Tweet
Any talk of dropping forwards after the inept delivery dished up by our midfield needs to stop right now.
-
I wish my weed was EMO so it would cut itself -
I disagree on dropping Davis. He is basically the only guy in our forward line who can beat the flood by kicking long goals from outside 50. He might not do it enough but on his day he can.
Our forward line is very very mediocre these days as it is. Davis to stay (& maybe even get involved in short cameo roles on the ball so as to send long kicks into the forward line)
JF"Never ever ever state that Sydney is gone.They are like cockroaches in the aftermath of a nuclear war"
(Forum poster 'Change', Big Footy 04Apr09)Comment
-
Nup. I must say the case for Bevo to be dropped is weaker than usual and its usually very weak. The usual excuse of a clanger or two didn't happen. He played on the ferret in the first and third quarter who collected all of ten possessions for the match and kicked one goal. One Bevophobe even suggested that Milne beat Bevo!!! He then played on Xav Clarke and closed down his run off the backline and stopped Fiora. Bevo is a defensive running back/midfielder this season. His job is to close down opposition runners. He did that well on Saturday night. The alternative to Bevo is not Barlow who is not particularly efefctive as a close checking defensive player but Mathews. The player who should be dropped but will be given a few more chances is Grundy. His lack of speed is a real problem. We lack a tall fast forward at the moment - Barlow? No lets have him in a negative defensive role. BrilliantBevo bandwagon driverComment
-
Milne kicked all of one goal. Coulda doesn't actually register on the scoreboard. Bevo did not play on Milne for the whole night. He played most of a quarter on Clarke, closed him down and stopped the saints run off the half back line. This move of Bevo to a defensive half forward was due to Davis failing to chase out of our half forward line (par for the course) and Grundy being slower than a Sunday afternoon in Nowra. The saints played a particularly quick half back line of the Clarke brothers and badly exposed our now painfully apparent lack of forward line pace and in Davis case a reluctance to chase their quick defenders. ROK as usual was outstanding in his chase and endevour. Thank christ he had Bevo helping out.Bevo bandwagon driverComment
-
You are right..Bevan wasn't on Milne very much as that was mostly Mattner's job. Mind you..you are being just as unfair..Davis wasn't on the ground that often. They both contributed in their way and everyone could have done better."The Dog days are over, The Dog days are gone" Florence and the MachineComment
-
it didnt take long
I agree with all the comments on Bevo. Roosey said on 3aw sat night that if skills dont improve our out, Bevo has to go and McVeigh must be close on the score of skills even though he gets kicks doesnt do anything with them. Grundy isnt good enough so what about givng Jesse a goComment
-
Nobody is suggesting Barlow should be played in a defensive role; that would just be ridiculous. You don't have to replace dropped players with players who play the same role. It's called shuffling the team structure to fit the best 22 players onto the field. We could give Bird a defensive role, or McVeigh. Buchanan could do it. Bevan doesn't deserve to be in our best 22. The only thing that might save him this week, as has already been mentioned, is Port's abundance of small forward types.Officially on the Reid and Sumner bandwagon!Comment
-
Ablett gone for 3 weeks with a groin.Comment
-
-
Must of injured it during the game then.
FootyGoss :: Club News - Adelaide [AFL Injury update - Round 2]Comment
-
Because Milne's opponent for most of the match was Mattner. Bevan was switched to Clarke in the second quarter because we were being thrashed off their half back line. We have a weakness with a slow aging forward line and Lyons was smart enough to exploit it with his match ups in the first quarter. Bevan's close checking helped put Clarke out of the game. If you want to assess Bevo's defensive performance have a look at Fiora and Xav Clarke. Neither gave the Saints any run when Bevan played on them. I think a lot of adverse comments against Bevo here are actually directed against the role he is given to play rather than how he does it. He ia very good one on one defensive player. And he gets selected for that reason. The conspiracy theories (white haired boy, Roosey's favourite) are pretty weak.Originally posted by Dr DiabolicalBevo bandwagon driverComment
-
McVeigh has played that role before. I know he isn't seen as a "hard" player, but I think that could have a lot to do with the fact that he has simply been told to be an attacking player, a loose possession getter. I have seen McVeigh lay some hard tackles before. Let's face it, if McVeigh doesn't dispose of the ball well, then one option would be to play him in a role where that isn't so much of an issue. McVeigh is a smarter player than a Bevan or a Matthews, and he has more speed and endurance than those two players. I reckon give him a go, and if he's being thrashed, move somebody else on to his man, and send him to the forwardline.
As for Buchanan, why not? He's a tough nut, he has good speed, decent endurance, and is a good tackler. Yes, playing him as a tagger would limit his output, but it's still an option.Officially on the Reid and Sumner bandwagon!Comment
-
Well Bevo was on top of Milne by the end of the first quarter but it might be going a tad to far to say that Bevo was killing him. Nonetheless good to see some balance in your assessment of Bevo - at last.Originally posted by Dr DiabolicalBevo bandwagon driverComment
Comment