DeeSpencer

Depends on the role and the game style I guess. The perfect game of footy would have 0 tackles because you'd always have the ball. And if Spencer is winning the hit outs then just win the clearance and stuff tackling! But I agree on the sentiment I guess. We seem to laud the guy who gets 30 disposals in the VFL when the guy who had 20 might've done a lot more for the team.

7 marks is nice for Weideman. I'd like him to get 20 touches and kick 5 goals every week but if he's just building his fitness and body then I'm happy if he does the job that separates good key forwards from bad ones which is take marks.

Fair point. I think we signalled our intentions with the leadership group of Jones, Vince, Viney, T Mc and Gawn (and Garland). The culture and leadership is focused on players who perform now, not just those who work hard. The young players have to follow Viney and Gawn now and fortunately those 2 guys have the performance on the board to demand respect. The Bailey days culture of hoping young kids would learn from flawed leaders wasn't any good, but the Neeld idea that the club would somehow improve on the basis of training hard without any leaders who could show the way on field was just as bad. The performance of the first 5 picked probably influences the club more than performance of the last 5 picked each week as long as the fringe guys at Casey feel valued and if they're winning each week they probably aren't too upset. Grimes is the only one who has a case to feel upset.

I don't see those goals as mutually exclusive. I also think our best forward line and midfield have played almost every week. We haven't tossed out older guys to fit younger ones in, we just have very few experienced players in those parts of the ground. We've certainly sidelined a few older defenders, but I see that as a response to the drastic change in game style and also injuries. Had Dunn and Lumumba been fit and playing the entire preseason and on to now then they might be in the side. They were both in the side in round 3 and since then have both had injuries.

I'm not fully convinced of that. Garlett was a bit of special exemption, but it was right. Who else do we have on our list who's ever kicked 4 goals in a game? Watts, Hogan, Kent is that it? Hogan the only one who's kicked 40 goals in a season. Grimes has been unlucky, but when Matt Jones is coming in ahead of you I don't think that's a choice for the future. The next 8 weeks will tell the story with Grimes but when he gets his chance I expect the coaches to be vindicated. Michie, ANB and Newton all got limited chances but Harmes, Vanders and Kennedy are in their spots and we aren't exactly welded on to those guys. Harmes and Kennedy in particularly received outstanding reviews for the games they were dropped for. Oscar's mistake prone games have also featured some very good positioning and the willingness to work off the ball. Dunn didn't do that and has had injuries. Garland, was just as bad as Oscar and last week was his only good VFL game, he even came back in after just some ordinary performances.

Frost makes mistakes. But keeping Jenkins to 2 goals and limited impact when he had kicked 38 goals in 13 games before yesterday is a solid job. His speed and agility make him a possible defensive weapon as his gets more experience and it also means he has the ability to get out of trouble if he can just find a bit more composure. Unlike Tom McDonald who needs space to out run an opponent Frost has the speed and strength to break the lines. I'm not going to say he'll be a star or make it long term but what's the point of being a 6 win 8 loss team and not playing a guy with Frost's potential?

Roos has been playing the kids since his very first game at Melbourne - JKH. He's been faced with the reality that so many of the senior players he inherited just haven't been up to it. And already this year we've seen guys who were regulars in previous years in Garland and Dunn make way, just as Grimes did last year. Dawes might be next. I'd go without him this week, but probably have him favourite to be back in against the Saints. From then on it's 6 weeks left and if he's not performing it's the right time of the year to trial Weeds and Hulett. The only other consideration is probably Casey finals and working out who qualifies and who we'd like to have down there.

There's no right answer with the tall forwards. Hasn't been all season. So in the slippery Darwin conditions why play any of them? Time for Michie to have a run in the midfield. He's been the best clearance player all season at Casey. He'd still know a bit about Freo players from his time there and he's usually good with a slippery pill. Petracca to spend more time closer to goal. Vanders to play at half forward. Out: Dawes In: Michie Dawes, Hulett and Pedersen (if fit) can all play at Casey and compete to come back in next week.

His stats and times in the best this year suggest he's more consistent and doing well playing as a half forward sacrificing his game to allow Casey to play 3 or 4 other talls in the forward line. 18 goals, 6 times in the best from 10 games. http://www.foxsportspulse.com/team_info.cgi?action=PSTATS&pID=194472567&client=1-118-10449-392693-8069487&ocompID=392693 Sam Lloyd kicked 38 goals from 17 games at Frankston before he was drafted. I'd say given he's a bit older that Smith would want to build on his form for the rest of the year but it's a shame there's not mid season drafts and we couldn't give him a run instead of the current options of Dawes/Pedda or the kids who aren't ready.

