Changes for Rnd 7 V Brisbane.

[Billericay]

... Reg is contracted until next year. I think he's become too slow to play in a modern defence, but not too slow to play in the ruck, where his work under pressure would be very useful once the ball hits the ground. He reads the play well and is a good mark. He also has a good tank.

Here's an idea: We play we 4 tall defenders: Reg, Aliir, Talia and Melican. Reg plays as our 1st ruckman with help from Aliir. So we effective are only playing 3 in defence at any one time. Our forward line is not compromised by taking a forward to play in the ruck.

I don't think Sinclair is a viable option. I like Cal because he puts in a big effort. He really gives it his best, but he is simply not good enough as a ruckman and cannot take a mark unless it uncontested and he gets 2 cracks at it. It's not going to work.

I agree that Sinclair hasn't been covering himself in glory, but he is improving week by week. Took a genuine contested mark and scored from it this week and another one inside FWD50 in the last quarter. I think he's going to be a better ruckman in the short-term than Reg. Wanting to not play Reg in defence is no excuse for playing him in the ruck.

In the absence of Tippett / Naismith I would like to see Cameron get a go as a Fwd / ruck not Sam Reid.

[barry]

McVeigh must come back through the 2's.
Tippet should not play unless 100%.

[i'm-uninformed2]

Some selection thoughts, not so much for next week as generally. It was prompted by a remark Longmire made last week that Aliir was out as Melican was playing in his spot. (And I say this as a Longmire fan). But it struck me he was saying we'd pretty much only play two tall defenders. When I reckon part of the issue is our defensive mix and what it frees up elsewhere.

So, I'd start with Grundy, Melican and Smith as the three pure defenders - that is, first job to negate. Smith is still our best small defender, Grundy can still take the gorillas and Melican looks a great prospect.

But from there, I'd have Aliir, as he can both take a third tall when required, or play on a medium forward comfortably with his athleticism. And the easier his assignment, the more he can be free to intercept and run.

And when Rampe returns, that means at worst he's got to play on a fourth best tall or medium forward, which gets him free to sweep and cover and be a release kick - something we miss dearly and he's best suited to.

I'd then put a combination of Jones & Lloyd in a running role too and one of the mids like a Mills or Heeney (which I will come back to) as floating back and marking cover on occasions.

Now, this has the benefit of sending Mills and either Jones or Lloyd upfield for two reasons - one to free Mills from the pressures of defence, and to add to our midfield mix.

Right now, I think the core three of Kennedy, Parker and Hanners are suffering from a few things, but one is they do almost all centre bounces. We saw in the first half yesterday what Heeney can add, and Mills could do the same. Whichever of Jones and Lloyd are not needed down back circulate through too. Suddenly, we have five or six excellent players to circulate through the core of the midfield - and some actually have real pace and run.

A mix of Hewett and Newman and one or two others will have to round out the rotations, but it is a more versatile and deeper group. And who knows, there may be occasions where match ups allow us to slip Rampe through for patches.

Finally, my other beef - how we play Tippett. I know he was a terrific ruck in the first half of last year, but his forward play has gone to crap. Both marking, and with it, goal production. And yet, at his best, he's a three goal a game forward.

Play him deep. Full stop. If he needs to do 20 percent of the game in the ruck ok, but his primary role should be as a forward. Buddy can then float 30-70m out, and Reid can roam through too. But three tall targets each with different strengths is a bugger for most defences, and gives Papley and Hayward or resting mids something to feed off, and our mids something to kick to.

Anyway, I appreciate its not a best 22 and dependent on injuries and fitness (for example, Parker is clearly struggling with a lack of pre-season) and general lack of cohesion being fixed but I think you get what my thinking is on trying to create a more stable defence, run, and deeper midfield, as well as some structure up forward.

