Saddo vs Dempster

[undy]

Very true - the profile pic on the web-site (where he appears quite chunky) doesn't show the whole story.

Fortunately we can apply todays massive desktop computer power to extrapolate from the head and shoulder shot what he actually looks like:

computer-generated image

[ROK Lobster]

Originally posted by undy
Very true - the profile pic on the web-site (where he appears quite chunky) doesn't show the whole story.

Fortunately we can apply todays massive desktop computer power to extrapolate from the head and shoulder shot what he actually looks like:

computer-generated image

10/10

[liz]

Originally posted by Charlie
That leaves Mathews, Fosdike, Schneider, Dempster and Vogels. Of those, Mathews is probably safe, even if he shouldn't be.

So that's four spots for them to compete for... along with McVeigh, Maxfield, Saddington, Schauble, Moore and Malceski, all of whom probably have stronger claims. Unfortunately, I just don't see how we can squeeze them in.

Schmidt probably has a claim alongside Moore and Malceski - and given that those two have both had a chance I hope that next time a spot opens up, Schmidt will get his chance. He has been amazingly consistent this year.

Willoughby has had a couple of niggling injuries over the last month that mean he probably won't get his chance this year. But at least if Schmidt gets a chance, Willoughby may believe that he'll have a chance early next year.

(And while Willoughby is still small, he's bulked up a fair amount since he was drafted as a waif, and there are a lot of equally skinny teenagers running around playing AFL at the moment and not getting snapped in two).

[Charlie]

Originally posted by liz
Schmidt probably has a claim alongside Moore and Malceski - and given that those two have both had a chance I hope that next time a spot opens up, Schmidt will get his chance. He has been amazingly consistent this year.

No he doesn't. Not considering that we're playing for a top four spot, and those two have at least had a taste of senior footy (though I don't expect either of them to play again in 2005).

Moving back towards the opening topic - I wouldn't be too disappointed to see Dempster dropped in the next couple of weeks. He's doing ok, but I think we need more from the half-back flank than he can provide during the finals.

[DST]

The team we fielded on the weekend was probably one of the most balanced we have played so far this year.

Almost everyone has shown good form over the last 6 weeks and those that have been a bit up and down like Davis, Scheinder, Matthews and Dempster all add something to the side:

Matthews - is a natural ball winner and can be given defensive jobs to free up Kirk, Bolton & Ablett when needed. He may let us down with disposal sometimes but he at least gets the thing 20 times a game which means the opposition don't have it to use it!

Davis - can win a game off his own boot in a quarter and we are not blessed with naturally skilled player so he stays.

Scheinder - has raw pace which has been useful to play on a small forward who is quick and thus gives Crouch another opponent

Dempster - has a bit of size and speed so he can play taller if needed

Barring injury I can only see two players that would come into the side at this stage and they are Schuable & Saddington:

Saddington - would come into the team to play the third tall forward if Vogels loses form

Schuable - will probably come back into the side for the game against North to match up their tall forwards. If that is the case then I can see him replacing Dempster

So barring any further injuries we are pretty well close to our full settled side at present.

DST

[giant]

I take it that "Schuable" is now the accepted spelling on RWO? Has anyone informed the team, media etc?

[Charlie]

Originally posted by DST


Matthews... gets the thing 20 times a game which means the opposition don't have it to use it!

Not immediately, no.

[ROK Lobster]

Originally posted by Charlie
Not immediately, no.

And the longer he stands there deciding which opponent to kick it to the longer it is that they don't have it for.

[barry]

Originally posted by DST
The team we fielded on the weekend was probably one of the most balanced we have played so far this year.

....

Schuable - will probably come back into the side for the game against North to match up their tall forwards. If that is the case then I can see him replacing Dempster

Yep, very well balanced I'd say. I also like the way Ball or Jolly can slot into FF when required. Makes us very flexible and allows us the luxury of playing 2 ruckmen (3 if you count goodes).

Just reading the reports on here, Schuabs didnt kick many goals and wasnt in the best for the 2's, so his selection may be entering the realms of hope now.

[ROK Lobster]

Originally posted by barry
Schuabs didnt kick many goals and wasnt in the best for the 2's, so his selection may be entering the realms of hope now.

If he played down back he probably never took his jacket off.

[liz]

Originally posted by Charlie
No he doesn't. Not considering that we're playing for a top four spot, and those two have at least had a taste of senior footy (though I don't expect either of them to play again in 2005).

My observation was about who might get a gig if another spot opens up through injury - eg if B1 has an enforced lay-off for a couple of weeks with a troublesome shoulder.

While Moore and Malceski now have a handful of games experience between them, I don't think it's a lay down misere that either would provide more in that 'player 22' role in the team than Schmidt could. Both look to have a future but neither has set the world on fire this year at senior level (which you wouldn't expect them to).

The only other real option to come into the team if one of our midfielders gets injured is Fixter - and obviously that is a real possibility if he's fit enough.

[cruiser]

Originally posted by giant
I take it that "Schuable" is now the accepted spelling on RWO? Has anyone informed the team, media etc?

You must be an English teacher?

[smasher]

I definately think our backline needs some changes if we are going to be a genuine finals prospect.I am a big rap for Saddo and I feel he would be a better option that the inexperiences Dempster who has come a lone way this year but still has plenty to learn.Schauble is a must on the bench.I know it's horses for courses but I feel we need to be prepared and time is not on our side.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Saddo vs Dempster

Originally posted by sharpie
I think Cruiser means to move Leo to HBF and put Schauble in at FB.

In the firsts Dempster has been used on both medium and small opponents thus far yet in the 2's he played on taller opponents. So the kid could make way for Leo. Saddo on the other hand can't handle the smalls.

Originally posted by sharpie
Iwhether Schauble is in Roos' plans for FB anymore

The next fortnight should tell, Merrett/Resting Ruckman this week and Rocca/Thompson/Hale the week after.
If he isn't included then (he's playing full games in the 2's) he never will be, and I think that would be a pity.