bing181

Presumably O'Mac and Petty come back in for ... whoever. We need some height, and they're the only ones left standing. One goes forward, one goes back, take your pick. Preuss ... maybe, he's been so underwhelming. Depends on Max.

Re Preuss: I'm neither optimistic nor pessimistic. On the basis of what we've seen I would have though he has a bit of work to do, but who knows. Re Hore: I agree, he's been a great asset this year. However, my point was simply that great VFL form does not automatically translate to great (or even reasonable) AFL form. Hope both of them turn out useful players for the Dees, fingers crossed.

Isn't it just a question of fitness, an ability to run/work all day at a high level?

Apart from the odd cameo, Preuss has been shown to not be able to bring this form to the AFL. At all. He has been mediocre at best. Reminds me of those clammering for Hore to be brought in after starring at VFL level. We did, and he was one of the worse performers yesterday. (12 disposals at 50%, 4 clangers, 4 marks from someone renowned for his marking, and zero tackles). AFL/VFL are completely different levels, played at a very different pace. Standout performances in one do not always translate to the other (and that goes both ways), and we've seen plenty of players who consistently dominate in the VFL but fail at AFL level. Here's hoping that's not the case with Preuss.

Age and experience play a bigger role than almost anything else. There will always be outliers (bell curve), but it's no accident that premiership clubs are generally not just more experienced, but have experience where it counts (key players, key positions). This also effectively lifts the level in younger players. Regardless of raw ability or even coaching, a 50-gamer in a forward line made up largely of other 50 gamers will not perform to the same level as a 50-gamer playing alongside a couple of 200-game AA'ers.

Projection. Have a look at the Melksham interview. (for example)

Of course.

Couldn't ask much more of Viney tonight: second for disposals and clearances, first for tackles (9) and I50's. He's at least trying.

Given the team we had on the park, I'm just not sure what people were expecting. Seriously. We had a midget forward line with 2 actual forwards in it, is the lack of conversion from I50's a surprise? People should stop looking for clever reasons as to why we're performing badly. We have 17 players unavailable, including some really key players at both ends of the ground, and we're putting what is largely a VFL-quality team on the park. Surprise surprise, we're losing - and at times, losing badly.

Can't agree - he has always been a dodgy set shot. What we're seeing is pretty much par for the course. Though at least he's taking shots, albeit missing.

19 actually - and both way ahead of a lot of other players who you could have named. But didn't.

Yes, but hard to see what the alternatives were. And not helped by the players further up the ground not having the skills or vision to adjust how they deliver inside 50.

Unwatchable is the word that comes to mind. Must be some positives there ... thought Lever is looking better each week, and showing why we got him, Lewis was good until injured, Brayshaw looking more like the player of last year, and didn't mind Spargo up the field a bit. He's one player who generally manages to do something with it and hit a target. Apart from that though, struggling.

Hunt has been playing poorly. Yes, we have no-one decent to bring in, but surely we don't use that as an excuse to gift players games.

This: "it only takes one or two guys to be a little bit off for entire gameplans to break down. If one player is out of position, it can make several others look slow or indecisive. One break in the chain, and it can be detrimental to a team's overall confidence."

Interesting that Lockhart wasn't preferred over one of those - would perhaps suggest that he has hit a wall fitness-wise, understandable given his late entry into the AFL and lack of a pre-season. Either that or it's last-chance-saloon time for some of the above.

By my calculations, we have 17 injured/unavailable so ... Though if you really want to see how bad things are, look at the Casey team for this week.

I think you'll find he hasn't done a full pre-season for 3 years. 2016 he had hip surgery, 2017 was the foot, 2018 was the ankle plus the foot.

I don't believe he's injured per se - or at least, no more injured than a lot of players are through the season. He is though seriously lacking in pre-season fitness, and all that it brings. The Wayne Carey comments re the importance of pre-season in his article were revealing, so god knows where that leaves JV, who hasn't had a full pre-season since 2015.

Two (or is it three?) pre-seasons. Worth remembering that the only competitive hit-out Viney had before this season started was "reduced time" in a Casey practise match a week before Round 1.

You seen much opera? https://www.broadstreetreview.com/music/Why_opera_audiences_boo

But it fits with yours.

Not only is this hindsight Harry at his finest, it ignores the simple fact that Frost's greatest weakness hasn't been the brain-fades and lack of football awareness that still cost us a goal or three each week, but his lack of a tank. He wasn't being played because opposition forwards would just run him round for a half, and then run freely off him for the rest of the game because he was too knackered to chase. Which is also why you don't see him playing further up the ground, where in many respects, his strengths would be more useful and his deficiencies less of a handicap. Perhaps another pre-season will help in that regard, but at his age, don't think anyone's going to be holding their breath. He is what he is.

Also any number of posters understand him playing back out of necessity. (staff shortages). Though equally, I'd argue that playing back for a while has made him a more rounded footballer. He played matches up forward last year, but with nothing like the impact he's now having.

No, they're just lucky.