Anyway about the team for Sunday...

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • sharp9
    Senior Player
    • Jan 2003
    • 2508

    Anyway about the team for Sunday...

    WESTERN BULLDOGS
    B: McMahon, Harris, Power
    HB: Morris, Grant, Gilbee
    C: Eagleton, West, Giansiracusa
    HF: Murphy, Skipper, Robbins
    F: Smith, Johnson, Hahn
    FOLL: Minson, Cross, Cooney
    I/C: Birss, Boyd, Griffen, Morgan, Rawlings, Ray, Wight
    IN: Birss, Griffen, Morgan, Rawlings, Ray
    OUT: Hargrave (susp), Walsh (inj)

    SYDNEY
    B: Schauble, C.Bolton, Dempster
    HB: Barry, Roberts-Thomson, Kennelly
    C: Mathews, Ablett, Crouch
    HF: O?Keefe, Goodes, Bevan
    F: Vogels, Hall, O?Loughlin
    FOLL: Jolly, Kirk, J.Bolton
    I/C: Buchanan, McVeigh, Moore, Nicks, Saddington, Schneider, Williams
    IN: Nicks, Schneider, Williams
    OUT:

    Had to start a new thread since you fellas had gone so far off topic. Nice to see Vogels and Dempster being named on the ground. Suspect young Saddo will be using that as some inspiration. Can't say I agree that Bevan should be named at HFF ahead of Buchanan (not that Bevo actually started there last week....we all know they put the positions there for fun).

    However it is presumably true that the players don't know who the emrgencies are until after training so the naming of the extended bench is certainly a filip for those named on the ground (a least I'm not being dropped this week!).

    Roosey does usually take a long time to move a player, though. Bucky stayed in the 18 for three or four weeks despite being unexeptional early doors this year, due to the fact that he had been so good in the pre-season. So I guess it is understandable that it will take more than one game to move from the emergency list to the 18.

    My predictions for the team arre that Saddo and Bucky are certainties, even though Saddo was quiet last week, he is tall and has looked good since he came back. Also he hasn't coughed the ball up much.

    Moore must play ahead of McVeigh at this stage. His ball-winning ability, composure and usage from his limited number of possessions has been outstanding....certainly better than McVeigh, even though we know that McVeigh is CAPABLE of great things, on form Moore has looked better out on the park, quite frankly.

    Last week he picked up the ball in traffic and delivered to the chest of a forward a couple of times. Superb.

    Obviously if Willo is fit he will play (instead of McVeigh). If he is unfit would one play Schneider? No, I'd give McVeigh one more chance to stop lairising with the ball and do something simple and constructive with it....like Moore does.

    Get the ball, pick a target, hit the target. ROCKET SCIENCE

    Here's my pop-psychology, he's trying too hard to be SPECIAL. What he needs to remember is that hitting a target upfield (or in the clear when you're in traffic) 20 times in one game is actually the definition of special. And nearly all of those 20 moments are not that difficult or that special. For someone of his ability he should be managing that standing on his head.

    His two huge clangers that spring to mind a shank on the run from 30 and a dithering handpass to no one when we were charging through the middle of the ground (resulting in a lucky miss by Port, from memory) show perfectly what is wrong. It's got the point where something in his brain says "kicking the ball nicely through the centre posts" is not enough to make an impression, he was (subconsciously, presumably) trying to look beautiful while he did it.

    With the hand ball he had opportunity to do a short hand ball when he first got it, and then opportunity to kick it long, but no he tried for the low percentage (but more "exciting") option of a handpass over traffic through the corridor that would probably have resulted in a goal (or easy miss knowing our form).

    Unfortunately his dithering looking for the beautiful option resulted in a delay which meant the man who made great space was nearly closed down and the handpass needed to be PERFECT...which it wasn't.

    These MUST be fixable things (and in the short term too I would have thought), so give him a go, 12 useful possessions will see his spot retained 'cos that's more than Schneider is promising right now.
    "I'll acknowledge there are more talented teams in the competition but I won't acknowledge that there is a better team in the competition" Paul Roos March 2005
  • BonBon
    BMT2144
    • Jul 2004
    • 2190

    #2
    We've got 7 on the bench, do we find out today who the final 4 are?
    Vicky Pollard: Oh my god I so can't believe you just said that this is like the time I threw Anita's nokia in the canal as a joke and she's like you have well got to buy me another one and I'm like get over it and then Paul came over who's adopted anyway and started saying that I fancy Mark Bennett but oh my god just because I have sex with someone doesn't mean I fancy them.

    Comment

    • Ert
      Back
      • Jan 2003
      • 490

      #3
      Check the AFL website about 7:30 tonight, they usually post an article on Sunday lineups

      Comment

      • NMWBloods
        Taking Refuge!!
        • Jan 2003
        • 15819

        #4
        Good points on McVeigh Sharp9 - this is generally what I think too.
        Captain Logic is not steering this tugboat.

        "[T]here are things that matter more and he's reading and thinking about them: heaven, reincarnation. Life and death are the only things that are truly a matter of life and death. Not football."

        Comment

        • Charlie
          On the Rookie List
          • Jan 2003
          • 4101

          #5
          Agree with NMW - good comments.

          I think, however, that it reinforces the argument of those who are pleading for McVeigh to be given more game time (as wel as perhaps explaining the problems faced by Schneider). I'd say the reason he feels the need to look special is that he isn't given a great deal of time to make his mark in a game.

