Changes for Adelaide

[Dirtyburt]

My initial thoughts were he would stand a good chance on insufficient force, but on the different angle I saw tonight, I think he's in more trouble than a first home buyer...

Yep he is a dick, every other player should do the same to him, selfish act. Hope he learns from it, been very good in the past, good record.

I reckon we will challenge

[Dirtyburt]

Good Job we have the soft haired barbarian to fill in. Or we could get TDL to stand Tippett?

[Cheer Squad]

Forget Grundy, he's gone. We'll have to send LRT down back to replace him.

We're going to have to select our strongest possible midfield - that means Goodes not up front - and then see if we can cobble something together with the forward line.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Everitt back, and Jesse. It's going to need a real team effort to win. Grundy's absence might shock them into action.

[Ludwig]

We can cover Grundy with LRT. He slotted right in last year when Grundy got sick. As dangerous as the Crows tall forwards are, the small forwards are the ones I would be worried about.

[mcs]

Forget Grundy, he's gone. We'll have to send LRT down back to replace him.

We're going to have to select our strongest possible midfield - that means Goodes not up front - and then see if we can cobble something together with the forward line.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Everitt back, and Jesse. It's going to need a real team effort to win. Grundy's absence might shock them into action.

I'd hope we don't have to play Goodes in the midfield, and don't think we will unless we must - remember he kicked 5 against them earlier in the year and they really stuggled to deal with him, and I do feel he would have won us that game had it not been for the injury.

I actually think LRT going back could help our forward line a bit - 3 pieces of tall timber is enough if you ask me, 4 can be more trouble than good. Tell Pyke/Mummy to lead away from Sammy, and then let Goodes do his thing as he sees fit - I think that is how we need to approach it. I don't think bringing in another tall forward is what we need - prefer to see Morton or TDL for that matter if they pick another forward rather than Everitt/Jesse.

It would not suprise me to see it be simply Nick Smith in for Grundy though. Will leave us a little short up forward potentially, but would give us an extra midfield rotation potentially - perhaps with Armstrong dropping back to be sub?

[Dirtyburt]

We can cover Grundy with LRT. He slotted right in last year when Grundy got sick. As dangerous as the Crows tall forwards are, the small forwards are the ones I would be worried about.

Yep LRT will take tippett and cover him. Smiff will have his hands full with stiffy.

[TPR4]

Insufficient force would be the only way Reg could get off. Stupid from him. Would imagine the ins won't change. Reid/Smith in for Reg/Walsh. Remember Tony came in for Smith so we have an extra defender anyway. Ted v Walker, AJ v Tippett, Marty plays the 3rd tall role (often does anyway), Smooch gets his normal small fwd (Porpoise or Callinan). Tony and Mal will float around half-back wing as usual. The strength of our backline is that they're versatile, should help. LRT may fill the hole on occasion but I don't think he'll play as a key defender. If LRT goes down back it kills our Reid/Goodes/LRT/resting ruck tall setup up forward.

[Dirtyburt]

I'd hope we don't have to play Goodes in the midfield, and don't think we will unless we must - remember he kicked 5 against them earlier in the year and they really stuggled to deal with him, and I do feel he would have won us that game had it not been for the injury.

I actually think LRT going back could help our forward line a bit - 3 pieces of tall timber is enough if you ask me, 4 can be more trouble than good. Tell Pyke/Mummy to lead away from Sammy, and then let Goodes do his thing as he sees fit - I think that is how we need to approach it. I don't think bringing in another tall forward is what we need - prefer to see Morton or TDL for that matter if they pick another forward rather than Everitt/Jesse.

It would not suprise me to see it be simply Nick Smith in for Grundy though. Will leave us a little short up forward potentially, but would give us an extra midfield rotation potentially - perhaps with Armstrong dropping back to be sub?

Everitt a chance.

