't think he is 100% fit after that injury, an older and giant body doesn't bounce back in 5 weeks though he may be healed. If we look at Tommo's acl he was pretty stiff and average last year but this year he's looked decent when in, obviously not the same person but I think Gawn may need a rest against a North or Hawthorn.

Can't agree with this. In his prime, Max was the best tap ruckman I have ever seen. He had a 360 degree range with either hand. And his prime was for many years - it's not like he had one stunning year out of an average 10 year career.

[rpfc 28,779]

Just now, jnrmac said:

Or he may not. Or he may get injured

We don't have any idea. Grundy is a great get at a good price to replace Jacko while we are in our 'window' and while we are grooming another young ruckman.

Our club has a good record in generating highly competitive ruckmen and I suspect it will continue.

As @Jaded No Moreintimates - if one of them cannot become a decent forward, we are on a hiding to nothing playing one of them as a part time forward and part time ruck. 

Where I move away from this ‘Gawn behind the footy and Grundy in the ruck’ is where we suddenly have to play another tall in the forward line and we become possibly too tall against some smaller, quicker teams.

My way forward would be to stick to Gawn forward but properly forward - he seems to always Ben in the wrong spot and we literally slow down play so we can chip kick to his advantage 5 seconds after all spots have been defended by the opposition. Commit to the structure and coach Max some craft and select and stick to some continuity with 5 forwards to work together and know where they lead and what space each one creates.
 

There are only 4 players the opposition does not want 20m out with ball moving quick - Fritsch, Pickett, Petracca, and Gawn.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,909]

1 hour ago, WalkingCivilWar said:

No, rpfc. No they can’t. Even in matters other than footy. For example, I didn’t drop/dump my ex. He was being managed for a while then unfortunately in September last year he was delisted. 😁 I told him not to hang up his boots just yet since he’s not too old to be picked up by another club. 😁

I wonder what your ex's version of events might be? Would he argue that he was just exercising his free agency rights? 

[binman 43,815]

9 minutes ago, Fromgotowoewodin said:

My point is they rested players and kept winning, I don’t think they would’ve rested anyone prior to a top 4 clash had they needed to win to keep a buffer on their top 4 spot.

Ok.

But i still don't understand the relevance of the fact the Cats won whilst managing players and we haven't? Or the relevance of your supposition that the Cats would not have rested anyone prior to a top 4 clash had they needed to win to keep a buffer on their top 4 spot

I mean, i assume you accept the fact the Cats took a squad mentality, and true to his word preseason, Goody is doing the same this season.  Are you arguing that Grundy is not being managed? 

[Demonland 73,163]

17 minutes ago, rumpole said:

I would have rested Grundy this week by selecting him and then having him as a late withdrawal to retain the element of surprise.

That is assuming we’re not breaking any AFL rules by pulling a swifty. 

We should have consulted with Chris Scott to confirm the best way to do something innocent like this.

[leave it to deever 17,518]

2 minutes ago, rpfc said:

No Moreintimates - if one of them cannot become a decent forward, we are on a hiding to nothing playing one of them as a part time forward and part time ruck

The most likely successful of them being a good fwd is definitely Max. Grundys marking just isn't up to it.

[rpfc 28,779]

7 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Or he may not. Or he may get injured

We don't have any idea. Grundy is a great get at a good price to replace Jacko while we are in our 'window' and while we are grooming another young ruckman.

Our club has a good record in generating highly competitive ruckmen and I suspect it will continue.

I don’t want to relitigate the decision to bring in Grundy. It’s done, let’s get the most out of it.

To me, it’s Gawn fwd 60% of the time with him leading at the footy in predictable lanes. 

I don’t think we have committed to that as yet. That’s essentially what I am saying. 

One can argue that he should be a behind the footy. That’s fine. But I don’t think our defence needs it and I don’t think our ball movement can survive being that tall.

[Pipefitter 2,168]

Good opportunity to rest Grundy. He’s hardly played a full season in yonks and has been surprisingly durable for us.

will be an interesting selection meeting next week if Max dominates and we beat the Lions. 

[leave it to deever 17,518]

6 minutes ago, rpfc said:

One can argue that he should be a behind the footy. That’s fine. But I don’t think our defence needs it and I don’t think our ball movement can survive being that tall.

