DeeSpencer

Adelaide - Walker, Jenkins, McGovern West Coast - Kennedy, Lycett, Darling GWS - Patton, Cameron, Himmelberg Port have played 3 or even 4 at times. Cats had Hawkins, Esava and Menzel who plays like a tall. Usually the third tall is more around the low to mid 190's and a mobile target with good defensive skills. It's the defensive skills that will undo our 3 tall set up. Especially given we don't have established smalls in that role. 4 tackles inside 50 was a poor result against the Saints. Bugg and Garlett are rightfully out of the side due to lack of skill/lack of contest. Kent injured. ANB struggling. Spargo looks good but he's more suited as a half forward with some good pressure skills. Petracca has the agility to defend really well, time to show it. Hannan inconsistent in his pressure, as is Melksham, he's not a natural at it. The other weakness with our talls is none of the 3 seem suited as good inside 50 kicks. Jack Riewoldt, Hawkins and Walker are right up there with the best in the comp for kicking to a lead inside 50.

Wonder why I'm negative. Must be all those finals we've played in recently? If you play ordinary against a terrible side it doesn't help you against better sides. It's a simple concept. I think our defensive effort and contested ball against Richmond was far better than against the Saints. If we defended like we did against Richmond then the Saints wouldn't have scored for 3/4's. Or at least 1 goal 7 knowing them.

We beat a terrible side by playing in fits and spurts. Purely with decent goal kicking the Saints would've been well clear at 1/4 time and in the game for far longer. In similar form in rounds 1-3 we ended up losing round 4-5. Last week was a half of sticking in a game and a half of very good football (until junk time). The second half last week was the standard we should aim for. At no stage today did we tackle or dominate around the ball to the same extent as last weeks second half. Today we played like a middle of the road team beating a bad team. That's ok. Don't be upset by it. Just recognise we can get better.

Didn't do much in the hit outs (zero actually) but a few nice handballs when up around the play in the ruck. Actually looks very comfortable using his hands in traffic, can handball both sides nicely.

A couple of long center clearances in to outnumbered forward 50's and strong defensive marks in those turnover stats I'd suggest. Kicks could be better but really it's part of the game plan. Bomb it forward and let the forwards do the rest.

Gus might have been best on today. Great game. But maybe his best moment was when he kept his head up and bumped a Saints player square in the side and kept after the loose ball. Hurt the guy too. Most importantly he kept that head of his well out of trouble and was safe to keep contesting.

The thing that stood out to me today with Gus was his defensive work rate. He was the midfielder fastest back to help the backline. I think that's the role which will make him most valuable in the short term. It should allow Oliver and Jones to hunt the ball, and Viney to hunt the man, ball and whatever else he likes to do. In terms of long term, finals are rarely won by match winners kicking 4+ these days but often won by a classy important big goal that caps off 2 or 3 or 3.5 quarters of sustained quality. Cotchin was the guy for Richmond last year who set the tone and kept them in or ahead in games. Martin then finished them off. Gus is far more like Cotchin and Tracc is more like Dusty. Both have a way to go but that's what I'd like to dream of.

Lynch is out for a long spell with a PCL knee injury. They played Day and a young ruck. Not sure how far away 2m Peter is from playing again. If he's not in then the obvious call is probably to just go with Lever and Oscar, but we could also experiment with Joel Smith on the young ruckman to give him a run. I'm not suggesting we gamble too much with our best team. Play like we did today and we are a huge chance of being beaten by any other side. But I also think we're going to need another tall down back at some stage this year. I guess I'm inspired by Clarko who's always a game or a month or a year ahead of the league and often brings young guys in when he feels the timing is right.

I didn't watch the game live which makes it harder to see the defensive work rates and break downs but I thought from the TV he was ok in that regard. His clean hands to get the ball once again were a massive tick. People underestimate how valuable that is. But he was slow to use it and got caught (sometimes pinged unfairly IMO). Kicking was the usual hit and miss and not a lot of creative use. Again, it comes back to the fact I won't criticise an inside clearance player too much when he's playing on the wing all game. Not sure why they can't spread his playing time through the middle and half forward a bit more and it's interesting to see what happens with Viney back. But for now if Tyson breaks even then there's plenty of others who can win their match ups.

Definitely true. You need better one on one defenders and better spread of forwards at the G but more than anything it really tests your midfield spread. Without the midfield running our backline gets exposed. I'm sure the hope is the young mids get fitter and start to spread better and cut down the chances. Against the Tigers we played the ground and opponent pretty well and it was only the break downs that let them get open runners that contributed to easier goals. Otherwise it would've been about 8 goals a piece for 3 quarters. The other thing we love to do is kick across the ground and change the angles and at the G it's just too tempting to go wide and get stuck in space. If our defending improves we can attack more through the guts at the G.

