3 hours ago, dees189227 said:

Are we going in to tall with petty?or will they rotate him & Ben Brown?

No and yes.

1 hour ago, Cyclops said:

The sub has to come from the 5 players named as interchange. That is Ben Brown cannot be named as sub.

The sub has to come from Windsor, Hore, McDonald, Petty or Oliver.

I think Petty.

 

Nope, they've changed it this year. Eg Tsatas sub after being named on field.

2 hours ago, Cyclops said:

The sub has to come from the 5 players named as interchange. That is Ben Brown cannot be named as sub.

The sub has to come from Windsor, Hore, McDonald, Petty or Oliver.

I think Petty.

 

This is not correct. Tsatas was named on the wing but sub for the Bombers last round. Essendon have a tendency to play funny buggers though so no surprise they did that. 
 

Every other team has named the sub from the bench and I expect our sub to come from the bench again this round but just wanted to clarify it doesn’t necessarily have to.

8 hours ago, seventyfour said:

What if someone gets injured in the first minute? That's a full game for Petty whether he's sub or not.

 

I obviously don't know his fitness levels or how his injuries are tracking but this all feels rushed and sketchy to me.

Dw, no one thought Oliver was ready, still managed 30 no where near his best as well.

4 hours ago, FTB said:

This is not correct. Tsatas was named on the wing but sub for the Bombers last round. Essendon have a tendency to play funny buggers though so no surprise they did that. 
 

Every other team has named the sub from the bench and I expect our sub to come from the bench again this round but just wanted to clarify it doesn’t necessarily have to.

If that’s the case then Sparrow is a shot for sub.

Still think it will be Windsor, as given he was subbed off last week after a good game, shows they’re carefully managing his minutes.

Whilst I dont mind bringing Petty in without getting much touch I do have concern with bringing him in when he has not played a full game. In saying that I anticipate both Petty and Brown will start and we will see high rotation of 2 of JVR, Petty, Brown through the forward line as well as high rest rate for Gawn with JVR chopping out more. I suggest Windsor likely sub otherwise Hore as only other likely option. 

 

13 hours ago, dees189227 said:

Are we going in to tall with petty?or will they rotate him & Ben Brown?

Was the forward line of BB, Tmac, Dogga Fritch too tall??

 

11 hours ago, wheaters31 said:

Billings and Langdon on the wings.

Windsor as the starting sub.

Petty to be subbed out late in the third qtr.

Windsor as sub?? Yeah right, just reward for his first 2 games that have been sensational! Just what message does that create??🤮

People suggesting Windsor or Hore as subs are of on another planet. BOTH GREAT LAST WEEK. Petty overated and lucky to get a game starts as sub!

10 minutes ago, picket fence said:

People suggesting Windsor or Hore as subs are of on another planet. BOTH GREAT LAST WEEK. Petty overated and lucky to get a game starts as sub!

That's really funny, you telling people they are from another planet for merely putting an opinion up about the sub. And Petty is overrated ?

I agree Petty underdone by the sounds of his VFL game but will be surprised if they start him as sub, just because it's Petty.  

12 hours ago, picket fence said:

Never in my life have I seen a player statless in the magoos promoted into seniors. RUBBISH on any level! Hore the sub?? HE WAS PHENOMENAL last week

I think it is very poor that a starless player in the seconds gets into the ones.

Oliver had great games, same as Tmac before selection.

sadly I think Tmac must be the sub or BBB

if petty breaks down if he is the sub then from then on you are one short.

unless you only put petty on very late.  Then he should have been at Casey for at least 3 quarters.

another wrong selection. I hope I am wrong,

12 hours ago, CHF said:

With due respect, I think there was just one selection last week that was questioned and that was the dropping of Tomlinson for TMac.

There was also a bit of chat about BBB's selection.

Fair enough too as it was left field selection given he had surgery only a few weeks ago, had been in rehab before that and he had only one VFL practice game (maybe 2?) under his belt.

But it was a good selection. 

Hore wasn't as left field, but his selection was still somewhat unexpected given he was replacing bowser, with many thinkng Laurie  might come in and/or salo goes back. 

And his selection meant  three players new to our baclkine - hore, tmac and howes.

So I"s argue tmac was not the only selection questioned. 

A few posters are talking about the sub like it is spare player you can use in a way that suits your management of players.

I see it as a player who needs to be fully fit in case we lose a player early in a game.  Break glass in case of emergency.  Preferably someone who can fill multiple roles, or the next best available player that can be shuffled into rotations.
 

I’m happy if the FD have decided Petty is fully fit to play him.  But it won’t be an allowable excuse that he’s underdone, if something happens requiring an early sub in my eyes.  Only they can know the risk they are taking.

Perhaps they see Petty at 75% is better than the alternatives.  As long as they don’t risk his long term prospects for the season, I’m AOK with that.

38 minutes ago, picket fence said:

People suggesting Windsor or Hore as subs are of on another planet. BOTH GREAT LAST WEEK. Petty overated and lucky to get a game starts as sub!