[111431]

Some selection thoughts, not so much for next week as generally. It was prompted by a remark Longmire made last week that Aliir was out as Melican was playing in his spot. (And I say this as a Longmire fan). But it struck me he was saying we'd pretty much only play two tall defenders. When I reckon part of the issue is our defensive mix and what it frees up elsewhere.

So, I'd start with Grundy, Melican and Smith as the three pure defenders - that is, first job to negate. Smith is still our best small defender, Grundy can still take the gorillas and Melican looks a great prospect.

But from there, I'd have Aliir, as he can both take a third tall when required, or play on a medium forward comfortably with his athleticism. And the easier his assignment, the more he can be free to intercept and run.

And when Rampe returns, that means at worst he's got to play on a fourth best tall or medium forward, which gets him free to sweep and cover and be a release kick - something we miss dearly and he's best suited to.

I'd then put a combination of Jones & Lloyd in a running role too and one of the mids like a Mills or Heeney (which I will come back to) as floating back and marking cover on occasions.

Now, this has the benefit of sending Mills and either Jones or Lloyd upfield for two reasons - one to free Mills from the pressures of defence, and to add to our midfield mix.

Right now, I think the core three of Kennedy, Parker and Hanners are suffering from a few things, but one is they do almost all centre bounces. We saw in the first half yesterday what Heeney can add, and Mills could do the same. Whichever of Jones and Lloyd are not needed down back circulate through too. Suddenly, we have five or six excellent players to circulate through the core of the midfield - and some actually have real pace and run.

A mix of Hewett and Newman and one or two others will have to round out the rotations, but it is a more versatile and deeper group. And who knows, there may be occasions where match ups allow us to slip Rampe through for patches.

Finally, my other beef - how we play Tippett. I know he was a terrific ruck in the first half of last year, but his forward play has gone to crap. Both marking, and with it, goal production. And yet, at his best, he's a three goal a game forward.

Play him deep. Full stop. If he needs to do 20 percent of the game in the ruck ok, but his primary role should be as a forward. Buddy can then float 30-70m out, and Reid can roam through too. But three tall targets each with different strengths is a bugger for most defences, and gives Papley and Hayward or resting mids something to feed off, and our mids something to kick to.

Anyway, I appreciate its not a best 22 and dependent on injuries and fitness (for example, Parker is clearly struggling with a lack of pre-season) and general lack of cohesion being fixed but I think you get what my thinking is on trying to create a more stable defence, run, and deeper midfield, as well as some structure up forward.

there is a lot of sense here. Just need to sort out long term ruck situation. Naismith and tippo are to fragile to play no1 ruck. Need to persevere with Sincas and Cameron (who looks good) for the long term

[Ludwig]

I agree that Sinclair hasn't been covering himself in glory, but he is improving week by week. Took a genuine contested mark and scored from it this week and another one inside FWD50 in the last quarter. I think he's going to be a better ruckman in the short-term than Reg. Wanting to not play Reg in defence is no excuse for playing him in the ruck.

1. I don't think Sinclair is actually improving. I've always given him credit for effort and he does tackle. The problem is that in the position he plays he has to absolutely nail his marks. He will take some marks. Many are uncontested. A fair few are double takes. He simply drops too many. I know Horse is often happy if a tall forward just brings the ball to ground, but when a 2 mtr. player is a clear position to mark the ball, he has to do it.
2. I am looking for something for Reg to do outside of his usual position in backline. I think Reg would at least as effective as Sinclair in the ruck and much more of an asset around the ground. Reg can definitely take a contested mark. He can also nullify the opposing ruckman who goes forward, as that's a very normal role for Reg.

I am just offering other options to the much maligned game plan of trying to win the contested ball. Let's try to give ourselves a different look that might give opposition something to think about.

As things might have it, we have suddenly come into a plethora of good KPDs with Aliir, Melican, Talia, Maibaum and AJ. Toby Pink has been playing forward and looking a reasonable prospect. Even if he doesn't make it as a forward, I think he could be a good key defender. Good size and agility. He's played in defence as a junior. Playing in the ruck could be a better option than the NEAFL for someone of Reg's experience.