Viney in. But leave the midfield as is and just let him run around half forward and pressure and compete. Put him in ANB's spot. Maybe some swapping on ball with Harmes if needed. I doubt Salem will overcome a thumb in 1 week. If he does then it's a matter of whether Vince or Lewis need a rest, if they drop Tyson or probably I'd go Lewis back to the wing, Fritsch to half forward and go smaller up forward to get more pressure, in which case Weeds is unlucky and misses out. With Hannan, Fritsch, Petracca and Melksham all strong overhead I don't think we need 3 tall forwards, we're only playing the 3 because we lack the midfield/half back options as is. Regardless of Salem's health it's probably a week to consider if we need to get a 2nd genuine tall defender a run because there's other teams coming up that have 3 big guys

Going hard at a wingman, I definitely agree with that. Gaff looms as the logical target and I think our inactivity to solve the problem last year was to not pay overs for a stop gap and then lose the flexibility of going hard for Gaff. Heck I'd be on the lookout for 2. One to replace Lewis and one to replace Tyson. I can't have Garlett in the team until he shows he wants the ball. Insipid efforts at the contest and even refusing to go get the ball when 5m clear of an opponent. Yes, a good small forward deep and moving Spargo up makes sense. I can live with ANB until Jeff shows a better endeavour, don't want to rush Spargo in to too much either. The coaches went with Harmes on a wing at the start of the year but he's too keen to get in to the contest. Physically he can run the wing but Tyson is probably more disciplined and smarter at keeping space. Harmes is best used where his desire to compete is harnessed in a defensive role, be it as a defensive forward, a defensive inside mid (not a tagger so much but someone who can run contest to contest and tackle) as he was on the weekend or even as a combative backman. Viney coming back and no further injuries probably means Harmes competes with Tyson for a wing spot. I'm just not convinced that will be a long term answer either.

Geelong in Geelong and Hawthorn in Tassie are not easy ways to judge a team. The Saints weren't too bad against the Crows, should've beat GWS and took care of Brisbane at Etihad. The idea that they are completely horrendous isn't true. They struggle to score but are pretty honest effort wise. It's probably a bigger test than Essendon who have bigger holes around the ball. Play like we did in the first half against Essendon and we won't win. Play too over confidently and make silly mistakes and we won't win either.

Problem is Salem played half back on the weekend. So you'd have to move Brayshaw to half back or the wing and Tyson on ball. That's a lot of shuffling.

Probably Wagner in for Salem. Although I wouldn't be against giving Stretch another chance and moving Lewis to half back. Tim Smith really the only likely option as forward if there's injuries or if they want to drop ANB or go smaller. Maynard had the job on Steven in preseason. He'd be an option, but I think they'll stick with Harmes and Brayshaw in the midfield providing the defensive cover to Jones and Oliver.

Where exactly do you want those guys to play though? ANB's best position is the high half forward role, he comes up to stoppages as an extra midfielder and then uses his elite endurance to get out in space, I'm fine with him there, he's just way out of form. I'd give Tyson a run at half forward and some time on the ball to mix things up but really the wing might be the best spot to get him in the team and what better options do we have? I'd play Stretch more but he got 1 chance in a huge pressure game and wasn't up to it. After him who else do we have for the wing? Lewis in on the other wing and he's just as poorly suited to it as Tyson is. Oskar Baker almost certainly isn't ready. Fritsch should be one day but he doesn't have the endurance and will tire and make simple mistakes. Spargo maybe, but that's asking a lot of a young body and no good if the opposition have a pair of 6'3 wingmen. The preseason plan was for Jones and Harmes. They were the starting wings in a lot of training drills. Lewis was half back. Tyson rotated in. Viney's injury and Petracca's form/fitness has forced Jones back inside and Harmes wasn't really working and been needed forward/ruck and is another player better on ball than wing anyway. I don't like Tyson on a wing but I'll live with it until we have other mature midfielders to push him out.

His kicking continues to be a let down but his clean hands around the contest has been super valuable the last two weeks. I certainly agree he isn't a wingman. Wouldn't mind putting him across half forward as the high half forward, replacing ANB and then moving Hannan and Fritsch to the wing. Maybe just rotate those forwards and Tyson through the forward line more and try lots of different options. Or we wait until Viney comes in and then move Jones/Harmes to the wing. Not that those guys are really wingmen either, both will be too see ball get ball to really make it on the wing but at least they can break the lines and keep up defensively. Harmes had the most pressure points on the weekend. His defensive in tight speed was valuable. So I can't see Tyson suddenly getting put in that centre square role any time soon. Wing really is the spot where we have the least depth. After Lewis and Tyson it's only Stretch as ready to go back up and he had a shocker against the Tigers.

I was saying yesterday to a friend that he has to be top 10 smartest footballers in the team already. Of course the challenge is for him to keep playing his natural game and not let the over coaching and criticism that all AFL players get, plus the oppositions attention get to him and start second guessing himself. Fritsch is another very crafty player and adding just a few more smart players really helps the team balance.

