Round 1: Brisbane v Swans @ the Gabba

[wolftone57]

It does give his first name as Hayden, and Lewis was atrocious against GW$. Maybe the club feels the need is greater for HMC down back than up forward with our "embarrassment of riches" keeping Sinkers as an emergency. Or at the very least that he can't be worse than the Pelican?

Otherwise it should please everyone at RWO: Wicks, Warner and RB all named, and whoever predicated Hayward as 23rd man, he's named as first emergency. Interested that Campbell named as a starter in the mids and JPK and Mills on the interchange. I know it means little but ...

I think McLean has been picked because their forwards are pretty tall. They run three talls. Will they change this due to rain? I don't think so it is a part of their game plan to stretch opposition. This it will do against most teams. we have included McLean because Melican played like a doped up Goose against GWS. McLean is a KPP. He has been doing defensive work with the backs as well as ruck and forward work. I think they are looking for flexibility from hayden.

[Markwebbos]

... we have included McLean because Melican played like a doped up Goose against GWS. McLean is a KPP. He has been doing defensive work with the backs as well as ruck and forward work. I think they are looking for flexibility from hayden.

I didn’t realise that McLean had been training with the backs. Makes a bit more sense now.

[Thunder Shaker]

The 19th & 20th man system was in place for some 80 years before the interchange system was introduced in 1978 with the purpose to allow injured players to receive treatment and return to the ground. It gradually got manipulated over the decades to where we are now with high rotations and being a 22 v 22 instead of 18 v 18.

It's interesting that the 19th & 20th man system would the simplest and fairest system to deal with the concussion and serious injury issues the AFL is currently trying to address. I think it would also reduce the risk of concussions and serious injuries because the increase of fatigue also means less high speed collisions/congestion.

I finally thought the AFL was on right path in heading towards reducing rotations & increasing fatigue, to a point I hoped it may also eventually reduce the number of players on the bench and more towards a 18 v 18. But this 23rd man (Clarko) rule they've suddenly introduced flies in the face of that. It shows coaches (Clarko) were panicking the reduced rotations was going to stifle their strategies and had to combat it by trying to justify the need for a 23rd man, which the AFL (Hocking) sadly fell for.

Don't know why the AFL continually consults coaches with rules changes, who are primarily paid to win games and do not give a stuff how the game looks.

If the AFL is serious about opening the game up to increase scoring, it would take a close look at the interchange rules that prevailed in high-scoring seasons.

The 1980s was a high-scoring decade. Clubs had two interchange players. The 1972 Grand Final had an aggregate score over 300. There was no interchange, just 19th and 20th players.

To refine the current rules, I would reduce the number of players on the bench and reduce the number of interchanges.
* 20 or 21 players plus an injury reserve, not 22+1.
* 15 interchanges for the whole game.
* The interchanging of players between quarters does not count against the interchange cap. This simplifies the duties of interchange stewards: they only need to count interchanges on the ground.
* Activating an injury reserve does not count as an interchange.
* Get rid of the 6-6-6 rule. It's not really necessary.

[Thunder Shaker]

Yes, I seem to recall that last season, we got into the habit of naming teams, that didn't bear that much resemblance to the starting positions. This one is probably continuing in that tradition. Other oddities that haven't really been commented on, are: Papley named as a follower; Mills and Kennedy starting on the bench; while Warner and the three debutants are all listed as starters. Which I don't think will happen. So, since I don't think McLean has ever played defence for us, it's likely that he'll play as our big bodied forward and Reid will play defence.

Although another possibility, is that both McLean and Reid play forward, Dawson plays as a key defender and Mills drops back to Dawson's defensive flanker role. But I think that would disappoint quite a few people.

One should not pay too much attention to the positions of players on team sheets. These traditional positions are based on an old play style with fixed player positions that has been out of vogue for decades.

If I was listing players for teams, I would list them as follows:

Tall defenders:
Other defenders:
Rucks:
Midfielders:
Tall forwards:
Other forwards:
Tall utilities:
Injury sub:
Emergencies:

No fixed numbers of players in each category other than the injury sub and emergencies. No interchange. Just 22 players listed according to their most likely roles.

This system would solve the problem of assigning position to Reid and McLean by placing them both in the Tall Utilities category. Both can play forward, in defence, or in the ruck as needed. I suspect that the Reid/McLean choice is influenced by the reduction in number of interchanges by designating them as rucks in specific parts of the ground when Hickey is resting elsewhere on the ground or the bench.

[dejavoodoo44]

I didn’t realise that McLean had been training with the backs. Makes a bit more sense now.

