Rnd 15 - vs West Coast Eagles at SCG, 4:35 PM, Saturday 24 June 2023

[Blood Fever]

Ridiculous move to drop Fox

It probably came down to him or Francis given match ups

[Maltopia]

Cameron is out, knocked unconscious by our old number 6 pick Gary Rohan. Fox would have been the matchup so our selection panel are geniuses

[liz]

Cameron is out, knocked unconscious by our old number 6 pick Gary Rohan. Fox would have been the matchup so our selection panel are geniuses

Except we're playing West Coast on Saturday, not Geelong.

[Maltopia]

Ah oops - I need more sleep it seems.

Cameron should be out for our Geelong match too at least due to the 12 day protocol.

[caj23]

It probably came down to him or Francis given match ups

That's a weird justification given that Fox is one of our most versatile players. He can play on talls or smalls in the backline and has played quality games forward and as relieving ruck.

He has been one of our better players and always has a crack in what has been a @@@@@show of a season.

[lwjoyner]

No mccartin )tom) again apparently in reserves. So why not try Arnold a big backman if we dont try him why did we pick him up in the mid season draft. Fox getting dropped surprises me also. Strange going son with our selections.

[Roadrunner]

No mccartin )tom) again apparently in reserves. So why not try Arnold a big backman if we dont try him why did we pick him up in the mid season draft. Fox getting dropped surprises me also. Strange going son with our selections.

The only thing that makes sense is that he is being managed. His game last week was a bit poor by his standards but he was moved all over the place. He has enough credits in the bank so I can’t think he was dropped in favour of Francis- we can’t be so silly, surely!

[Blood Fever]

That's a weird justification given that Fox is one of our most versatile players. He can play on talls or smalls in the backline and has played quality games forward and as relieving ruck.

He has been one of our better players and always has a crack in what has been a @@@@@show of a season.

So you agree he should play instead of Francis?

[Jimitron5000]

Confused by Fox's omission. He has been for the last year or so one of our better players, and if Longmire wants to play his best team then Fox is in it.

[crackedactor 01]

I am also stunned by Fox being dropped. He was ordinary last week but he is a defender not a wing man. I have been looking forward to a forward line containing Amartey, McDonald and Papley.

[Thunder Shaker]

I could be wrong, but I think Fox is being rested. He has played the last nine matches, at a time when we have struggled to put together a functional backline due to injuries, and our opponents this week are on the bottom of the ladder. If a player is to be given a rest, now is the time, surely?

If he doesn't play at all this week, he is selected as the sub, or he plays in the VFL with limited game time (a half or less), then he is being rested.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, we have just had a bye, but that's not an indication as to the timing of resting players.

[Ludwig]

I am sure the selectors had a tough call on dropping Fox from the 22. If you go through the exercise of moving the magnets round, it's easy to see what they were faced with.

If Fox is not the sub, then my analysis goes out the window. With Fox in the emergencies, I assume he will be the sub.

If you look at the team selection as a 23 man side instead of a 22 man side, it makes it easier. Then the question becomes, who should be the sub out of the 23.

This is how I think the selectors went about the team selection. Start with the general objectives for the group, i.e. how they team should be structured. Key points that may not be obvious:

• Sheldrick keeps his spot. He played well. We want to continue his development and increase his playing time.
• We want Blakey to be our rebounder and not tied down to one on on defence.
• We want to play 2 genuine key defenders (192 cm +).
• Like most teams, the Swans play a 7 defender side.

So what meets that criteria?

7 defenders: Melican, Francis, Blakey, Rampe, Florent, Cunningham, Lloyd. If Fox plays defence, then Florent or Lloyd play midfield. Then who move out of the midfield. McInerney? Should Fox play midfield? Or forward? Then what?

Out of all the players in question of dropping out of the 22, who is the most versatile, thereby most adapted to playing the sub role? I would say Fox.

Everyone knows that I've been a big fan of Fox before it became popular. So I'm not coming at this with any negativity toward Fox. It's simply that when faced with the very reasonable constraints listed, it makes the most sense.

Go through the exercise. Move the magnets around and see if you can come up with a better solution. It's also possible to challenge my assumptions and say we drop McInerney, or Hayward, or Sheldrick. But if you think those guys keep their spots, then what?

