Changes for the Suns

[liz]

As ROK just said players get a high % of these shots in a dedicated session at training but miss them in games. I believe it comes down to some players not coping with the pressure.

I'm in no way excusing the misses in games because it's unacceptable for highly paid players to miss the shots they're missing. If it's a technique issue then it should be picked up and corrected at training but that can only do so much. You have to find a way for players to cope better with game pressure. Look at Lindsay Thomas for someone who's goal kicking woes is all down to having the yips. I would imagine at training he's nailing them all over the place.

They discussed this on AFL Insider a few weeks back. Brad Scott commented that at training Thomas would nail pretty much every shot he had.

This is a topic that comes up frequently in the media and it is clearly not a Sydney specific issue - though clearly we are one of the worst afflicted teams this season. So yes, from the grandstand, sipping on our chardonnarys or gorging into our third meat pie of the day, it may be baffling how players can miss what look like simple shots at goal. If anyone reckons they know the answer and can provide coaches with a guaranteed solution to improving set shot accuracy, I suggest they spruik themselves to the highest bidder of the 17 clubs.

[Wardy]

As ROK just said players get a high % of these shots in a dedicated session at training but miss them in games. I believe it comes down to some players not coping with the pressure.

I'm in no way excusing the misses in games because it's unacceptable for highly paid players to miss the shots they're missing. If it's a technique issue then it should be picked up and corrected at training but that can only do so much. You have to find a way for players to cope better with game pressure. Look at Lindsay Thomas for someone who's goal kicking woes is all down to having the yips. I would imagine at training he's nailing them all over the place.

I feel that the pressure of the situation in front of goal can effect some more than others. But having said that, I dont think it helped lift the fans spirits showing on the big screen at ANZ the amazing accuracy the boys had for kicking a drink can off the goal post in some advertisment. I just hope that they weren't practicing that party trick for too long just so as they could get some good footage.

[ugg]

If all goes to plan:

In: Malceski, Jack, Smith, Mumford
Out: Everitt, Bird, Parker, Bevan

[S120]

Inside word, ugg? Or just your thoughts?

[liz]

If all goes to plan:

In: Malceski, Jack, Smith, Mumford
Out: Everitt, Bird, Parker, Bevan

I am not convinced by the balance afforded by those changes. We were too tall last week, even before the rain came. Those changes don't make us any shorter. If White stays in the team but solely as a forward (ie we have both Seaby and Mumford to ruck), that means LRT will be in purely as a backman. Reg, Ted, LRT and AJ as tall defenders, plus Marty as a semi-tall backman, and all three of Malceski, Kennelly, and Smith as medium sized defenders / rebounders seems like at least two defenders too many.

And while debate might reign over whether Bevan is the best small / medium forward we have available, at least he was performing that role in the team last week. None of those "ins" is an obvious choice to perform the role if Bevan is omitted.

[Dan]

FB: Smith Richards Mattner
CHB: Malceski Grundy Johnson
C: Shaw Kennedy Jack
CHF: McGlynn Reid O'Keefe
FF: TDL White McVeigh
Foll: Seaby Goodes Bolton

Int: Kennelly Mumford Hannebery Jetta(Sub)

Basically, IN: Jack, TDL, Mumford, Smith, Malceski,
OUT: Bevan, Everitt, LRT, Parker, Bird(inj.)

Why? The in's are better players than the outs! I think White needs to play a full game at FF and with both Mummy and Seabs in the team hopefully this happens, so LRT out so we aren't too tall. TDL deserves another crack, 20 goals in 2 weeks against anyone is a good effort and he offers more as a small forward than Bevan. If Jack doesnt get up keep Parker, Malceski or Smith bring in Sumner as he has been in the Ressies best for a few weeks now. I'm counting on at least one of Malceski or Smithi playing which by all reports seems pretty reasonable.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Oh No "ug"
We played 8 talls last week, which was too many, are we really going to make the same mistake again (and exacerbate it because for all his faults Everitt more mobile than the Mummy.

