Official Team V The Doggies

[Damo 3,357]

Can you expand please was anything else said?

The interview was a stern Bailey who re-iterated how he had trained them hard and to expect a turn around but the Journo (Rob Waters?) said the players were definitely dropped not injured.

[Deeoldfart 8,033]

Ten showed the interview with Bailey.

They are adamant Moloney was dropped not injured.

I was actually surprised he didnt drop his head last week and he played better than I gave him credit. But it is all relative!

I still dont rate him as a real loss because he is easy to coach against, but my belief is that he will still play.

Im still getting used to expecting nothing from the full forward.

Dont forget we had nearly the same amount of inside 50's as hawthorn.

Yes it does depend on the quality of the input, but it is definitely the forward line, and the dearth of any silver linings that has me worried the most.

I would rather Robbo be given enough rope than have to watch someone swing in the breeze.

Another bit of speculation about the omission of Beamer.......

Agree that delivery to the forwards was a major problem on the weekend, and IMO Beamer has always been a chronic offender in this regard. Admittedly the forwards didn't give him many options on Sunday, but perhaps there's no part in DB's game plan for a midfielder who habitually bombs it in and hopes for the best.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

Bailey is a [edited]

If you're going to abuse the guy at least show some wit and call him a "Craig Smoker".

[grazman 7,436]

Another theory maybe that neither Moloney or Petterd played according to instructions (lack of accountability)- actually I'd prefer this because it would mean regardless of how many possessions you get, you better do what your told or start learning at Sandy.

[Yze_Magic 3]

Another theory maybe that neither Moloney or Petterd played according to instructions (lack of accountability)-

Well then Bruce should be playing for Sandy Under 12's

He still wouldnt go in for a hardball

[joeboy 3,166]

Agree.

What explanation does it require for some?

DB has stated he will only play players when they are fully fit. Frustrating as it is.

Bruce ?

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

Another theory maybe that neither Moloney or Petterd played according to instructions (lack of accountability)- actually I'd prefer this because it would mean regardless of how many possessions you get, you better do what your told or start learning at Sandy.

Personally I'd prefer to see the likes of Robertson, Bruce, Green and Miller dropped for their lack of second and even first efforts.

[Keepin up with the Joneses 48]

Another theory maybe that neither Moloney or Petterd played according to instructions (lack of accountability)- actually I'd prefer this because it would mean regardless of how many possessions you get, you better do what your told or start learning at Sandy.

I guess we can't drop 16 players can we?

I feel for Beamer, especially when the leaders have done such a poor job.

I hope DB has all the answers and we win by 3 goals on Saturday. What do we know?

[Dee man 303]

I just watched 2 videos on Melbournetv - an interview with Paul Williams today and an interview with Brent Moloney on Sunday.

Williams said nothing about Moloney in regards to selection and avoided a question about Yze getting dropped.

Moloney said he pulled up fine after the game, the groin didnt trouble him at all. He said he hoped to 22 games this season...

Absolutely ridiculous decision to drop him.

[QueenC 74]

Absolutely ridiculous decision to drop him.

While that seems absolutely true to us, there simply must be some logical reason(s) from the coaching panel for the decision.

[Rogue 585]

I like the ins, although it's disappointing some other guys still haven't come up.

Dropping Yze was a good move, IMO. It'd be interesting to know the reasoning behind Moloney's ommission. Axis of Bob might be onto something.

i know a line up on thursday is nothing to go by but i still worry about our forward line...davey needs to play forward!!!

I totally agree.

As no one other than Weetra played above expectations on Sunday

You must have had expectations even lower than I did! I didn't see much from Weetra vs the Roos (at Casey Fields) or at the 'G last week. I can't recall his game vs Geelong in the pre-season, and didn't see the Ballarat/Cairns games, so maybe I missed something.

[Eastie Boyz 0]

Rivers not in - are we tanking already...

Don't expect Rivers to be the teams saviour.

Hasn't played a game of footy in about a decade and even at his best is no where near big enough to take Pavlich, Brown or Hall

[Hannabal 4]

I said elsewhere today (or yesterday) that Jones, McLean, McDonald, and Moloney are too slow to play together in the midfield. I guess they made their choice. I'm ok with that. You can't have all 4.

I was told that Petterd was terrible on sunday, but will get better. So I'm ok with that too. Yze is finished.

I thought that the slow Holland may replace the slow Newton and cause matchup problems for the Dogs. He's more aggressive and a better mark, although both have severe limitations. Holland is first emergency. Newton is lucky.

[Demon Jim 149]

I can't be stuffed reading the rest of this but my take is that Bailey is trying to add pace along the lines of Port Adelaide

Moloney could be a little bit sore, Rivers & Bate need another week to be certain. This is called injury management and Bailey has been clear about his view on unfit players

We are going to have to be patient while he works out his best 22 but the good news is he didn't bring in any old hacks like Holland (love him BTW but what's the point)

[Damo 3,357]

I see two of the emergencies coming in. Holland and Moloney.

If we are trying to win we need a solid body in the forward line whos likely to go frony and centre and take a mark.

And we need to keep one of the only players we've got who can keep up with them.

I see someone not making it from the forward line out of Robbo, Neiter or Newton.

There are a whole shout of arguments for any of those to miss.

I have to asume we are trying to win rather than just get the sour taste of defeat mingled with pithy posts of how its going to plan yada yada yada....

Again Wheatley seems to be sacred.

From a perennial rovers point of view Im miffed (!) that Valenti isnt uploaded to help Jones.

And while Im on it (Annies Lane), does any notice how Tadgh kennealy looks like this years model of Chris Judd?