[i'm-uninformed2]

I am sure the selectors had a tough call on dropping Fox from the 22. If you go through the exercise of moving the magnets round, it's easy to see what they were faced with.

If Fox is not the sub, then my analysis goes out the window. With Fox in the emergencies, I assume he will be the sub.

If you look at the team selection as a 23 man side instead of a 22 man side, it makes it easier. Then the question becomes, who should be the sub out of the 23.

This is how I think the selectors went about the team selection. Start with the general objectives for the group, i.e. how they team should be structured. Key points that may not be obvious:

• Sheldrick keeps his spot. He played well. We want to continue his development and increase his playing time.
• We want Blakey to be our rebounder and not tied down to one on on defence.
• We want to play 2 genuine key defenders (192 cm +).
• Like most teams, the Swans play a 7 defender side.

So what meets that criteria?

7 defenders: Melican, Francis, Blakey, Rampe, Florent, Cunningham, Lloyd. If Fox plays defence, then Florent or Lloyd play midfield. Then who move out of the midfield. McInerney? Should Fox play midfield? Or forward? Then what?

Out of all the players in question of dropping out of the 22, who is the most versatile, thereby most adapted to playing the sub role? I would say Fox.

Everyone knows that I've been a big fan of Fox before it became popular. So I'm not coming at this with any negativity toward Fox. It's simply that when faced with the very reasonable constraints listed, it makes the most sense.

Go through the exercise. Move the magnets around and see if you can come up with a better solution. It's also possible to challenge my assumptions and say we drop McInerney, or Hayward, or Sheldrick. But if you think those guys keep their spots, then what?

I think everything you say is perfectly logical and a reasonable assumption about the thinking.

My query is not on anything you've posted but, if all of the above holds, the assumption of the coaching panel that suggests Fox can't play tall better than Francis. Fox was our second best player in a GF flogging and kept the best key forward in the game to two goals when the ball was endlessly pouring into our defence. Him over Francis - who actually isn't that tall anyway, and whose lack of athleticism and leap diminish any notional height advantage he has over Fox - any day.

[Blood Fever]

I am sure the selectors had a tough call on dropping Fox from the 22. If you go through the exercise of moving the magnets round, it's easy to see what they were faced with.

If Fox is not the sub, then my analysis goes out the window. With Fox in the emergencies, I assume he will be the sub.

If you look at the team selection as a 23 man side instead of a 22 man side, it makes it easier. Then the question becomes, who should be the sub out of the 23.

This is how I think the selectors went about the team selection. Start with the general objectives for the group, i.e. how they team should be structured. Key points that may not be obvious:

• Sheldrick keeps his spot. He played well. We want to continue his development and increase his playing time.
• We want Blakey to be our rebounder and not tied down to one on on defence.
• We want to play 2 genuine key defenders (192 cm +).
• Like most teams, the Swans play a 7 defender side.

So what meets that criteria?

7 defenders: Melican, Francis, Blakey, Rampe, Florent, Cunningham, Lloyd. If Fox plays defence, then Florent or Lloyd play midfield. Then who move out of the midfield. McInerney? Should Fox play midfield? Or forward? Then what?

Out of all the players in question of dropping out of the 22, who is the most versatile, thereby most adapted to playing the sub role? I would say Fox.

Everyone knows that I've been a big fan of Fox before it became popular. So I'm not coming at this with any negativity toward Fox. It's simply that when faced with the very reasonable constraints listed, it makes the most sense.

Go through the exercise. Move the magnets around and see if you can come up with a better solution. It's also possible to challenge my assumptions and say we drop McInerney, or Hayward, or Sheldrick. But if you think those guys keep their spots, then what?

Great post Ludwig. Also, coaches have been complaining that a player is named as omitted when in fact he will be the sub and part of the team of 23. So probably the fox omission is a storm in a tea cup. Am I off the mark here?

[Thunder Shaker]

With regards to the Fox speculation, here's some context: West Coast have scored 8.4 (52), 8.9 (57), 6.10 (46), 4.2 (26), 6.7 (43), 8.10 (58) and 6.8 (44) in their last seven matches. The Eagles' average score this year is 61.2; every other team's average score is over 70 (our average is 84.0, ninth best). Just how crucial would Fox be when the ball isn't going to get into our backline very often?

The more I consider it, the more I believe that Fox is going to start as the sub.