[Mr Magoo]

IMO we are only one"tall" too many and that is in the backline where you now have LRT, Ted, AJ and Reg. You should have permanent tall CHF and FF and the second ruckmen should rest in a pocket , much in the same vain as collingwood do with cloke , dawes and brown. They then have the first ruckman in jolly and in the backline maxwell , obrien, reid are talls. Thats seven definite talls every week.

I see articles in todays paper alluding to putting grundy up front but this I imagine could only be at the expense of white if anyone.

If it is then outs - Bird, White, Everitt and parker. In smith, malceski, jack and mumford.

[swansrule100]

if everitt is the sub again i will throw the tv out the window. Either put him in a spot in the team and if we are doing that it should be forward, or just drop him (probably a good idea).

talk of grundy going forward is stupid, hes a very good backman why move him its stupid

[Mr Magoo]

Being that Seaby is now in some sort of form and Mumford might be a little underdone for match fitness, you could almost go with Seaby as the Sub interchanged with Mumford at half time (hides head as tomatoes are loaded). You then put three midefielders/ running players on the bench and your not going too tall (assuming everitt out, bird out, someone who is a little sore out,parker out ) .

[Bleed Red Blood]

Too many defenders. I would drop Johnson, because he's neither playing as a genuine "tall" or "small" so we'll be able to cover him most sufficiently. I would also drop Mattner, Shaw or Kennelly. Which one should be decided by match ups with GC. For this exercise, Mattner will be the one I leave out.

FB: Smith Richards LRT
CHB: Malceski Grundy Shaw
C: O'Keefe Kennedy Jack
CHF: McGlynn Reid Parker
FF: TDL White McVeigh
Foll: Seaby Goodes Bolton

Int: Kennelly Mumford Hannebery Jetta(Sub)

IN: Jack, TDL, Mumford, Smith, Malceski,
OUT: Bevan, Everitt, Mattner, Johnson, Bird(inj.)

We should win this. So Mumford should be subbed out, and the minutes he plays will gear him up for next week. I don't think theres any point bringing Parker in for a week, and then dropping him. LRT must start playing all in defense, he'll need to be in good touch come finals time. Likewise, give Jesse the whole game up forward. At least this week.

[Matt79]

Too many defenders. I would drop Johnson, because he's neither playing as a genuine "tall" or "small" so we'll be able to cover him most sufficiently. I would also drop Mattner, Shaw or Kennelly. Which one should be decided by match ups with GC. For this exercise, Mattner will be the one I leave out.

FB: Smith Richards LRT
CHB: Malceski Grundy Shaw
C: O'Keefe Kennedy Jack
CHF: McGlynn Reid Parker
FF: TDL White McVeigh
Foll: Seaby Goodes Bolton

Int: Kennelly Mumford Hannebery Jetta(Sub)

IN: Jack, TDL, Mumford, Smith, Malceski,
OUT: Bevan, Everitt, Mattner, Johnson, Bird(inj.)

We should win this. So Mumford should be subbed out, and the minutes he plays will gear him up for next week. I don't think theres any point bringing Parker in for a week, and then dropping him. LRT must start playing all in defense, he'll need to be in good touch come finals time. Likewise, give Jesse the whole game up forward. At least this week.

BRB....please explain Mattner's ommision. He should be one of the first picked to play each week!!

[Captain]

Too many defenders. I would drop Johnson, because he's neither playing as a genuine "tall" or "small" so we'll be able to cover him most sufficiently. I would also drop Mattner, Shaw or Kennelly.

Agree with this all, except the Shaw/Mattner bit.

[S120]

Mattner and Rhyce are playing career best footy this year IMO. Even better than their respective podium finishing seasons in the Skilton. I'd be dropping Tadhg before them. Having said that, I wouldn't be dropping Tadhg either...not yet anyway.

[ugg]

Twitter

Longmire says Mumford and Spangher definite ins this week. Seaby is out. More to come this arvo. Jack & Bird 50-50.