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Well he manages to play excellent games for the Zebbies.. Hasnt been pulled up there.. ..so..enlighten me again..He's not fit ??

Did you see these games? Did he play out the full match? Is he extending himself in these games? How is pulling up from them? Is able to train fully atm?

[grazman 7,436]

And while Im on it (Annies Lane), does any notice how Tadgh kennealy looks like this years model of Chris Judd?

The good version or the broken one?

[Damo 3,357]

The good version or the broken one?

Youre a better judge than me but Id take him.

[Axis of Bob 11,830]

Errrrr, so what you want is to bring in Holland, drop Wheatley and have a midfield of Jones, McLean, Moloney, McDonald and Valenti. Maybe we could stick Adam Fisher in there too.

You didn't see the game last week, did you? Remember the bit where we were completely run off our legs by Hawthorn to the tune of 104 points?

You then speak of the virtues of possibly the two quickest players in the game!!

Yes, there are many people screaming blue murder about the team at the moment. But forgive me if my time on the websites has caused me to not think highly of the opinions of 'passionate supporters'.

[w00dy 146]

Again Wheatley seems to be sacred.

From a perennial rovers point of view Im miffed (!) that Valenti isnt uploaded to help Jones.

i thought wheatley was one of our better players last week... and for valenti to be promoted, someone needs to be put on the long term injury list, or retire for there to be room on the list... unfortunately barring an injury, i don't think we'll see him in the red and blue until next season...

[Damo 3,357]

Errrrr, so what you want is to bring in Holland, drop Wheatley and have a midfield of Jones, McLean, Moloney, McDonald and Valenti. Maybe we could stick Adam Fisher in there too.

You didn't see the game last week, did you? Remember the bit where we were completely run off our legs by Hawthorn to the tune of 104 points?

You then speak of the virtues of possibly the two quickest players in the game!!

Yes, there are many people screaming blue murder about the team at the moment. But forgive me if my time on the websites has caused me to not think highly of the opinions of 'passionate supporters'.

You seem to be pretty happy with your view of the game and want to pick the best footballer out of Wheatley, Holland Valenti and Maloney.

You say Fisher was [censored] but he was never given a chance. you say you play the game but I wonder if speed is your forte.

I saw the game from Barwon Heads, because it was northerly all day, not that you would have a clue what that means.

Were you there? Nup.

But a smug expert as always.

[Left Field 313]

I said elsewhere today (or yesterday) that Jones, McLean, McDonald, and Moloney are too slow to play together in the midfield. I guess they made their choice. I'm ok with that. You can't have all 4.

I was told that Petterd was terrible on sunday, but will get better. So I'm ok with that too. Yze is finished.

I thought that the slow Holland may replace the slow Newton and cause matchup problems for the Dogs. He's more aggressive and a better mark, although both have severe limitations. Holland is first emergency. Newton is lucky.

H I believe we had this discussion at some point of the last 18 months (on demonology).

You were all over the "hard at it, in and under types". I recall something like "outside midfielders - consistently inconsistent" or the like. I called for balance in the group. At one stage I proposed swapping Sylvia for Daniel Wells (and I stand by that swap if NM were stupid enough to do it).

Anyway. Blind Freddy can see we can't play those 4 together in the same midfield. First in if it comes our way, 2nd in if it doesn't. No runners to receieve. Nasty slow inside midfield we have, huh!

CAC and Danners were obsessed with the Brisbane model but the game has moved on.

[Jarka 767]

H I believe we had this discussion at some point of the last 18 months (on demonology).

You were all over the "hard at it, in and under types". I recall something like "outside midfielders - consistently inconsistent" or the like. I called for balance in the group. At one stage I proposed swapping Sylvia for Daniel Wells (and I stand by that swap if NM were stupid enough to do it).

Anyway. Blind Freddy can see we can't play those 4 together in the same midfield. First in if it comes our way, 2nd in if it doesn't. No runners to receieve. Nasty slow inside midfield we have, huh!

CAC and Danners were obsessed with the Brisbane model but the game has moved on.

How do you feel about Grimes?

[Axis of Bob 11,830]

Franky, it did come across badly but I wasn't trying to have a go at you. The comment about not seeing the game was rhetorical, as I didn't know nor particularly mind if you did or didn't. It merely led into a point about the midfield speeds of the two teams last week.

Although I was surprised that you wanted to bring in Valenti when our midfield is sooooo slow. Even most of our outside players are slow. The reference to Fisher was that he, too, was very slow. I think Valenti could be a handy little player in the Mitchell style, but Mitchell is surrounded by pace and skill while Valenti would be surrounded by the plod squad. Fisher won a lot of the ball but didn't have Valenti's class.

BTW, I'm not exactly a speed merchant! :D And even at my very agricultural level, a midfield filled with nothing but stocky clearance midfielders would struggle. You only need one or two or you'll get cut to shreds by decent opposition.

[grazman 7,436]

H I believe we had this discussion at some point of the last 18 months (on demonology).

You were all over the "hard at it, in and under types". I recall something like "outside midfielders - consistently inconsistent" or the like. I called for balance in the group. At one stage I proposed swapping Sylvia for Daniel Wells (and I stand by that swap if NM were stupid enough to do it).

Anyway. Blind Freddy can see we can't play those 4 together in the same midfield. First in if it comes our way, 2nd in if it doesn't. No runners to receieve. Nasty slow inside midfield we have, huh!

CAC and Danners were obsessed with the Brisbane model but the game has moved on.

Just so you don't feel alone SBT... I was also in the Wells for Sylvia camp... this year should provide us a very good indication of where both are at. Sylvia of course was out for disciplinary reasons and Wells by his own admission needs to be consistently better.