DeeSpencer

We managed to win a 2nd game in a row and in the process show exactly why we usually don't win 2 in a row. That's a rare achievement. I'd be keen to see 2 really good performances in a row.

Possibly a down fall of zone defending. Or laziness/lack of awareness to get the match up right. If the Dogs were playing Boyd, Redpath, Roughead and 2 rucks they would've had 3 if not 4 talls on the field. With Dunn off that left McDonald, Garland and Wagner as the taller defenders. Maybe at times they were happy for Jetta to take the 3rd tall forward instead of Wagner. That's one thing I'm happy to let slide during a preseason game. It should be an easy fix come the real stuff.

If your argument is that we are young an inexperienced I'll agree with you. My concern is that we are young, inexperienced and not very good. I thought that this year we would have enough experience in the midfield and backline and enough young talent up forward to win at least 8 games. If that is going to be the case then we can't justify barely scraping past the Bulldogs depth players with near on a full side.

Grimes is on his way out as a football, Oliver is just getting started. And about 1 in 3 of Grimes' disposals is either a turnover or a momentum killer. That said, his work off the ball is going to superior to Oliver's and probably to any other option we have for the wing, especially since Stretch has hardly been sighted so far. We have to run with the best sides to beat them, we can't just throw kids in and expect them to keep up to seasoned endurance freaks. So prepare to be a bit disappointed if Grimes is starting on a wing and Oliver isn't. The good news is Oliver looks a very good shot of finding a place in the half forward/midfield rotation.

Some badly missing sarcasm detectors in the last few posts. Well done Wrecker and LDC

We beat the Dogs in near identical preseason circumstances last year. We beat Collingwood at the height of Neeld rubbish. We beat Richmond in Roos' first year. There's a myth that we never won preseason matches. Just as there's a myth that a reasonably decent 7 win team from last season needs to win presesaon games this year to somehow change the culture. Playing good football is the important goal and we failed miserably today. The gulf in the age, experience and allegedly talent between the two teams today should've been a 10 goal win not a 10 point win.

I can't speak for Steve but if we smashed them by 50 I'd be saying that's a pretty good performance and there likely would've been many positives. We beat a reserves team by 2 goals. It's a pretty simple scenario to work out it wasn't a good performance. For some ridiculous reason we have to pretend it was because it could be worse? Come on. But it's not only about the scoreboard. I would've liked to have seen someone from outside the best 22 put their hands up for a game. Or someone show they've gone to another level. We saw Oliver. Watts, Gawn and Viney look in good nick, but we knew that last week. Matt Jones and Grimes are having a crack on the wing and Bugg is a goer. But there really hasn't been anything else of note from young players. Bulldogs fans are sitting back enjoying that without 16 of their best they nearly beat a near full strength side. Trust me, I'd be the first to celebrate the honourable nature of that loss if it was us.

Hogan and Petracca makes 2, Brayshaw would be a nice 3rd. Trengove is excluded as Clay Smith from the Dogs is also excluded, we don't know what he'll be when he's back yet. That accounts (and being generous) for Stringer, Bont and Macrae maybe. Still doesn't account for another 12 players including the skill aspects of the Dogs backline, a large chunk of their midfield and a few other solid forwards. Similar young sides to the one the Dogs put out there today - like Carl, Essendon, Richmond and Hawthorn have fielded over the first two rounds - have been absolutely punished by experienced line ups. Today was poor, I'm not sure why everyone is keen to reward the mediocrity.

Only some is more like 15. FB: Morris #### Wood HB: Boyd ##### Murphy C: Macrae Bont Suckling HF: Hunter #### Picken FF: Stringer #### Dickson Ruck: #### Wallis Dahlhaus Int: Stevens Johannisen Most of that lot would absolutely walk it to our side. We took on the bulldogs dodgy spine, Libba and a bunch of kids and it took us 4 quarters to over run them to win the game. Imagine us without 15 of our best players, it would be a blood bath against a near full strength team.

