At least 1 change needed...so who?

[Matt79]

With Barry Hall being continually doubled team, I wonder why we persist playing him inside the forward 50 where we find our space consistently clogged up.

My thoughts for this week...

1) Bring in Grundy and play him out of the goal square. Put MOL in the forward pocker and Schneider in the other.

2) Play Hall at CHF and allow him to lead all day up field, thus negotiating the continual double teaming. If he does not kick a goal than so be it. Play ROK and Davis on the Half forward flanks and allow ROK to present forward and Davis stay as a marking target inside the forward 50.

3) With Williams and Dixon both out next week (Dixon did a groin today) we may not have as many dangerous forwards to defend on. If match ups allow, give Grundy a spot on the bench for a rest and play malceski out of the goal square and allow him space to lead into. Good hands, quick and an accurate set shot.

4) Craig Bolton to take Buddy, Richards on Boyle and allow Leaping Leo to be creative of the half back line.

There are my changes and thoughts for this week's game!
Thoughts?

Cheers,
Matt

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Davis probably will get dropped, if the recent performance of our selectors is anything to go by. I thought he was superb last night, creative and willing to take risks, and they usually came off. Also Dempster was good, but like someone else already pointed out, he's not being used properly. The boy has one of the best kicks in our team, yet he's almost wasted in the role that Roos has given him.

The only players that should be dropped are McSpreigh, Paul "toughness >>> skill" Bevan, and maybe one of either Mathews or B1, but it wont happen.

[liz]

Why would you want to put Malceski leading out the goal square? He's our best creator up field and one of those able to kick goals from outside 50.

I'd have both Davis (if he's fit enough) and O'Keefe pushing well up the ground and trying to leave the forward 50 as open as possible. If anything, I'd stick a ruckman up there with Grundy, with one other smaller player at their feet, and get Magic and Baz to create around the half forward line. Let's truly flood the midfield (where Hawks main advantage is) and leave our forwards space to work in.

One positive of this game is that I don't think Hawthorn will over-flood. Clarkson is probably still sensitive to criticism of their games against Brisbane and the Saints, and seems to want to back his team to play open football. If they get numbers back it will be to triple team Hall. All the more reason to let him run around as far as he can and leave the forward line as open as possible.

I'm glad the game is at the MCG as well. I think the extra space may help. Good as Campbell Brown has been this year, I don't think the Hawks defence will succeed one-on-one with our forwards IFF they have some space and get half decent delivery.

Croad was a late withdrawal for their game today. Anyone know what's up with him?

[DeadlyAkkuret]

With Barry Hall being continually doubled team, I wonder why we persist playing him inside the forward 50 where we find our space consistently clogged up.

My thoughts for this week...

1) Bring in Grundy and play him out of the goal square. Put MOL in the forward pocker and Schneider in the other.

2) Play Hall at CHF and allow him to lead all day up field, thus negotiating the continual double teaming. If he does not kick a goal than so be it. Play ROK and Davis on the Half forward flanks and allow ROK to present forward and Davis stay as a marking target inside the forward 50.

3) With Williams and Dixon both out next week (Dixon did a groin today) we may not have as many dangerous forwards to defend on. If match ups allow, give Grundy a spot on the bench for a rest and play malceski out of the goal square and allow him space to lead into. Good hands, quick and an accurate set shot.

4) Craig Bolton to take Buddy, Richards on Boyle and allow Leaping Leo to be creative of the half back line.

There are my changes and thoughts for this week's game!
Thoughts?

Cheers,
Matt

I wish you could have a talk to Roos

[Matt79]

Why would you want to put Malceski leading out the goal square? He's our best creator up field and one of those able to kick goals from outside 50.

Liz, one of our critisims of our side is that we are too predictable, one dimensonal. As I mentioned, IF defensive options permit, why not give something different a try? He is athletic, great mark and a top set shot for goal. IMO he would be hard to handle in an open forward line on the lead.

Allow Leo to play his role with Tadgh off the half back line. It is just something different, a plan b.

[liz]

But we have about a dozen guys who should be able to convert if they mark leading out of the goal square. Malceski showed us last week he can take a good contested mark but its stretching things to say its a strength of his. And he would have played almost none of his football as a leading forward.

On the other hand, how many guys do we have who can deliver it long and accurately into the 50? Possibly half a dozen, with varying degrees of reliability, but he's far and away the best.

[Matt79]

OK, swap ROK and Mal around for a change. ROK is creative and can deliever the ball inside our forward 50 effectively and play MAL on the half forward line.

[liz]

I don't think there has been any tangible difference this year between where ROK and Malceski have been playing, except for maybe where they start at centre bounces. They both work right up the ground and if anything, Malceski has been going forward more than ROK.

[DeadlyAkkuret]

OK, swap ROK and Mal around for a change. ROK is creative and can deliever the ball inside our forward 50 effectively and play MAL on the half forward line.

I can't agree with this. Malceski has to stay where he is, along with Kennelly, they're two of the rare members of the team that know how to play their role, week in, week out. If changes are made, we should be focussing on areas that need fixing.

[ernie koala]

Dempster Looked great running to the F50 and banging a goal from there. I'd like to see that more often.