Not really. As you correctly stated our defence doesn't need it. Probably the best in the comp. I think Grundys tap work is better than Max so he spends more time in the middle with Max forward.  

Edited July 13, 2023 by leave it to deever

[DeeSpencer 26,083]

34 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

The biggest issue with the Gawn/Grundy combo, is that we want one of them to play forward, and neither are forwards. At 29 and 31, that is not going to change. You just have to move on from that idea. We never played Gawn or Jackson as permanent forwards, so why are we insisting to do it with Gawn and Grundy?

Gawn dropping back is where he excels, and providing the outlet from half back.

Grundy needs to use his strength at ground level to play as an extra mid. He can't do that if he's absolutely buggered, so it's not a bad time to give him a week off to freshen up ahead of playing a fast moving Adelaide. 

But neither are forwards, and the more we try to make them something they are not, the more we will suffer.

There’s not a pathway for both of them playing in the same side that doesn’t involve them being forwards.

Geelong managed to achieve 2 rucks on ball because Blicavs can play as a genuine midfielder. 

There’s no level of freshness that will see Grundy playing as a midfielder in 2023. He’s too cumbersome, and he’s forgotten to kick the ball too.

The best hope is that they cover the ground well so they call their own switches and appear to both be in the ruck. But one will be the designated forward.

Gawn’s very good in the CHF long target role as long as we move it quick enough.  And Grundy does move well on leads and create space, plus he’s a nice kick for goal, he can function as a forward.

The issue is we need a pair of mobile and versatile key forwards to shuffle around them to make it work. Resting Grundy is as much about BBB’s limitations as it is the 2 rucks 

 

[Hawny for Gawny 461]

7 minutes ago, rpfc said:

I don’t want to relitigate the decision to bring in Grundy. It’s done, let’s get the most out of it.

To me, it’s Gawn fwd 60% of the time with him leading at the footy in predictable lanes. 

I don’t think we have committed to that as yet. That’s essentially what I am saying. 

One can argue that he should be a behind the footy. That’s fine. But I don’t think our defence needs it and I don’t think our ball movement can survive being that tall.

I agree, we say we want 3 tall FWDs but we don't have 3, Gawn can provide that structure and create contests/clunk a few while we play JVR and Fritta/whoever, this is only possible if Gawn commits to the time and gets the training. 

Max is probably better behind the ball but our defense is good enough that it isn't needed.

[Lucifers Hero 40,364]

47 minutes ago, binman said:

I would characterize it as it being fatigued, not unfit.

Binman, I marvel at your ability to reverse engineer just about every decision the club makes, to fit the 'fatigue' (aka 'loading') dogma. 

You are preaching to the converted!  Everyone believes in loading but don't necessarily see it as the dominant or sometimes even a relevant explanation for club decisions and team performance.

There are a myriad of other possibilities behind individual club decisions/team performance.

Maybe its time to widen the lense of the fatigue/loading prism...

Edited July 13, 2023 by Lucifers Hero

[Fromgotowoewodin 1,606]

7 minutes ago, binman said:

Ok.

But i still don't understand the relevance of the fact the Cats won whilst managing players and we haven't? Or the relevance of your supposition that the Cats would not have rested anyone prior to a top 4 clash had they needed to win to keep a buffer on their top 4 spot

I mean, i assume you accept the fact the Cats took a squad mentality, and true to his word preseason, Goody is doing the same this season.  Are you arguing that Grundy is not being managed? 

Winning form is good form, would you rather finish first and have a home final, or scrape into fourth and potentially play Port in Adelaide? You might say it doesn’t matter but I would much prefer to play at home.

I don’t think he’s being managed I think we’re still trying to make the forward line work. Why manage a best 22 player against a fellow top 4 side? Manage players against Norf or Hawthorn.. plus he didn’t look unfit or slow to me last week, but Gawn did - manage Max if anyone. 

[SFebes 4,884]

Just because things worked OK in 2021, doesn't mean that they are guaranteed to work in 2023, for loads of reasons. Ohhh I mentioned loads.....

[rjay 25,093]

19 minutes ago, binman said:

Are you arguing that Grundy is not being managed? 

He's not being managed 'bin'...