Either way, I'm quite keen to have a look at McLean. While he'll probably be better suited in the dry, rather than the wet, we should be able to get a handle on, whether his first his first uninterrupted preseason has improved his athletic ability. If it turns out that he has more mobility and greater endurance, then he may be a genuine key position prospect, and one that we picked up for a bargain.

[royboy42]

The 19th & 20th man system was in place for some 80 years before the interchange system was introduced in 1978 with the purpose to allow injured players to receive treatment and return to the ground. It gradually got manipulated over the decades to where we are now with high rotations and being a 22 v 22 instead of 18 v 18.

It's interesting that the 19th & 20th man system would the simplest and fairest system to deal with the concussion and serious injury issues the AFL is currently trying to address. I think it would also reduce the risk of concussions and serious injuries because the increase of fatigue also means less high speed collisions/congestion.

I finally thought the AFL was on right path in heading towards reducing rotations & increasing fatigue, to a point I hoped it may also eventually reduce the number of players on the bench and more towards a 18 v 18. But this 23rd man (Clarko) rule they've suddenly introduced flies in the face of that. It shows coaches (Clarko) were panicking the reduced rotations was going to stifle their strategies and had to combat it by trying to justify the need for a 23rd man, which the AFL (Hocking) sadly fell for.

Don't know why the AFL continually consults coaches with rules changes, who are primarily paid to win games and do not give a stuff how the game looks.

It is entirely possible that my memory is inaccurate, but i think 19th and 20th were not for injured to be fixed and returned. Once they were off, they stayed off and 19 or 10 stayed on till the end.

[Ludwig]

My speculation on the Melican non-selection is that it was due to something the club did not want to speak about at this time. So probably not injury. I didn't think that Melican played as badly last game as some have said, but he did fall away badly in the 4th quarter after being competitive even in the contests he lost earlier in the game. Last year, Melican was dropped after getting frustrated by not playing well and giving away several costly free kicks. The fourth quarter drop off last week is a sign of Melican losing competitiveness due to lack of self-control, allowing his frustration to get the better of him. It's something that Longmire really frowns upon.

I agree with Wolftone as to the likely inclusion of McLean as a key defender. I've been thinking iwe would try to turn either McLean or Amartey into a defender to give both a better opportunity to develop into AFL regulars. If Paddy McCartin is drafted by us in mid-season, it will lessen opportunities for either to make the team as a forward We can use some extra height down back as well.

It's less likely that we would play 2 inexperienced key forwards in one game, rather than playing the experience Reid to help keep the structure intact. McLean and McDonald would find it harder to get their coordination right in a first time pairing.

[Ralph Dawg]

Brisbane weather update from my house, 2km from the Gabba.
No rain now for the last 3-4hours.
Clouds high, overcast but doesn't look threatening.
Backyard soft on foot but drying.
Pretty humid, would be about as moist as Boony's jock strap.

Pumped for the game.

[longmile]

I'm really suprised by McLean getting a go before Brand. Is he injured? Thought he looked the goods as a defender before getting injured last year

[TheBloods]

Big trouble if we are dropping an average player like Melican for a plodder like McLean.

Wtf would Kennedy be on the bench and Papley as a follower ?

[longmile]

Big trouble if we are dropping an average player like Melican for a plodder like McLean.

Wtf would Kennedy be on the bench and Papley as a follower ?

Listed starting positions rarely mean much

[The Runner]

Big trouble if we are dropping an average player like Melican for a plodder like McLean.

Wtf would Kennedy be on the bench and Papley as a follower ?

This isn't 1992.

[TheBloods]

Listed starting positions rarely mean much

Insulting nonetheless. One of the great warriors in our clubs history. Not just of his era. Deserves better than to be named on the bench while the follower spots go to an unproven player and a small forward.

I am expecting Mclean to play forward and Reid to go back. Both disasters. Reid is a serviceable fwd. That is better than anything else we have right now. McLean is like a tonka truck, last game was nowhere near the level when he played forward. No idea what Longmire is thinking.

[Auntie.Gerald]

Im not sold that McLean will play all his game in the backline against a top4 team no matter how tall their forwards. McLean doesnt play much in the backs prior and the Lions are formidable.

We will probably see Mills roll back 50% of the game and McLean shuffle around ruck, backs and forward if McDonald is struggling and or exhausted and getting smashed by the Lions backline.

[Auntie.Gerald]

So, all but Bud and Fox due to injuries?

exciting that we have minimal injuries for rd1 and we have pretty much a full deck of cards to play with.

Our 2019 no3 pick Stephens cant get a game nor McInerney a big improver last season. Niggling injuries or need more game time in ressies?