I agree with most of that. Although I will say Vince to half back is a positive. He was rusty today but should improve. Salem we know about. Jetta and Dunn need to rebound more but they both use the ball smartly. They usually absorb pressure and release to free players, even if they aren't breaking the game open. Mitch White and Wagner are both options to take over as the third tall defender but it might take time. I'd throw Wagner in and live with it if Garland plays like he did today, but not if he played like he did last week. I do think there's a margin for a senior player to be a decent ordinary player and make the team better instead of stalling it. Needs to be the right player in the right position. If we got a Salem, Vince, Dunn, Jetta, Wagner/White backline up and running with proper midfield support and some workrate/class on the wings we might be on to something. Which leaves us with McDonald needing to improve. His model should actually be Frawley at Hawthorn. A similarly gifted athlete with dodgy disposal. Frawley's disposal hasn't improved much at Hawthorn, he's just limited himself to bombing it long down the line or taking very safe sideways kicks.

Most of those players are what they are though. We know Pedersen and Frost aren't stars, they are competing to have a crack as 2nd ruck/forward. Kent had a down day. Dunn played a half. M Jones and Grimes were ok etc etc. Garland could easily be included in this thread. But at this stage of his career I'm a bit over the expectations on Garland. He's a 3rd tall defender who mostly doesn't get destroyed by his opponent and usually minimises his errors. McDonald is meant to be a quality legitimate tall defender and he continues to have incredibly poor awareness and kicking skills. The form he's in now compared to the start of last year is probably a 5 goal swing to games. It's very worrying.

I mean only in terms of his readiness for AFL. Long term it was great to see a kid push himself to exhaustion. He's got the fitness to run out 70% of a shortened practice match against mainly a 2nds side. How is that not of some concern to whether he's ready to take on a super fit GWS midfield.

Kennedy, Harmes, Kent, Watts, the list goes on for guys who turned it over and do it too often. But McDonald and Grimes (who's now out of the backline) are probably the only two who routinely miss kick the ball. All players will misread distance or not identify an opponent and occasionally turn it over. If that's all McDonald did I could live with it. The issues for McDonald are that he'll clean shank a kick purely from poor execution combined with that he'll run himself in to trouble. Early last year he was getting out of trouble and therefore cutting down on the panicked turnovers and he wasn't shanking it so much. As his confidence went the mistakes started to come.

Not sure what they are doing with Stretch. He can play half back or wing and let others play back there. No issues with Hunt playing ahead of ANB though. I really like ANB but he's in competition with the half forwards and midfield rotation. Hunt could be the attacking half back we need. So it's good to have him out there. I thought his contested work was fine. I want to see him take the game on more. Maybe the windy conditions and lack of space stifled his game.

Because for the first half of last year McDonald was an AA level defender, whilst Frost never really cemented a spot at GWS. We think he's a decent defender, but we aren't certain. Tom McDonald's turnovers and missed goals would hurt just as much forward. At this rate the coaches will have to make the move eventually, but I don't blame them for trying to fix McDonald first. Frost will be moved back if/when Pedersen/Dawes/Weideman or others are available for selection up forward. We hardly have a heap of options.

Might be better just giving him the week. Can always play a half at Casey the next week. Glad to hear they think it's not too bad. Was happy to see him icing it and walking around, even if gingerly, rather than in the dreaded boot

FB: Garland Dunn Jetta HB: Salem McDonald Vince C: M. Jones Jones Grimes HF: Vanders Hogan Kent FF: Watts Pedersen Garlett Foll: Gawn Tyson Viney Int: Oliver Harmes Bugg Lumumba Would love to see more of Stretch, Wagner and Hunt to see if they can push for round 1. Just haven't seen enough. At this stage a returning Lumumba gets the nod. And Bugg. Kennedy v Kent v Harmes v Oliver v a returning Brayshaw remains a battle for a couple of spots As does Frost v Pedersen

Tom's decision making on the field is just terrible and getting worse. Why he feels the need to run in to the back pocket and take the short kick out is beyond me. He's not punching the ball well. He isn't impacting contests and he seemingly refuses to take the safe option by hand or foot. Unfortunately his brother was terrible in the first nab game and Frost is busy pretending to be a forward so there's little competition for his spot. I'm hoping the bigger ground at the G, the task of guarding Cameron and the fatigue levels of other players helps improve his form. But at the moment he's almost better on the bench until the heat has died out of the game. It's just too quick for him right now. I really do think he's plateaued as a football which is a big worry for him and the team.