He's been dropped for team balance reasons.

That's my code for the 2 of them in the same team are not working at the moment.

[Hawny for Gawny 461]

Just now, rjay said:

He's not being managed 'bin'...

He's been dropped for team balance reasons.

That's my code for the 2 of them in the same team are not working at the moment.

I don't think Goody is the type of guy to suddenly make the call to take Grundy out ahead of this 2048 point game against the Lions, I think grundy has probably pulled up sore and won't be able to compete, but all we can do is speculate.

[Redleg 41,473]

12 minutes ago, rjay said:

He's not being managed 'bin'...

He's been dropped for team balance reasons.

That's my code for the 2 of them in the same team are not working at the moment.

Or it’s selection specifically for this week’s matchups/opponent.

Edited July 13, 2023 by Redleg

[binman 43,815]

24 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Binman, I marvel at your ability to reverse engineer just about every decision the club makes, to fit the 'fatigue' (aka 'loading') dogma. 

You are preaching to the converted!  Everyone believes in loading but don't necessarily see it as the dominant or sometimes even a relevant explanation for club decisions and team performance.

There are a myriad of other possibilities behind individual club decisions/team performance.

Maybe its time to widen the lense of the fatigue/loading prism...

I'm not doing that all luci.

I could not agree more that there are a myriad of other possibilities behind individual club decisions/team performance.

I have not ONCE argued otherwise.

And to be frank, I'm wholly sick of the inference that i have (not you, generally).

And please, the idea I subscribe to some loading 'dogma' or 'reverse engineer' to fit my narrative is both inaccurate and insulting.

And this is good case in point.

Sure, you and others might be right and they are trialing a single ruck set up. But what is the evidence that supports that opinion? 

My opinion is he is being managed becuase he is fatigued (for whatever reason) and needs a break, just as has been the case for other best 22 players in Hibbo, Chanlder, Spargo and JVR. 

And there is plenty of evidence that supports that supposition:

• The club has publicly said it will take time for brodie to get back to optimal fitness.
• He is clearly struggling at the moment - he looks tired.
• The club has flagged via the media as much and implied, but not yet said (i don't think) he is being managed - are they lying if they come and out and say he is being managed?
• Goody publicly stated he would take more a squad mentality this season. And he has done so. Resting Brodie fits with that approach
• As far as i am aware there has not been one comment from the club suggesting any movement away from the two ruck set up being the optimal set up - on the contrary there are multiple recent examples of the club affirming the two ruck model  

It is not dogma. It is logic.

Apply Occams razor to he set of facts at hand and Brodie being managed becuase he needs a chop out is the most probable scenario.

Edited July 13, 2023 by binman

[rjay 25,093]

2 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Or it’s selection specifically for this week’s matchups/opponent.

That's a fair call 'Red'...

I'm pretty sure most of us think the 2 rucks is not working at the moment, so it's going to be an interesting watch.

 

[Redleg 41,473]

1 minute ago, rjay said:

That's a fair call 'Red'...

I'm pretty sure most of us think the 2 rucks is not working at the moment, so it's going to be an interesting watch.

 

I  wonder if it’s “not working “, just because Max is in poorer form than the last few years.

Max dropping simple marks for example, cannot be blamed on Grundy playing.

I am also pretty confident the two of them will be playing together in more games this year.

[Engorged Onion 10,223]

I may have missed some good conversation on this, and it's not specifically relevant to this game. I do wonder why we see less of Max dropping back in defence anymore. As strong as our defence is, I still think it's his best role. Does him doing that negate the effectiveness of our defence?

Does anyone (everyone) who is smarter than me, have some thoughts, on why there appears to be a shift away from this?

[buck_nekkid 6,046]

Wach Fagan bring in Darcy Fort, to stretch us like last time/and like the bombers did.

[Roost it far 8,629]

4 minutes ago, buck_nekkid said:

Wach Fagan bring in Darcy Fort, to stretch us like last time/and like the bombers did.

Bombers stretched us because Grundy was poor defensively that day. Gawn can play the drop back ruck much better than Grundy, whose strength is post ruck clearance work. We also have a really settled back half and should be able to comfortably cover Brisbane playing 2 rucks. This game will be won at contest. Beat them there and it’s all over.