Changes for Round 5 v Tigers

[aguy]

Your reasons for dropping Jack?

Good question.

Simply because I think we need to invest in games in the future of the club. I know he provides some leadership but I think we have enough on field leadership. Franklin up front Kennedy in the middle and Rampe down back.

As much as I love Jack and what he has done for us he won’t be in our next premiership team

[Blood Fever]

Good question.

Simply because I think we need to invest in games in the future of the club. I know he provides some leadership but I think we have enough on field leadership. Franklin up front Kennedy in the middle and Rampe down back.

As much as I love Jack and what he has done for us he won’t be in our next premiership team

We have always aimed to play finals and that has been admirable. Don't think we'll make it this year. If that becomes apparent, we probably do need to play some young players at the expense of Grundy, Jack and even McVeigh if he only looks to be able to play towards the back end of the season. He is clearly in the best 22 (probably the top 5) and it would be a dilemma but we need to look ahead.

[Ludwig]

Richmond have a small forward line with Riewoldt out, as well as a smallish back line, with Rance out. We could drop both Thurlow and Blakey and not replace them with talls.

It's amazing how Sinclair has now managed to play 35 straight games over 3 seasons, when he was looking so fragile in 2017. I'd be interested in bringing in Cameron and play him along with Sinclair, alternating the 2 in the ruck. Cameron is a good player around the ground, actually not dissimilar to Sinclair, but should be better in the ruck. We should gain some flexibility on how we use Reid and McCartin, depending on the flow of the game, as Buddy and the ruckman playing forward should tie down Asbury and Grimes quite well.

Stoddart defended well against a very quick opponent in the NEAFL game. I'd give him a go playing on one of their small forwards.

[Ralph Dawg]

Richmond have a small forward line with Riewoldt out, as well as a smallish back line, with Rance out. We could drop both Thurlow and Blakey and not replace them with talls.

It's amazing how Sinclair has now managed to play 35 straight games over 3 seasons, when he was looking so fragile in 2017. I'd be interested in bringing in Cameron and play him along with Sinclair, alternating the 2 in the ruck. Cameron is a good player around the ground, actually not dissimilar to Sinclair, but should be better in the ruck. We should gain some flexibility on how we use Reid and McCartin, depending on the flow of the game, as Buddy and the ruckman playing forward should tie down Asbury and Grimes quite well.

Stoddart defended well against a very quick opponent in the NEAFL game. I'd give him a go playing on one of their small forwards.

I don't think Blakey is purely a tall. Yes he is physically tall but is fast and skillful. He can run on a wing and off half back if the coaches didn't want him playing tall. He has showed flashes of brilliance and X factor. I just feel he brings more to the table than Ronke, who can't hit a target or kick reliably for goal at present. He's not really versatile as he has only shown effectiveness as a small forward. I would give his spot to Rowbottom.

[Ludwig]

I don't think Blakey is purely a tall. Yes he is physically tall but is fast and skillful. He can run on a wing and off half back if the coaches didn't want him playing tall. He has showed flashes of brilliance and X factor. I just feel he brings more to the table than Ronke, who can't hit a target or kick reliably for goal at present. He's not really versatile as he has only shown effectiveness as a small forward. I would give his spot to Rowbottom.

At this point in the season, I would leave the first year players in the NEAFL for a while and give guys who look more ready to play at AFL level, like COR, Rose and Stoddart, a go at senior level.

I think Rowbottom will get a shot this year, and perhaps it's not too far off, but I would like to see him continue to develop his outside game in the NEAFL.

Blakey is showing that is a talent of the future, but he's not contributing much right now. I'm ambivalent about Ronke. He was a bit better on Thursday, but off his best by some margin. He can dropped and replaced by a midfielder in normal rotation.

[Blood Fever]

At this point in the season, I would leave the first year players in the NEAFL for a while and give guys who look more ready to play at AFL level, like COR, Rose and Stoddart, a go at senior level.

I think Rowbottom will get a shot this year, and perhaps it's not too far off, but I would like to see him continue to develop his outside game in the NEAFL.

Blakey is showing that is a talent of the future, but he's not contributing much right now. I'm ambivalent about Ronke. He was a bit better on Thursday, but off his best by some margin. He can dropped and replaced by a midfielder in normal rotation.

Unless Ronke kicks goals, his inability to hit a target makes him a liability. Burnt Buddy a number of times with kicks that landed in front of him. Chronically poor short passer of the ball. Not AFL standard.

[Ralph Dawg]

At this point in the season, I would leave the first year players in the NEAFL for a while and give guys who look more ready to play at AFL level, like COR, Rose and Stoddart, a go at senior level.

