Wiseblood

Sounds like a Clayton Oliver clone. We don't need another.

I agree 100%. Just thought it goes to show how much we miss that second key forward that even old dee is asking for Weideman to get selected.

Never thought I'd see the day that OD was advocating for Weideman to get picked. Strange times indeed.

Apologies that I've just picked out one of your many good points across both sections, Luther, but I thought this was key. Two weeks ago against Carlton we looked terrific... when the game was played on our terms. When Carlton changed it up, we had no answer for it. We didn't make any adjustments or try something different to stop it. Then, this week, when Geelong got it on their terms... the same thing happened. We just allowed them to chip it around time and time again. While it didn't necessarily work totally in their favour, it again showed that unless the game is played on our terms, we lack the ability to adapt and change things around to make a difference. We just stick with what we do and hope it's enough. The problem is that it isn't enough, and things need to change.

Fair point, but if we're being honest, Hibberd and Salem are getting dropped before Rivers is. He has been in better form than both of them.

Two terrific selections from our recruiters at the moment. I love that Rivers is a natural back flanker - he knows when to run and knows when to defend.

Richmond fans currently high fiving each other as their season gets back on track.

I'll respectfully disagree on that one, bin. I won't argue that his skill set is what we are missing. He was a great kick of the footy and he was capable of being a game changer for us on occassion. However, we all know that he could be laconic, bordering on the lazy at times, and when things got tough, he rarely got going. Think back to his time at the club and he would go missing more than he would make an impact, and in the games where we needed him most, he wouldn't do a lot and most would be in here berating his performance for hours on end. Moving on Watts is not a mistake and nor is it the problem. He wouldn't make a lick of difference to our side right now. And of course Clarkson might have made it work... but the bloke is at Hawthorn. Not Melbourne. And he is the greatest coach of the modern era. It wasn't going to work at Melbourne.

We are 1-1 since the restart. It could so easily be 0-2... but then it could very easily have been 2-0 as well. At least we aren't getting smashed like others are.

Vanders looked like a bloke who hasn't played AFL footy in 18 months. He struggled with the pace of the game, but I kind of expected that. I like Vanders, but I think they played him a little too soon. I'd have left him in the twos playing scratch matches for a few more weeks before playing him. It's why they dropped Bennell so it's kind of strange that they played him.

I'd move Melksham into the midfield on a permanent basis. Yes, he's out of form, but he is one player who can be creative with ball in hand and hit targets forward of centre. He might take a few risks and turn it over, but at least he is trying something. I would have Fritsch play anywhere but inside 50 for the time being. He is terrific on the lead, but he is even better with ball in hand. I'd have him leading up from 50-70 metres out, then wheeling around to deliver quickly inside 50 as often as possible. For that reason, I'd also have Salem up the ground. I know they like his disposal coming out of the back half, but I don't see that as an issue. Get him up to a rotation on the wing and even on a forward flank. That leaves what happens inside 50. I'd have McDonald deep forward with Weideman/Brown up at CHF. Pickett is given the freedom to do as he pleases inside 50 as long as he is chasing and harassing when the ball hits the deck. From there, you could have one of Bennell/Bedford as a smaller type forward with better skills, while having someone else like Hannan as another medium forward who can hit a few targets as well. I'd also look to have Trac be a midfielder for 90% of the time. Give him a spell forward every now and then, especially to mix things up a bit, but he gives us a different dynamic (as Melksham would) to Oliver, Viney and Gus. None of these things will probably happen, but interested in what other people think all the same.

Anyone asking for Tomlinson to be dropped must have the IQ of a boiled potato.

Hogan wanted out. Yes, we were probably happy to see it happen in the end based on his off field issues, but we can't do much about it when the bloke was 12 months away from leaving anyway. Watts was going nowhere with us. If I'm being honest, he would be doing the same stuff for us right now that he always did when the chips were down and he would be copping it big time from us supporters. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but losing these two isn't the problem. What we do with the ball is. Some will say we are a tall forward short right now, and I'd agree. It's time to see what Weid or Brown can give us inside 50 to support T Mac.

Our defence, and the players in it, are the least of our worries right now. Look at the other end. You'll find plenty to pick apart there.

I agree. Right now, one thing we need is continuity. We made five changes last week, so I'd like to see no more than two this week. At the minimum I think one of Weideman of Brown needs to come in to the side, for either Melksham or Hunt. Other than that I think we're okay across the board. Making more major changes will achieve nothing right now.

I heard Weideman kicked 10. This means he'll now be named emergency for the scratch match next weekend.

Yep. Getting hold of the footy isn't the problem. Getting it inside 50 isn't a problem. You could even argue that, right now, we aren't really a problem defensively. We've given up only 7 goals to each of the two teams we've played. It's just everything else - how we use it, how we run to position, how we make decisions - that is hurting us the most right now. We need to fix it, and quickly - but do we have the capacity to do it? Time will tell.

Cheers to both of you. This is in line with what I thought, too. Seemed a little more composed from what I saw and did his job defensively. He is clearly not the problem with our side at the minute. We have more pressing concerns.

Hey dazzle - sorry to piggyback off your comment, but what were your thoughts on Joel Smith? From what I could see he had a better game than last week, but interested in what you thought all the same.

I've now flicked through the replay. Thanks @titan_uranus for the measured response. It's appreciated, and I can't argue with what you've said one bit. The only thing I want to add is that we got it right when we selected Pickett. Our forward line, while still dysfunctional, looks a little bit more exciting with him roaming around. He gets to position well and it's only a matter of time before he hits the scoreboard, and hits it hard. Disappointing loss with the same old problems. One to next week I guess.

@titan_uranus or @Nasher- thoughts on the game? I ask you two as I didn't see a single second of the game and I trust you both to give a decent summary of the game that isn't run only on emotion. Cheers.

Times might change, but talent stays regardless. Neitz, Lyon, Schwartz etc all had talent for the game that would translate into the modern game if they were trained under modern conditions. Could you imagine 1994 Ox roaming around inside forward 50? He was fit, athletic and took mark after mark. We still do that today and he would be our number one forward.

Interesting time to bring this to the fore - you don't think for a second that the Eagles being in the hub has had an effect on their overall performance? We didn't set the world alight in Round 1, but the Eagles were on their home deck and fresh off a good pre-season. There is nothing to suggest that it makes that loss look any 'worse'.

Another season derailed? He is almost blaming everyone else for the predicament the Bombers find themselves in. Arrogance and ignorance do go hand in hand.

Going by those highlights... We dominated.