I'd rather Harmes never touches the ball but his defensive work around the ground was very good today. Jones, Oliver and Brayshaw could hunt the ball because Harmes was the negating midfielder. Petracca in his spot would be adding in another attacking midfielder and distorting the tentative balance we found today.

ANB is in terrible form but I wouldn't directly replace him with Petracca, not when the rest of the forward line is mostly taller players without great pressure or fitness. One of the talls has to make way if Tracc comes back - and that's an if at this stage. I'm a Weid's fan and he was very good against Richmond and ok today - he's especially handy around the ground as a ruck. But to get Tracc back in he's the logical out as Tommy Mc builds fitness. I don't believe that Weideman is hampered by returning to Casey. He's still young enough that he doesn't desperately need games. The bench at the end of the game was Tommy Mc, Hogan, Melksham and Salem. I'd be watching to see if they are all right to go during the week. Tim Smith would have to be in the wings as well if Hogan or Petracca isn't right or if Tommy pulls up sore. In fact if the club believe Smith can do something as a midfield type player as a high half forward he might be the way to replace ANB. Double change - Weids and ANB for Petracca and Smith - that way you keep the same forward pressure and don't lose the aerial threat. Maynard is about the only other option to replace ANB. He could play high half forward and maybe swap in and out with Harmes and Tracc.

He's out of form and down on fitness by the looks of how much he's often blowing. But his pace makes a huge different both in attack and defending. We really don't have anyone to bring in for him. The backline were excellent all day and I wouldn't make a change.

McKenna - contracted and was back training at the start of preseason Johnstone - contracted, coming in to his 2nd year and we need to develop small forwards. Should be played down back at Casey to learn how to win more easy footy but more often that not his tackle numbers are up. Bit early to give up on him. JKH - received a contract mid last year presumably to give him belief to persist with dominant VFL form and break back in. Poor decision mid year but I get the logic Vanders - the club rates him as do I, with 45 on the list we can afford one long term injured player Flippers - young ruck, the club are clearly trying to develop the next ruck after Gawn now rather than later, if not him it would be another ruck in his spot Balic has a tight hammy so forget about him. Otherwise there is Hannan, Frost, Pedersen, Joel Smith, JKH, Maynard and Bugg (who was contracted) plus three draft picks in Fritsch, Spargo and even Petty all available to come in and whilst there's no world beaters there all of them (besides the young guys) have performed to some level at AFL. Also, Weideman competed just fine against the best backline in the AFL. He needed match fitness at Casey before he was ready to come in. It's too early to say he's really right to go as a long term player but aside from one terrible shot for goal he did a lot right. The biggest problem with our list is our top 7 or so A graders mostly aren't truly elite reliable performers yet and our decent B graders (say 8th to 18th picked each week) depth is a little short of what we need with some older guys (Lewis, Vince, Garlett) falling out of that category and leaving us without a good solid small forward or outside mid. No point getting caught up with the C graders who fill out the last 4-6 spots each week.

Didn't get the return for it up the field but Gawn, Oliver and Jones in particular did enough in the guts to keep Martin playing there and not able to go forward for large chunks. We kept them honest that way. And we kept Martin under pressure and bouncing from one fend to the other largely without sprinting away from contests and being dangerous with the ball. Many of his possessions went: A) Fend, fend, fend, uncalled throw Or B) Fend, fend, fend, shanked kick to no one.

We couldn't simply keep Howe. The clown thought he was a forward. Roos - one of the best defenders of all time and allegedly one of the best man management coaches of all time - couldn't convince him he was a defender. He was also very happy to pick and choose when to put in effort. We got Hibberd, a vital back flanker that we needed to fill one gap down back anyway. We gave up two first round picks and got Lever and a 2nd rounder that became Harry Petty. If they turn out to be quality 3rd tall and CHB then no one will complain about the two first round picks. Lever's contract might be more troublesome but not if it's well structured. Premiership windows are overrated. Richmond jumped right back in to one with 3 trades. We can open a premiership window with good coaching, development of young top end talent in to genuine A graders, refining the role players and finding a couple of big upgrades in certain positions of weakness.

Why can't we get the balance between who's up and who's down right in the backline: 1. most of our defenders are proficient over head but we can't seem to turn that to an advantage. Houli, Ellis and Short don't bother flying with Rance, Grimes and Astbury around mainly because they know they'll spoil but also because they just aren't that big or strong in the air. 2. We like the zone. Which means different match ups for different defenders. It's not always small on small. 3. Lack of trust in the talls. Oscar's only starting to win more than he loses now and Lever has been shaky. Eventually those guys will get stronger and more reliable. But more than anything: 4. Lack of continuity. Lever is new. Hibberd 1 season at the club. Hunt and Wagner how many games together? Oscar how many games? The 2nd/3rd tall spot might take some rotating but overwhelmingly we hopefully have a backline that can keep most of the parts together over multiple seasons. That will be a huge help.