I am in the risk averse camp and would not play Petty, particularly when we had a functioning forward line. In saying that now that he is named on the bench I dont see any value in him being the sub so choose to look at the other available options named on the pine.  Oliver is just not one. Tmac could be being Hawthorn forwardline is not tall but think less likely than the remaining two. Both Windsor and Hore were good but neither were great (would not have either in our best 10). Windsor was subbed off validating whilst quality he may not be able to run out a game. Hore also has not played much AFL match minutes thus far. I suggest in all instances we are trying to play the longer game but I do hope it is not ahead of risking early wins. 

8 minutes ago, Lil_red_fire_engine said:

IHore also has not played much AFL match minutes thus far.

I suggest in all instances we are trying to play the longer game but I do hope it is not ahead of risking early wins. 

I can't see hore being sub. Not flexible enough.

Was thinking petty, swapping out for bbb, but perhaps you're right and he starts. 

Thinking about it, petts could play the melksham role and run with Sicily to negate his influence. We have missed such a player.

Stretches the hawks defence and means fritter, who had the dogs best defender for company, and/or bbb get the next best key defender.

Might free up fritter too to play his own game.

Leaving Windsor as sub to come on in the third to inject some run and dash, with petts coming off if need be.

Good management of a young player.

If petts did come off, the forward line would then be the same group as against the Dogs.

Goody said before the season last year they planned to use the sub in two ways - tactically or as part of their load management strategy.

That jags with their use of it thus far.

Playing the longer game for sure, and there is no doubt it is a calculated risk.

But it's all about winning the war not the battles.

The game has undergone a massive transformation in the last 10 years. It is so much more aerobically challenging for the whole list its crazy. And every team now needs 10 plus elite runners of the nibbla ilk.

It's why Lyon loaded up on athletes and runners (by the by, seems crazy to have let billings walk given he is also a great kick, which Lyon has also targeted).

Leaving aside injuries, the fittest of the real contenders (IMV dees, giants, swans, lions, pies) come finals will win the flag.

I'm usually against key position players being subs as they don't give you a lot of flexibility if there is an injury.
This year however, I am slightly changing my tune. We're already quite flexible on field with running Salem/Pickett through the middle - Sparrow didn't attend a bounce last week. Billings can play a few different positions. Can throw Howes on a wing or Trac up forward etc. Petty would be a good sub as could cover either end (although i'm sure theyd want him up front) and they could bring him on so he doesn't need to play a full game. I know the last few games against the Hawks have been close but hopefully we can build a solid lead and make the sub (hopefully no injury and either a young fella needing a rest or managing BBB)

My biggest concern about this team selection is Hawthorn's forward line. It's very small and with May, Lever, McDonald and to a lesser extent Hore and Howes, we seem to be going in too tall. Adding Petty in place of Woewodin limits our ability to add a pacy, small defender should it be needed.

I should add that I'm not questioning Petty's selection from a form or fitness point of view. It's purely a question of team structure. 

Edited March 22, 20241 yr by La Dee-vina Comedia
typo

14 hours ago, picket fence said:

Never in my life have I seen a player statless in the magoos promoted into seniors. RUBBISH on any level! Hore the sub?? HE WAS PHENOMENAL last week

Your right Picky I cant see how you pick a player who has to be under done,cant be sub it would be a waste when he could play a full game at casey to get match fit

ON windsor as Sub, could be that every 3-4 weeks we play him as a sub to "rest" him (decrease the AFL demands on hs body. Because we do tend to see first year players start to lag a bit ~3/4 of the way through the season. SO to me putting him as a sub would be logical in this sense (putting petty in isn't logical but see what happens). 

8 hours ago, JJR said:

Dw, no one thought Oliver was ready, still managed 30 no where near his best as well.

No. No.  Not so.  However most agreed that Spargo wasn’t ready.  Many feel the same re Petty.  

2 hours ago, roy11 said:

I'm usually against key position players being subs as they don't give you a lot of flexibility if there is an injury.
This year however, I am slightly changing my tune. We're already quite flexible on field with running Salem/Pickett through the middle - Sparrow didn't attend a bounce last week. Billings can play a few different positions. Can throw Howes on a wing or Trac up forward etc. Petty would be a good sub as could cover either end (although i'm sure theyd want him up front) and they could bring him on so he doesn't need to play a full game. I know the last few games against the Hawks have been close but hopefully we can build a solid lead and make the sub (hopefully no injury and either a young fella needing a rest or managing BBB)

This, for my reasoning and guess.

1 hour ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

My biggest concern about this team selection is Hawthorn's forward line. It's very small and with May, Lever, McDonald and to a lesser extent Hore and Howes, we seem to be going in too tall. Adding Petty in place of Woewodin limits our ability to add a pacy, small defender should it be needed.

I should add that I'm not questioning Petty's selection from a form or fitness point of view. It's purely a question of team structure. 

It will all be about the midfield. If we pressure them up the field and they have to bomb it in these guys will have an absolute field day marking everything.

3 hours ago, Dee Zephyr said:

That's really funny, you telling people they are from another planet for merely putting an opinion up about the sub. And Petty is overrated ?

Yep I'll say it again Petty is Overated!

3 hours ago, 640MD said:

I think it is very poor that a starless player in the seconds gets into the ones.

Oliver had great games, same as Tmac before selection.

sadly I think Tmac must be the sub or BBB

if petty breaks down if he is the sub then from then on you are one short.

unless you only put petty on very late.  Then he should have been at Casey for at least 3 quarters.

another wrong selection. I hope I am wrong,

You arent wrong at all!