If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
A record win against the Hawks without Buddy and Hickey was very nice. I do think Rowbottom though, had a meh game for a contested possession player and was far under the standard he set in the second half of last season. First real test is next week.
To be fair to Hayden, he's being asked to play a role that is not his forte whilst others are out or coming back from being injured. He's a better forward than a ruck, because he neither has the height to be a pure ruck, nor the agility to compensate for the lack of height.
If either Amartey or Reid are at full fitness, they place the second ruck role. He's doing a holding job for now. I expect with Bud coming back next week, and Joel now having been managed back into the senior side, Hayden goes out.
Hayden's a solid depth player who can clunk a couple of marks, stand up packs, and kicks beautifully for goal when he gets his chance. I like having him on our list as you need players like him, and he's an honest competitor, but am realistic about what he does and doesn't bring.
A record win against the Hawks without Buddy and Hickey was very nice. I do think Rowbottom though, had a meh game for a contested possession player and was far under the standard he set in the second half of last season. First real test is next week.
Agree with this. I think RB has had a slower start to the year than hoped. The good news is that his pressure and defensive game is still strong, leading our tackles and 2nd behind Errol in pressure acts. Hopefully, he can start winning some more hard ball like at the end of last year.
Are you suggesting they drop Joel for Buddy's return?
Good lord no, that'd be nuts!
Based on there being no new injuries/or recoveries, and in the absence of alternative ruck:
I'd play McLean again as relief ruck, and when not doing that tagging Lever to stop him interception party.
Bring Buddy back as a supersub, yes I agree with Ludwig in this.
And let Roberts get a whole game in the two's rather than have another 10 minute vignette in the 1sts.
Based on there being no new injuries/or recoveries, and in the absence of alternative ruck:
I'd play McLean again as relief ruck, and when not doing that tagging Lever to stop him interception party.
Bring Buddy back as a supersub, yes I agree with Ludwig in this.
And let Roberts get a whole game in the two's rather than have another 10 minute vignette in the 1sts.
Some might say playing Franklin, McDonald, Amartey and McLean is playing too tall? Although if Franklin was sub, that would alleviate that issue.....but I just doubt he'll be sub.
Agree on Roberts though.....must be frustrating playing limited minutes at the end of a game.
Some might say playing Franklin, McDonald, Amartey and McLean is playing too tall? Although if Franklin was sub, that would alleviate that issue.....but I just doubt he'll be sub.
Yep all 4 on the ground (plus a ruck) at the one time would make us too tall.
Yep all 4 on the ground (plus a ruck) at the one time would make us too tall.
The sub is such a stupid rule with the AFL trying to gimmick more tactics/discussion re who will be sub and when will they come on. Just make it an extra player on the interchange already.
The game is interesting and physically challenging enough without importing a soccer rule with all the issues it creates (like is it a proper debut or not, limited minutes for the sub who comes on late, the subbed out player not being able to be brought back on if there are injuries to other players etc).
With the sub rule replaced by an extended bench, we wouldn’t have to consider conniving Buddy to be a super sub or not, and a player like Roberts would get more decent game time.
We could also play Roberts for 50-60% TOG by taking a few % TOG off lots of different players instead of effectively taking it all from the player subbed out.
On Footy Classified they showed the initial coaches votes for our game, and one of the coaches accidentally selected Will Gould instead of Gulden! They blamed Longmire.
I just watched footage on the Swans app of Luke Parker mic'ed up during the game. It's really interesting.
The sub is such a stupid rule with the AFL trying to gimmick more tactics/discussion re who will be sub and when will they come on. Just make it an extra player on the interchange already.
The game is interesting and physically challenging enough without importing a soccer rule with all the issues it creates (like is it a proper debut or not, limited minutes for the sub who comes on late, the subbed out player not being able to be brought back on if there are injuries to other players etc).
With the sub rule replaced by an extended bench, we wouldn’t have to consider conniving Buddy to be a super sub or not, and a player like Roberts would get more decent game time.
We could also play Roberts for 50-60% TOG by taking a few % TOG off lots of different players instead of effectively taking it all from the player subbed out.
On Footy Classified they showed the initial coaches votes for our game, and one of the coaches accidentally selected Will Gould instead of Gulden! They blamed Longmire.
I just watched footage on the Swans app of Luke Parker mic'ed up during the game. It's really interesting.
Yes, I enjoyed that. And it wasn't just that it showed how much chat goes on. The loud bumps emphasised how physical the game is and combined with the up close camera work, it demonstrated how threats can come from any angle. Which in turn emphasises how rapidly players have to process options, in order to get away effective disposals.
It also made me wonder, how many fans, if given a choice between listening to a miked up player and the Channel 7 commentary team, would go for the player?
Yes, I enjoyed that. And it wasn't just that it showed how much chat goes on. The loud bumps emphasised how physical the game is and combined with the up close camera work, it demonstrated how threats can come from any angle. Which in turn emphasises how rapidly players have to process options, in order to get away effective disposals.
It also made me wonder, how many fans, if given a choice between listening to a miked up player and the Channel 7 commentary team, would go for the player?
I don't know about listening to all of those grunts for two hours. However, I would certainly prefer a crowd sounds feed to the Ch7 commentary. It's a matter of time before Fox is allowed a provide its own commentary for simulcast games (as occurs in the NRL) and that would be fine too.
Comment