Jade Rawlings can leave too. Besides Jetta what's he hanging his hat on as a position coach? When's he going to develop a couple of young defenders to put pressure on McDonald if he won't improve.

Terrible game. Skills just aren't there and we should ran all over the young dogs for 4 quarters not just when they tired. Wind was a factor in the first and 3rd quarter performances but not an excuse. Plus the kicking for the goal in the last might've shown we didn't know it was out there anyway. Grimes, Watts, Kennedy, Tom McDonald, Garland, Harmes, Kent, Frost all showing the same flaws. No real answers to who plays in round 1. Wagner only played a half, Stretch unsighted, Vanders injured. I'm not at all happy. The saints will show us up big time if we can't deal with pressure and defend smarter than we did for most of today.

Was fantastic around the contest again. He needs to learn to stay down more as a forward and crumb, he won't be taking pack marks from out of position too often (he might from a nice sit!). Plus cramping (and spewing up) after 71% TOG is a worry as well. His spot in round 1 will be determined mainly by whether the coaches think he has the fitness. Form wise he's done enough already

Murphy (attacking) and Boyd (more safe) gave them reliable half backs. Jason Johanissen and Easton Wood gave them run and speed. I agree in most other spots they aren't much better ball user but they have us covered from half back. Certainly a better set up, ground coverage and more pressure will close the gap as much as any skills improvement would. We need both.

I do worry that we don't have a high enough skill level across the park but particularly in the flanks and on the wing. Scoring comes from moving the ball quickly, which comes from 2 things: - Running hard to open space - Attacking quick disposal I'm concerned we don't have enough players who can do both. Grimes and Matt Jones might be starting wingmen for us and whilst they will run and spread well I'm not sure they will hit the targets with the ball to capitalise. Then if we are turning it over we are obviously not scoring but also opening up our backline. The same problem exists at half back with guys like Lumumba or Hunt. Then there's Salem who has the disposal skills but can't be relied upon to carry the rebound by himself. Even at half forward, Watts is a quality user but can be taken out of games. Kent, Kennedy and Harmes are 3 who can run and move the ball on quickly, but will they hit the targets? Finally, a key component to Clarko's Hawks and his disciples, in particular the Dogs and Eagles has been their zone defending. The Weagles Web got the popularity but the Hawks and Dogs did it as well. The guarding of space and multiple intercept defenders allows for more turnovers and then much faster counter attack as the player who gathers the intercept possession always knows where his outlets will be. Defending man on man implies that every defender then has to out run/out smart their forward opponent to get open to receive the ball. The alternative is to drop a man behind play and then have the overlap to rebound the ball, but the issue then is you're facing the same at the other end and therefore haven't achieved any improving in attacking play. I want to see better skills and spread but I'd also like to see more aggressive zoning in the backline. I hope Goodwin has picked up on this tactic and maybe Jennings the coach from the Dogs can help implement it.

The clubs admit they are practice matches. The League dresses them up and sells them to the media to make some extra cash. No idea why people get frustrated with that? I wish they'd let the clubs broadcast them independently but they love the foxtel money so you have to put up with commentators faking interest. Best thing to do is not watch many games. The real stuff isn't that far away.

Laughable. Why would you do that? What good comes of having serious games in February and early March. If you want that then just play 2 extra rounds and let the teams win their 8 points fair and square. Imagine missing the 8 because another team won the practice match series, you'd be furious.