          He is constantly on the edge of selection, and when he's in the team spends way too much time on the bench. It's one thing to say that he'll be 'special' if he gets 20 effective touches in a game... but if he doesn't have time to gather more than eight or ten, can you blame him for feeling that he has to pull something out of nowhere each time he gets the footy?
          We hate Anthony Rocca
          We hate Shannon Grant too
          We hate scumbag Gaspar
          But Leo WE LOVE YOU!

          Comment

          • Sean
            On the Rookie List
            • Sep 2003
            • 327

            #6
            Agree with NMW & Charlie.

            Originally posted by Charlie
            He is constantly on the edge of selection, and when he's in the team spends way too much time on the bench. It's one thing to say that he'll be 'special' if he gets 20 effective touches in a game... but if he doesn't have time to gather more than eight or ten, can you blame him for feeling that he has to pull something out of nowhere each time he gets the footy?
            It's hard for him but Moore got possibly less time in his first game than McVeigh usually gets and generally looked better.

            Having said that, I agree with you - I'd like to see McVeigh have a solid run of 3-4 games with more game time and see what he can do. If he doesn't deliver, send him to the reserves and don't bring him back after a 40 touch game. Let him stay there until a position becomes available that he deserves.

            Basically, give him a chance - if he doesn't take it then just treat him like any other player in the 2s.

            Comment

            • Wil
              On the Rookie List
              • Jun 2004
              • 619

              #7
              Can't agree with the Moore/McVeigh comparisons. Moore is played in the front pocket while McVeigh is played on the wing.

              My idea from a while back was to let the younger players get used the speed of AFL in an "easier" position such as a forward pocket. Then slowly move them into the centre. It would be funny if Moore was seen as better as McVeigh by the coaches because this is what they have done with him.

              Comment

              • stellation
                scott names the planets
                • Sep 2003
                • 9721

                #8
                Originally posted by Wil
                Can't agree with the Moore/McVeigh comparisons. Moore is played in the front pocket while McVeigh is played on the wing.

                My idea from a while back was to let the younger players get used the speed of AFL in an "easier" position such as a forward pocket. Then slowly move them into the centre. It would be funny if Moore was seen as better as McVeigh by the coaches because this is what they have done with him.
                I think you're right with this. I had the same issue last year with Bevan vs. McVeigh where McVeigh was rotating for small amounts of time through the midfield and Bevan was sitting in a pocket.
                I knew him as a gentle young man, I cannot say for sure the reasons for his decline
                We watched him fade before our very eyes, and years before his time

                Comment

                • Wil
                  On the Rookie List
                  • Jun 2004
                  • 619

                  #9
                  Originally posted by stellation
                  I think you're right with this. I had the same issue last year with Bevan vs. McVeigh where McVeigh was rotating for small amounts of time through the midfield and Bevan was sitting in a pocket.
                  YES! And now Bevan sees much more time in the midfield and everyone thinks he has dropped on form.

                  Comment

                  • Thunder Shaker
                    Aut vincere aut mori
                    • Apr 2004
                    • 4202

                    #10
                    Re: Anyway about the team for Sunday...

                    Originally posted by sharp9
                    Moore must play ahead of McVeigh at this stage. His ball-winning ability, composure and usage from his limited number of possessions has been outstanding....certainly better than McVeigh, even though we know that McVeigh is CAPABLE of great things, on form Moore has looked better out on the park, quite frankly.

                    Last week he picked up the ball in traffic and delivered to the chest of a forward a couple of times. Superb.
                    He's showing plenty already. It's hard to believe we drafted him only six months ago. My favourite Moore play from last week's game was when he stole the ball from the hands of a Port player and kicked it into the forward line. Cheeky!

                    I hope he has more good games in the next few weeks. He deserves a Rising Star nomination.
                    "Unbelievable!" -- Nick Davis leaves his mark on the 2005 semi final

                    Comment

                    • Vivien
                      On the Rookie List
                      • Apr 2005
                      • 261

                      #11
                      I agree with Wil - McVeigh has had the 'harder' run of things, but I still don't think that warrants his inclusion this week. Moore hasn't done much wrong in the short time he's played, and I'd like to see him get a bit more game time this week. At the end of the day, you have to drop the players who aren't performing in preference for the ones who are - it's only fair.

                      Comment

                      • stellation
                        scott names the planets
                        • Sep 2003
                        • 9721

                        #12
                        LRT and Schaubs dropped?

                        I knew him as a gentle young man, I cannot say for sure the reasons for his decline
                        We watched him fade before our very eyes, and years before his time

                        Comment

                        • Mike_B
                          Peyow Peyow
                          • Jan 2003
                          • 6267

                          #13
                          I find it surprising they've dropped Schauble - the only plausible reason would be they see no potential match up for him. I guess they figure Eade will have to play Grant in defense to counter our forward options....

                          I'm on the Chandwagon!!!

                          If you cannot compete for the premiership, it's better to be young and exciting than middle-aged and dowdy.

                          Comment

                          • ROK Lobster
                            RWO Life Member
                            • Aug 2004
                            • 8658

                            #14
                            Originally posted by stellation
                            LRT and Schaubs dropped?

                            http://www.smh.com.au/news/Sport/Swa...533533508.html
                            I understand how that must make you feel stell.

                            Comment

                            • Vivien
                              On the Rookie List
                              • Apr 2005
                              • 261

                              #15
                              That's odd! I couldn't see them dropping either of them, esp not Shauble. Surely we need the talls if nothing else?

                              Comment

                              Working...