It's a good year to experiment and try a few different things.

[Billericay]

Some selection thoughts, not so much for next week as generally. It was prompted by a remark Longmire made last week that Aliir was out as Melican was playing in his spot. (And I say this as a Longmire fan). But it struck me he was saying we'd pretty much only play two tall defenders. When I reckon part of the issue is our defensive mix and what it frees up elsewhere.

So, I'd start with Grundy, Melican and Smith as the three pure defenders - that is, first job to negate. Smith is still our best small defender, Grundy can still take the gorillas and Melican looks a great prospect.

But from there, I'd have Aliir, as he can both take a third tall when required, or play on a medium forward comfortably with his athleticism. And the easier his assignment, the more he can be free to intercept and run.

And when Rampe returns, that means at worst he's got to play on a fourth best tall or medium forward, which gets him free to sweep and cover and be a release kick - something we miss dearly and he's best suited to.

I'd then put a combination of Jones & Lloyd in a running role too and one of the mids like a Mills or Heeney (which I will come back to) as floating back and marking cover on occasions.

Now, this has the benefit of sending Mills and either Jones or Lloyd upfield for two reasons - one to free Mills from the pressures of defence, and to add to our midfield mix.

Right now, I think the core three of Kennedy, Parker and Hanners are suffering from a few things, but one is they do almost all centre bounces. We saw in the first half yesterday what Heeney can add, and Mills could do the same. Whichever of Jones and Lloyd are not needed down back circulate through too. Suddenly, we have five or six excellent players to circulate through the core of the midfield - and some actually have real pace and run.

A mix of Hewett and Newman and one or two others will have to round out the rotations, but it is a more versatile and deeper group. And who knows, there may be occasions where match ups allow us to slip Rampe through for patches.

Finally, my other beef - how we play Tippett. I know he was a terrific ruck in the first half of last year, but his forward play has gone to crap. Both marking, and with it, goal production. And yet, at his best, he's a three goal a game forward.

Play him deep. Full stop. If he needs to do 20 percent of the game in the ruck ok, but his primary role should be as a forward. Buddy can then float 30-70m out, and Reid can roam through too. But three tall targets each with different strengths is a bugger for most defences, and gives Papley and Hayward or resting mids something to feed off, and our mids something to kick to.

Anyway, I appreciate its not a best 22 and dependent on injuries and fitness (for example, Parker is clearly struggling with a lack of pre-season) and general lack of cohesion being fixed but I think you get what my thinking is on trying to create a more stable defence, run, and deeper midfield, as well as some structure up forward.

I agree about 3 tall defenders. We were playing 2 talls plus Rampe, which worked because Rampe is a medium who plays tall. Marsh v Cameron proved a disaster. I'd rather have Aliir in there than Laidler. If speed is an issue, Aliir is faster than Laidler and can do more offensively. When Rampe returns it will be interesting to see who'd make way.

I also agree about too much being left to Parks / Joey / Hanners. We absolutely need to rotate a few more through there. Heeney is already happening. I'd like to see Jones on the ball as he is hard and breaks the lines, although he doesn't seem to tackle much. Mills / Newman feel like they'd sit behind the play and distribute rather than win the ball. Hewitt is going OK as an onballer. Does Ronke have the potential to play inside, if he actually exists.

Ruck is a huge problem for us right now. Tippett playing deep didn't work for us which is why he ended up going into the ruck, with great success for the first half of last year. Now he's out of form, can we afford to play him back into form in the AFL or should he have a stint in the NEAFL? I'd like to give Cameron a go and take the pressure off Tippett to rush back into the side. I know he has great "potential" but he hasn't got anywhere near it this year.

Not convinced Sinclair has the potential to be our #1 ruck, but they have to keep playing him to give him every opportunity until Naismith returns. I have really high hopes for Naismith. I'm not convinced he is injury prone; players just need to stop falling onto him. But again, I'd keep going with Sinclair until Naismith has had a game or 2 in the twos and is back in form, rather than rushing him back in.