Haha harsh but not necessarily wrong. Although Oscar is young, that can't be denied. He had another bad but almost good day today, in that there were several occasions when he moved to the right position with the right intent and still botched it. Still wasn't the worst young tall defender on the ground, that was Lever. Your comment about what cuts it in an aspiring team is interesting. Replacing a guy willing to do the hard yards with one who can't doesn't really sound like a plan to me. At the very least Matt Jones and Bugg are part of setting the standards on the work rate required and letting everyone know what's needed come preseason. If young players want his spot then they can show during preseason and in the GPS data that they deserve it!

Fair point. I'm just sick of seeing people who don't understand the importance of elite runners in a team, particularly when it comes to the outside mids. So when I saw the sooner the better I probably unfairly lumped you in with that group. Seems to be a fair bit of it around, even from AFL coaches who don't grasp it. Clarko led the way with Hill and Smith torching the wings and it's taken years for other clubs to adapt. The Giants use Scully, Whitfield and Kelly to great benefit. Sydney have Hannebery as a weapon inside but have focused on getting more run in their side. Matt Jones is a bit of a necessary evil right now. And I will defend Buggy. He won some crucial contests today and has done it most of the year. To have a guy who's going to always be running to provide an option and you can trust that if you kick it his way he'll give his all to win it is very handy. I don't mind the idea of him being the 22nd picked each week and in the side because he'll work his backside off covering others and put his body on the line. We'll have a good team if we can start leaving him out. Or if we can get him to use his right side he could probably stick in the team as a quality player. That would be a nice option!

Salem and Kelly (who will be the best) likely played a lot of TAC. But Robert Shaw was probably pleased he didn't have to give up Hunt, even if he was stick thin and unpolished. Kelly, Salem, Freeman, Zac Merrett, Karl Amon and a bottom aged Angus Brayshaw would've made a pretty handy TAC midfield at Sandringham Dragons that year.

I thought his first quarter was good. Bit of both in the middle half of the game. Had chances to go forward with the ball and passed them up. Then the error in the last term that's classic Matt Jones. 0 tackles as well is poor. Maybe one of Bugg, M Jones and Stretch can make way but our run will suffer. If you want to take 2 of them out then prepare for Grimes or inside midfielder on the wing. Please explain how that will help us? Stretch is young. Harmes is young and learning about the wing role (and half back today). Melksham might be an option next year. Hunt could easily go to a wing but we need him at half back. Salem needs a heap of fitness once healthy so he can do the hard running. We are short on wing options. Just like Dawes at CHF sometimes a high work rate player with limited skills offers more than an exciting young player who doesn't have the physical ability to do the job.

Spoils - including several that came after long hard runs to cut off possession, chases, hard ball gets, bursts from congestion and a fantastic goal. He tired a bit in the 2nd half but his 2nd quarter was brilliant. He changed the game.

We had Kent, Petracca and Garlett from half back ALL DAY. They had Cameron, Betts and Douglas do the same. They started with 7 back on our 5 forwards. We had 5 defenders and the rolling in half forward set up in the diamond against their 5 forwards. We then placed the spare half back flanker (usually Hunt) out near a wing, and therefore had 2 on 1 on that wing. Our plan was for Gawn to hit it out towards the wing with the spare and then get clearances that way. Obviously for the first quarter and at the start of the 3rd it was awful. Watts went back in the 3rd to give us an extra number deep back. Both teams were happy to roll the dice at centre clearances with a forward coming through. With Adelaide's extra down back and ours on a wing. It was an interesting tactical battle. 16-15 centre clearances a piece and most of the early 3rd quarter stuff came from the team being asleep. Maybe we didn't capitalise on Gawn enough, but then again Sloane/Thompson/Crouch bro's is probably a stronger midfield than what we had out there today in Jones/Viney/Tyson/Vanders

A couple of underdone inside mids playing on the wing isn't going to solve anything. Vanders and Ben Kennedy might make way for those 2 in the next few weeks, but we played as well as we have all year today due to having a fit team capable of running with a top opponent. There's a reason for that. I wonder if the footy department will consider Brayshaw for half back. Harmes was good there today but could go back on a wing. Half back might be the best thing for Brayshaw's develop in the next 8 weeks, I'd love to see it.

For those who CBF'ed watching what's the answers?

In summary, I think we are downhill skiing a bit right now. We sense a kill and the team lifts and we play fast, aggressive, skillful footy. We play good teams and the pressure gets to us and we become fumbly, disjointed in the backline and lazy going forward. It's ok if that's where we are at, but at least once in the last 9 games we have to grind out a 4 quarter performance against a good team to take confidence in to next year.

