Changes for Rnd 11 V Bombers

[Gezball]

Sorry for having a goddamn opinion. ...

x2

[Captain]

Bashing? I know you love him but talk about sensitive.

I said he competed well. He was good. I thought the 'Dogs were woeful and I questioned whether LRT's going to be the answer up forward against the better teams. What's the problem with that?

Saying he should be dropped amounts to the same thing.

He had a great game, looked very good up forward, charged into packs, took pressure off Reid, led well and gave us a solid target. All in conditions hardly ideal for a key forward.

I'm not suggesting that LRT is the next great hope up forward. However by playing well there it adds another string to his bow giving us even greater flexibility. Aside from Goodes, no one in the team can play the multitude of positions well that LRT can.

One of the first picked in my book.

[Doctor]

LRT was bloody brilliant yesterday and did a lot more without having to pinch hit in the ruck - he's not gonna get dropped so let's leave it there. Pyke was great too so I hope we stick with what we've got for next week. Now is not the time to go shorter again with the ruck threats Essendon have. The question is really who comes in for Parker. Horse tends to give the last man in the sub role no matter who it is so my fearless prediction is Armstrong into the 21 and Spangher in as sub.

[Ludwig]

I don't think it's out of the question that Spangher could come in for Parker. When Kennedy is not injured WCE normally play 2 rucks plus 3 talls in the forward line to great success. Reid, LRT and Spangher are all good runners and compete reasonably well at ground level and can tackle. We can easily cover Parker's inside midfield role, with Bolton or ROK for instance, so we are really talking about Spangher in a forward role usually taken by a midfielder. Another possibility would be to move LRT to the back and have Johnson cover a smaller player, like Melksham, which he has done effectively in the past. Also, with rotations, it is likely that we would have one tall on the bench most of the game anyway. The value of LRT in the team is that he can play front and back as well as in the Ruck.

Furthermore, this may be the only chance to experiment with the 2 ruck, tall forward line setup (ala West Coast), because once Goodes comes back this deal is off.

I think it's worth a go.

[Plugger46]

Saying he should be dropped amounts to the same thing.

He had a great game, looked very good up forward, charged into packs, took pressure off Reid, led well and gave us a solid target. All in conditions hardly ideal for a key forward.

I'm not suggesting that LRT is the next great hope up forward. However by playing well there it adds another string to his bow giving us even greater flexibility. Aside from Goodes, no one in the team can play the multitude of positions well that LRT can.

One of the first picked in my book.

I didn't say he should be dropped for this week and I don't think there's any chance he will be dropped.

He performed his role well yesterday but our midfield dominance and the 'Dogs lack of key defenders made for a pretty good day for the forwards. Obviously for the time being, he deserves to hold his spot though.

Against good opposition and if we're going to stick with Pyke as the second ruckman/resting forward, I think Spangher could be a better forward option than LRT. People will suggest that he can go back but with Grundy and Richards doing so well and few teams having 3 genuine tall forwards, it's pretty unlikely.

I just think we need to see a few more weeks of Mumford/Pyke/LRT in the one side before declaring it a definite winner. That is not LRT bashing in my view.

[Go Swannies]

Saying he should be dropped amounts to the same thing.

He had a great game, looked very good up forward, charged into packs, took pressure off Reid, led well and gave us a solid target. All in conditions hardly ideal for a key forward.

I'm not suggesting that LRT is the next great hope up forward. However by playing well there it adds another string to his bow giving us even greater flexibility. Aside from Goodes, no one in the team can play the multitude of positions well that LRT can.

One of the first picked in my book.

Wot he said.

[dimelb]

Old rule: don't change a winning combination. Of course we have to, with Parker's injury, and I suspect that Armstrong will get the nod. The question then is another tall (Spangher, not White or Everitt) or the prime substitute choice, a mid/utility. I lean towards the second option, but it needs to be someone with a bit of pace - perhaps Cunningham will return.
I like seeing LRT perform as he did yesterday: he's a good back, a respectable forward, a fairly useless ruck. We must keep Mummy and Pyke together; they enhance each other.

[GongSwan]

If Mummy, Pyke and LRT all play, then you would think we need a smaller replacement.
But hell, I thought playing those three in the wet today was crazy, but it seemed to work.