[GongSwan]

LRT goes back and follows Tippett into the ruck. Leaves Pyke and Mummy to rotate thru FF and Goodes to roam around doing his own thing. With Smith in, Armstrong plays HB and Smiff rotates thru midfield or tags one of them

[Melbournehammer]

LRT goes back and follows Tippett into the ruck. Leaves Pyke and Mummy to rotate thru FF and Goodes to roam around doing his own thing. With Smith in, Armstrong plays HB and Smiff rotates thru midfield or tags one of them

It would be a luxury to have lrt and pyke and mummy rucking and we would play too tall. I originally didn't mind the idea of lrt going wherever Tippett goes, but I am beginning to think it would be a mistake. I think maybe he picks up Jacobs if he goes to resting ruck in forward line.

Adelaides weakness is its defence and we have to do everything we can to exploit this.

[Hartijon]

LRT goes back and follows Tippett into the ruck. Leaves Pyke and Mummy to rotate thru FF and Goodes to roam around doing his own thing. With Smith in, Armstrong plays HB and Smiff rotates thru midfield or tags one of them

I like this but feel we have to tag Dangerfield who could destroy us in a few minutes of cameo performance in front of his home crowd. I would put Smith on him and play Armstrong for the whole game on HB.Sub should be Jetts on form .

[liz]

I like this but feel we have to tag Dangerfield who could destroy us in a few minutes of cameo performance in front of his home crowd. I would put Smith on him and play Armstrong for the whole game on HB.Sub should be Jetts on form .

Smith doesn't have the size (strength) or speed to closely tag Dangerfield. What's more, Adelaide have a couple of very dangerous small forwards, and defending against this type is the craft that Nick has developed over the past few seasons. Makes more sense to me to use him in an important role that he is very good at, than to move him to a midfield tagging role against a player he is not physically well matched up against.

We don't have anyone with the obvious attributes to tag Dangerfield. Like Goodes when at his best, his combination of size and pace makes him almost impossible to match up on. It will require a team effort to keep his influence under control. ROK is probably the one who has the size and strength to match him, though clearly not the pace. (Kennedy has the size too, but we're not going to be using him to tag anyone.)

[Far Reach]

Not sure we can win this with the usual defensive set up. Might be better to surprise Adelaide with less congestion, a touch more speed, and maintaining a forward structure. Reliance on the mids to kick goals after battering the ball forward is too uncertain in finals and against good teams. Save that for the rain or if we get a big lead.

Changes:
Out: Grundy; Walsh; Parker;
In: Reid; Smith; Everitt (sub)

Pyke and Mumford to do the job as second tall forward.

[SPC]

Smith doesn't have the size (strength) or speed to closely tag Dangerfield. What's more, Adelaide have a couple of very dangerous small forwards, and defending against this type is the craft that Nick has developed over the past few seasons. Makes more sense to me to use him in an important role that he is very good at, than to move him to a midfield tagging role against a player he is not physically well matched up against.

We don't have anyone with the obvious attributes to tag Dangerfield. Like Goodes when at his best, his combination of size and pace makes him almost impossible to match up on. It will require a team effort to keep his influence under control. ROK is probably the one who has the size and strength to match him, though clearly not the pace. (Kennedy has the size too, but we're not going to be using him to tag anyone.)

I would use Shaw on Dangerfield. He has the speed, the run and a nice bit of mongrel to go with him all day. I think Rhyce played some of his best games last year as a tagger and when he won ball in a turnover he had the speed to use it quickly. We would also be better off at the back, because Armstrong's use of the ball and decision making were a breath of fresh air last week and he should definitely be in the team. Rhyce was only slightly better than Hanners in terms of awful disposals.

So for me,
Reid in for Walsh (who I thought was much improved), Smith in for Grundy (Stupidity), Malceski as Sub (run at the end of the game when we need it)

[SPC]

So my team would look like this.

Smith Richards Johnson
Mattner LRT Armstrong

Mumford Kennedy Jack
Parker O?Keefe Shaw (Tag Dangerfield)

Goodes Reid Bolton
McVeigh Pyke McGlynn

Bird, Jetta, Hanners (big lift needed), Malceski (sub)