It feels like the Swans need to stop picking unfit / out of form players and only play those that are fit and are playing well. Easier said than done when there's not much to come in from the NEAFL.

[Chilcott]

I was at the game and by the end of it, I wasn't taking much notice, but I swear Grundy was back on the ground in the last 5 minutes. If that was the case, he should be available next week.

[Meg]

I was at the game and by the end of it, I wasn't taking much notice, but I swear Grundy was back on the ground in the last 5 minutes. If that was the case, he should be available next week.

On the match report Grundy was listed as having concussion (along with Rohan). If correct then I hope he wasn't back on the ground.

[ugg]

Yes Reg finished the game on the ground

[Billericay]

No 'dramatic change' for Sydney, despite horror start - AFL.com.au

SYDNEY won't make any "dramatic change" in the wake of its shock 0-6 start to 2017, with Swans football boss Tom Harley confident the club has the talent to turn its season around...

Harley told SEN radio on Monday morning the Swans were not contemplating the type of "catastrophic changes" Hawthorn coach Alastair Clarkson flagged in the wake of his side's latest flogging at the hands of St Kilda on Saturday.

Harley said the Swans had blooded 13 debutants since the start of last season, and believed simple hard work would prove the solution to their on-field woes.

"We haven't taken a specific development focus with the selection of the team. We've been picking the team on merit and the way the list has evolved over the past couple of years, the kids [have been] playing," Harley said.

"So it's not just like we've changed tack and played the kids because the kids are playing. And to be fair, of those 13 (recent debutants) only Jack Hiscox is no longer in the squad and the others have made meaningful contributions.

"We've clearly had some challenges with players coming off limited preparations and some absolute uncontrollables like (Isaac) Heeney (glandular fever) and (Dane) Rampe (broken arm), so we need to get our best players in the team and fit, and then work on the form.

"I wouldn't be forecasting any dramatic change.

"We know we have got the talent. We had five All Australians last year and technically that's only seven games ago. So we've got to find ways to maximise their output."

[wolftone57]

Id just bring in Talia and Allir.
Talia should have played today.

Ruck can be Sinclair with Reid and Allir helping out.

Barry I don't want to see Reid in the ruck. Our forward line has been totally destabalised since he has had to go to the ruck. I want to see either Cameron or Tippett in. Cameron was very good in the reserves. We have no forward set up at present and that is because Longmire insists on rucking Reid. Absolute crap and it has been a bloody disaster. Not that he has been crap in the ruck he has been just ok. But when he is in the ruck we have no forward set up because Sinclair can't mark the bloody ball. The other thing is Darcy Cameron can be very dangerous up forward.

[swansrob]

On the match report Grundy was listed as having concussion (along with Rohan). If correct then I hope he wasn't back on the ground.

I'm sure I read somewhere that his concussion was a late on-set and he passed the in-game test, only showing symptoms afterward

[ScottH]

I have a 100% win record for interstate games.
And I'm going to this one.
I'd like to keep my record clean.

[Mark26]

Barry I don't want to see Reid in the ruck. Our forward line has been totally destabalised since he has had to go to the ruck. I want to see either Cameron or Tippett in. Cameron was very good in the reserves. We have no forward set up at present and that is because Longmire insists on rucking Reid. Absolute crap and it has been a bloody disaster. Not that he has been crap in the ruck he has been just ok. But when he is in the ruck we have no forward set up because Sinclair can't mark the bloody ball. The other thing is Darcy Cameron can be very dangerous up forward.

Agreed. It doesn't make any sense to play a key position player in the tuck. We compromise our forward structure further by doing so. If our ruckman are incapable of rucking, they should be cut or traded as soon as possible.

[Meg]

I'm sure I read somewhere that his concussion was a late on-set and he passed the in-game test, only showing symptoms afterward

Thanks for info.