Yeah, he's got talent to burn...He's quite quick, skillful and a good size, which is why he should be influencing more contests.

[Triple B]

Yeah, he's got talent to burn...He's quite quick, skillful and a good size....

But in the other thread you wanted him dropped.

[ernie koala]

But in the other thread you wanted him dropped.

No.....I said he needed to lift his work rate and influence more contests. Same as the bit I wrote in my last post, that you edited out in your response

[DST]

I am convinced that we now play our best football on bigger grounds where we can control the stoppages, break hard and isolate our forwards in one on one contests.

For years we had a team and game style that was suited to the SCG but sadly was never going to allow us to win a final on the MCG/AAMI/Subi/Telstra Stadium or the GABBA when meeting quality opposition.

We are now totally opposite to that and as a result the SCG is not the same fortress it used to be.

DST

[Nico]

Dare I ask the learned people who watch the two's the following:

But firstly to prempt my question.

My 2 pet whipping boys are Bevan(worst player getting an AFL game) and J Bolton closely followed by McVeigh.

Bevan was played as an everywhre man lat night and proved to be a nowhere man. He is slow, cant kick, cant read the play, falls over etc (tries hard). So if he is useless everywhere then a player like Schmidt who can read the play, kick a goal, kick accurately with distance and is probably yards faster would improve the bottom line of team quality.

J bolton is a snail, is always second to the ball, cant kick more than 20 metres with a Butch (gale) behind him, has no defensive skills and purely and simply is there to create a stoppage by falling on the pill.

Mcveigh, inept is probably the best word to describe him and suffers from a combination ailments of the above 2 duffers.

Q. Would someone please tell me if the skills/attributes of Brabazon, Thornton, Moore, Laidlaw are equal to if not better than the 3 drop kicks mentioned above. If any 2 of pace, kicking skills and clean possession are seen as better, then can anyone make a case for these people adding value to our line up as against the afforementioned.

Liz you are eligible to make comments but please dont sit on the fence on this one. It is a very serious question paramount to our future.

By the way the look on Roos's face last night was a new one and hopefully he is losing patience with some players and can see the light finally.

[liz]

It's really hard to answer your questions re the youngsters Nico because they generally play against witches hats. And I think Roos' selection history indicates that he places more store by the few games they get in the pre-season playing against senior AFL players than by how they go in the reserves competition.

That said, plenty of youngsters come in to the senior competition and hold their own quite quickly. Although a lot of our kids are low draft selections or rookie picks, there's no inherent reason why they should struggle if given real opportunities at senior level.

That said, I don't think any of them are going to come in and make an immediate difference in terms of winning a premiership this year. It is more a case of whether they can get some senior experience into them while remaining a real challenger, if that's what the coaching staff believes the team currently is.

As for individuals, I think Schmidt definitely has what it takes. And he was decent earlier in the year when he did get his chance. He's not going to add any pace to the midfield but if you look at centre bounce clearance specialists like Mitchell and Harris (Roos), that isn't an issue if you can get your hand on the ball. His disposal skills are spectacular ala the Eski but they look sound and his decision making looks good too. He'll make mistakes early at senior level but that's what he needs the time for.

Brabazon I am not sold on still. He had a great few weeks recently in the reserves - though not so much this week and last - but I'm not convinced. Even if he eventually makes it, I think he'd be seriously out of his depth at the moment.

(Caveat - I stated a few times early last year that I thought Grundy would struggle translating his reserves form to senior level and he showed me I was way off. So I don't claim to be an expert on spotting what it takes to make it. I did call Schneider though, early in his first year on the list, based mostly on just watching him train a few times.)

I like Laidlaw though he's a bit inconsistent within matches. And I'm not sure where he would fit in the current team since his attributes suggest he should be playing a similar role to Malceski, Kennelly, Dempster, O'Keefe, even Davis if he played the role further up the ground that I think he could. I don't think his form over the last two matches has been special, though earlier in the year he was blitzing things. I don't think it would hurt to throw him in there and see whether he's ready yet or not. He could play a mid-sized forward role - ala Matty Nicks - and is very good overhead.

Thornton has improved tremendously since last year and his last month has been very good - though he was a bit quieter yesterday. He's probably shaping up to be a tall wingman, maybe like a Matt Rosa, though in the reserves everyone just goes forwards and kicks goals. I'd have Laidlaw slightly ahead of him at this stage but he's coming along nicely. Laidlaw is a bit quicker and possibly a longer kick. He's also better overhead for his height, though Thornton's marking has definitely improved and he's a bit rangier than Laidlaw. He may not quite have the strength / bulk yet for senior football, but that doesn't seem to prevent the likes of Rosa or some of those skinny Collingwood kids from being thrown into the fray.

I have no doubt Moore could make a contribution if he was given a real chance but he needs to be thrown into the thick of things and given an extended run. His problem is possibly that he's a clone of Buchanan in style - though his kicking looks better. I think he needs to do what Malceski did in 2005/ early 2006 and play a couple of absolute blinders so that he can't be not picked. But thus far he's looked pretty laconic and/or bored playing reserves footy - and he probably is bored.