I think Rowbottom will get a shot this year, and perhaps it's not too far off, but I would like to see him continue to develop his outside game in the NEAFL.

Blakey is showing that is a talent of the future, but he's not contributing much right now. I'm ambivalent about Ronke. He was a bit better on Thursday, but off his best by some margin. He can dropped and replaced by a midfielder in normal rotation.

If we played in a reserves competition with consistent strong opposition, then yes, I would agree with playing our first year players in reserves. NEAFL is getting better, but is still no VFL / SAFL. I think Blakey will learn more playing in one's, has skills we need in firsts and is actually playing better than others.

[ugg]

If Lloyd Perris’s comments are any guide, it doesn’t look like Rowbottom will be debuting soon as they think he has aspects to his game he needs to work on.

[Ludwig]

If we played in a reserves competition with consistent strong opposition, then yes, I would agree with playing our first year players in reserves. NEAFL is getting better, but is still no VFL / SAFL. I think Blakey will learn more playing in one's, has skills we need in firsts and is actually playing better than others.

Gold Coast put out a pretty good team today. We play mostly the reserves for the other AFL clubs, so the competition should be roughly the same level for both sides. If Lukosius can play for GC reserves, then Blakey can play for ours. GC had a lot of high draft picks in their side.

In any case, if you think the competition is not good enough for our 1st year players, then it would be even worse for out second year players, and even worse for 4th year players like COR. It doesn't make sense to play Blakey in the side and leave out COR, or Melican, for that matter. These guys really need AFL games in them, because they need the game to start feeling comfortable in the AFL; get used to the pace, etc. We know they belong in the AFL when playing in good form.

[707]

COR & Rowbottom for McInerney & Ronke/Blakey all of who contributed little against Melbourne

I don't care what deficiencies Rowbottom has in his game (per Perris) he is highly likely to contribute more than those guys at present, from all accounts a footy smarts ball magnet.

COR was stiff to be dropped and his replacement didn't do too much either, Thurlow not needed this week against a small forward line.

[Ralph Dawg]

Gold Coast put out a pretty good team today. We play mostly the reserves for the other AFL clubs, so the competition should be roughly the same level for both sides. If Lukosius can play for GC reserves, then Blakey can play for ours. GC had a lot of high draft picks in their side.

In any case, if you think the competition is not good enough for our 1st year players, then it would be even worse for out second year players, and even worse for 4th year players like COR. It doesn't make sense to play Blakey in the side and leave out COR, or Melican, for that matter. These guys really need AFL games in them, because they need the game to start feeling comfortable in the AFL; get used to the pace, etc. We know they belong in the AFL when playing in good form.

I'll confess Ludwig, I don't watch SAFL or VFL so only assume it's stronger than NEAFL based on mature age talent that comes out of their competition. NEAFL is definitely getting better but when we play some of the weaker sides like Canberra, Redlands and NT, it doesn't seem to be much of a challenge. The AFL reserve teams are very dependent on injuries so are strong at the start of the season but can deteriorate as the season goes on, with teams full of young academy boys. Look at what happen to our team in the GF v Southport last year. Plus so many byes. But I take your point about our 2-4 year players needing AFL time but only if we are confident they are up to it. 1st year players can also benefit hugely from playing mainly ones straight away - Papley, Heeney and Mills are 3 I can think of.

[stevoswan]

Interesting that we are playing Richmond at Marvel Stadium yet again......why is this so?

Mind you, I am not unhappy about this given our record at this stadium.

[MattW]

For those of us on Horse Presser Hint Watch, he suggested Rowbottom and Stoddart as well-performed reserves players under consideration this week.

[KSAS]

Interesting that we are playing Richmond at Marvel Stadium yet again......why is this so?

Mind you, I am not unhappy about this given our record at this stadium.

My understanding is that as part of the AFL's Marvel - MCG stadium deal, Richmond is required to play one home game at Marvel. Invariably it has been us last 2 seasons, as it's also linked to the AFL's fixturing policy for each Non Vic club to play 2 H&A games at the MCG (otherwise we'd get 3 MCG games). Not sure if the other MCG tenant teams are also bounded by this clause.

[caj23]

I don't think Blakey is purely a tall. Yes he is physically tall but is fast and skillful. He can run on a wing and off half back if the coaches didn't want him playing tall. He has showed flashes of brilliance and X factor. I just feel he brings more to the table than Ronke, who can't hit a target or kick reliably for goal at present. He's not really versatile as he has only shown effectiveness as a small forward. I would give his spot to Rowbottom.

I think going forward that is true, but at the moment he isn't offering anything at AFL level and needs a run in the NEAFL (Blakey)

Not sure whether Ronke should be dropped or not, but even out of form he is giving us more than Blakey