Horse said the Dogs took in 3 200cm players, so in comparison, they were taller

It's a conundrum replacing Parker, ideally you want someone who can go in hard and lay tackles etc, however, playing Etihad next week, the team probably needs a tweak to add a link man on the wing. I assume Horse will play a hard tag on Stanton(agent Smith) and Possibly Watson(maybe Bird) ROK will play more in the clinches with Jude, and JPK. Most people, Horse included, won't like the idea, but Everit would be my pick to come in, possibly as the sub with Armstrong in the back six covering for Smith who will be tagging. I wouldn't tinker with the forward setup, it seemed to get the job done this week. Mitchell isn't ready for seniors at a fitness level, and Spang has played 3 ressies games after a long time out with a hammie, he'll be needing more time before he gets a run. Definitely, we need to change our game a little for the longer ground, which I believe is more important than who comes in. No way I'd remove Pyke, teh ruck combo seemed to work and LRT had a better game as a result

[TPR4]

If Mummy is fit to ruck the majority of a game, I can see us going:

In: Spang (2nd tall FWD), Eski/Morton (Any small for Parks is likely to get the green vest, so someone who can have an impact in a quarter of footy)

Out: Parker (inj), Pyke (stiff but is behind Sugar Shane and LRT)

Though against the Dons who have a good set of versatile talls (Bellchambers, Ryder, Hurley, Carlisle all are mobile) we may keep the 3 ruck options and bring in a runner (Eski most likely) for Parker and leave it at that.

[Jewels]

Everitt in as the sub is the only change I can see.
We didn't make wholesale changes after the car accidents that were the Saints and Tiges games so I can't see any changes other than the necessity of covering Parker.

[Bloody Hell]

I didn't say he should be dropped for this week and I don't think there's any chance he will be dropped.

He performed his role well yesterday but our midfield dominance and the 'Dogs lack of key defenders made for a pretty good day for the forwards. Obviously for the time being, he deserves to hold his spot though.

Against good opposition and if we're going to stick with Pyke as the second ruckman/resting forward, I think Spangher could be a better forward option than LRT. People will suggest that he can go back but with Grundy and Richards doing so well and few teams having 3 genuine tall forwards, it's pretty unlikely.

I just think we need to see a few more weeks of Mumford/Pyke/LRT in the one side before declaring it a definite winner. That is not LRT bashing in my view.

What he said.

I like LRT, but think he should be in the backline, and would probably have him ahead of Richards ordinarily. But Richards is in smoking hot form and he has probably dropped to 3rd in the KD list.

LRT is not a solution at FF. Most people who are pro LRT say he'll take pressure off Reid. Spanger is a better option who has shown he works well with Reid in the past, taking pressure off him.

[bandwagon]

Everitt in as the sub is the only change I can see.
We didn't make wholesale changes after the car accidents that were the Saints and Tiges games so I can't see any changes other than the necessity of covering Parker.

Most likely. Armstrong can pay a full game, pushing Shaw or Smith into the midfield. Spangher to wait another week.

[Melbourne_Blood]

Everitt in, seriously ? To do what exactly ? I think we'll have to cover Parkers loss from within the team, possibly Mcglynn spending some significant time on the ball, and Jude and ROK to increase their minutes on ball . Perhaps then we would need to bring in another small/mid forward to cover Mcglynn. Not a Morton flag waver, but has he been going okay in the magoos, is he ready for a chance? Him and TDL together could prove a handful. Other than that maybe Harry C if he can be elevated, he could make a good sub. He did okay in the Nab cup against the Bombers at Etihad. Could give us a real lift coming on in a tight game.

[Reggi]

lRt was very ordinary. The fact that heis getting a gig astounding. Did not look like taking a mark yesterday, and we were all over the doggies he is not a forward

[Melbourne_Blood]

I dont know what game you were wtaching but i thought LRT was good, probably close to the best he's looked up forward for us. Made a strong contest, crashed packs, made defenders earn any marks in our F50, clunked some good grabs, and kicked 2? I thought allowing him to concentrate soley on playing forward really made a difference to his performance.