There's a big gap between the good and bad sides at the moment and we are in the middle. Unfortunately we've faired poorly against the Saints and Power who are in the same bracket as us. We had a good shot at North. Beat GWS playing up and down footy in round 1, which is never a true form guide. Were right in the game against an undermanned Hawthorn in conditions that suited us. Where are we at/where are we heading is really hard to measure right now. We are playing a game style that does open the game up more this year which is a huge positive. Our inability to pressure teams is a massive negative though. I know we are a young side but the lack of pressure against good teams is a huge concern for me. Then again, if we start to get pressure on against good teams we've got the talent and game style to capitalise. The last 9 games will almost all be big tests for us. 4 against top 8 teams - Adel, Haw, WC, Geel 2 important winnable games at the G that the pressure will be on for - GC, Carl 3 road (if you count Etihad) games against similar teams that we haven't won in years prior - St K, Freo, Port No more early season, expectation free games where we can just turn up and smash an out of form Rich or Coll, and if GC get players back there's no easy beats.

Matt Jones wasn't and probably never will be damaging, but we don't have an Isaac Smith on our list, and there's only a few of those types in the whole comp. And even someone like Scully who might be the AA wingman right now still has shonky as can be kicking. Stretch was in our best players against the Dogs and Lions. Was moved around a bit against Port. Did nothing wrong against Collingwood and has the bye to freshen up. I'd keep him in. I'd probably play Matt Jones as well. Start one on each wing lining up on Seedsman and David McKay who are pretty similar players, although Seedsman in particular has more kicking penetration. That would free up Bugg to play as a defensive half forward on Brodie Smith, who along with Rory Laird are the main drivers of Adelaide's ball movement from half back. The alternative is leaving Bugg on the wing and deciding between Stretch, Matt Jones and Harmes for the other 2 spots. Or Harmes coming in and dropping another half forward. I just hope we put time in to Adelaide's running defenders, and I'm not all that worried about having 2 wingmen who don't do a lot of damage as long as they do the hard running and are efficient with the ball. If they get back to help the defenders then get the ball to Kent, Petracca and Watts leading out to the wings then those 3 especially can make things happen for us going forward.

We gave Jeff a lifeline from stuck in the VFL at Carlton straight in to our best 22, but I don't want to do it now, not when he's got a 3 year deal coming up. He needs to put the runs on the board at VFL level and show that his defensive game and ball winning are up to scratch. He can have a pass for the game played out in a bog, but with Casey winning by 90 points on the weekend there's no excuse for not playing well as a small forward.

Adelaide play with 4 tall forwards. No way Oscar McDonald will be dropped unless it's for Garland, and I don't see the need for that yet. Vince probably gets a week. Matt Jones in, Bugg to half back. Otherwise it's a question of whether we need to change up any of the other bottom 6 types, with Harmes the main candidate to come in. Personally I'd go Harmes for Trengove and send Trenners back to Casey to work on his speed and spread from the contest. One more week for Vanders, Kennedy, Oliver, Dawes etc. There's not a lot pushing up at Casey and after the bye is probably the wrong time to be too reactive.

Stretch didn't have a good game, but clean outside runners who can run and break the lines are more important, not less in wet weather. They won't get a heap of ball but they can provide the scoring chances. Replacing Stretch with a plodder on the wing wouldn't have changed the result. We needed to win the ball inside to get it to Stretch more. Maybe a case can be made for Harmes instead of him but if the ball isn't coming away from the contest with any quality the winger on the outside is stuffed regardless. Oscar, we probably could've done without. But if there's a strong bodied, quick, skillful defender at Casey I'd like to know who it is. Michie, Grimes or Garland in his spot wouldn't have changed the game. Our midfield need to lift to be able to match the best, then across the ground we have to lift our pressure skills. We have to be faster to apply pressure and better under pressure. Sydney are always so quick to set up to provide options for their team mates and then they are so efficient in the way they hunt the other team with the footy whilst covering options.

The Bugg one was as deliberate as they come. He knew it, you could see the look on his face. What was the other one? I think Oscar actually was called for holding the ball not deliberate. The umpire just missed the high contact where Oscar got a whack across the face, otherwise it would've been holding the ball. The umpiring was strange. It started out with them paying absolutely nothing in the first quarter as the Pies threw the ball around and Melbourne players were infringed, then as the game went on they started paying more, particularly more holding the balls. The did an ok job. I'd prefer them to miss a few than pay too many. But there were the usual bad calls. IMO Hogan should've got a repeat shot for goal after he was slung to the ground after he kicked.

Pre illness he looked to me like a young man who's bulked up a bit with much needed muscle and maybe still a bit of puppy fat, which is better than just been skinny and copping contact injuries. He might well have thinned down as the season went on. And certainly he has to build his tank but it's better than average and well on the right track. The progress of the Hawks is hopefully what Salem can do. Just a shame he's had these delays.