Changes v Carlton: Dawes, Mckenzie for Byrnes and Fitz

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
With Fitzy out I'll say Frawley will play forward along side Dawes, we need 2 targets up forward, Pederson to play down back.

Great to see Mckenzie back in the side, always puts in 100%
 
With Fitzy out I'll say Frawley will play forward along side Dawes, we need 2 targets up forward, Pederson to play down back.

Great to see Mckenzie back in the side, always puts in 100%

With Jarrad Waite out I dont see the need for Frawley to play back there isnt an obvious match up for him , Georgiou and Macca should have it under control
 
With Jarrad Waite out I dont see the need for Frawley to play back there isnt an obvious match up for him , Georgiou and Macca should have it under control
Yeah Macca to take Henderson and Pederson to take Casboult, Georgiou to take the 3rd tall.

Dawes and Frawley would give us a competitive forward line.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

With Fitzy out I'll say Frawley will play forward along side Dawes, we need 2 targets up forward, Pederson to play down back.

Great to see Mckenzie back in the side, always puts in 100%

I hate to say it but there is a perfect spud/spud match up for Pedo in the backline.... Levi Casboult.
 
Is it possible to have both Spencer and Warnock hitting out the ball to nobody? Are we in danger of the thing disappearing at every ruck contest? Schrödinger's ruckmen?
What if we set up a mutual arrangement with Carlton to just do away with ruck contests? Employ a rotating system of starting with the ball from the middle instead?
 
Team list has him down the back... I know it doesn't mean anything but with Dawes back and Pedo swapping with Spencer would you put him up front
Edit more to the point would you put Pedo in the backline
 
Is it possible to have both Spencer and Warnock hitting out the ball to nobody? Are we in danger of the thing disappearing at every ruck contest? Schrödinger's ruckmen?
Quality post.

Maybe it should be 'Schrodingers tap.'
 
Gah I'm getting unreasonably excited. I think Carlton's changes play into our hands quite nicely. As the Ox said on the radio, we've got nothing to lose; Carlton have a lot to lose. A few of them playing for their careers, you'd think.

I just get the feeling that if we're in with a sniff at HT/3QT they'll be rattled. The prospect of losing to us could freeze them.

Now watch us get done by 10 goals.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

just my two cents on a few posts here;

Terlich isn't a great defender, nor a great ball user/decision maker. At least Frawley and Grimes are good defenders despite poor skills/decisions.

Frawley and Dawes up forward makes us look on paper more dangerous. I just hope the mids/backs half more confidence to move the ball quicker and more direct to them.

Where is Garland? he could of played VFL two weeks ago if they didn't have a bye according to Roos/Misson. We need him back ASAP which allows Frawley to spend more time forward without weakening our backline as much.

Thank the lord we didn't give up draft picks and $$$ for that dud Warnock, most overrated player in the AFL.
 
I heard David King say on SEN that Melbourne move the ball slowly into the forward line, it's no good having Dawes in is no good if we move the ball slowly. Yes this is true however the slow movement is because of the lack of forward line. Well I hope so.
And yet I've been reading posts suggesting that we drop fitzy now dawes is back? Wouldn't having fitzy and Dawes in the same forward line be a positive in a team with no forward line?

I wonder about some of the things I read here sometimes.
 
I heard David King say on SEN that Melbourne move the ball slowly into the forward line, it's no good having Dawes in is no good if we move the ball slowly. Yes this is true however the slow movement is because of the lack of forward line. Well I hope so.
So let me get this right, we have no forward line, so now dawes is back, lets drop our other tall forward? riiiight, makes a f'n tonne of sense.
 
And yet I've been reading posts suggesting that we drop fitzy now dawes is back? Wouldn't having fitzy and Dawes in the same forward line be a positive in a team with no forward line?

I wonder about some of the things I read here sometimes.
Fitz is a liability at the moment, that's how bad he is. Needs to get back his game sense and improve his fitness.
 
Fitz is a liability at the moment, that's how bad he is. Needs to get back his game sense and improve his fitness.
We need to cut ties with Casey and have our own VFL team. That way the training is continuous, no one gets their nose out of joint when our players come into the team, and we have total control of things.

I think the Casey partnership is damaging our's 1sts. MFC should just take over the scorpions.
 
He may be a liability, but he stays in the team until either Jamar or Gawn (or both) come back into the team.
We need to cut ties with Casey and have our own VFL team. That way the training is continuous, no one gets their nose out of joint when our players come into the team, and we have total control of things.

I think the Casey partnership is damaging our's 1sts. MFC should just take over the scorpions.
I have been thinking this for a while , but Hawthorn and Box Hill suggest it is possible to work . Maybe a long term ambition when the finances are more solid.
As for Fitz , his form doesn't warrant selection and it may be we just don't want to go in with too many talls given it may be a wet afternoon tomorrow .
 
I think the problem for Fitz is that he's been asked to be the main forward for us, a role he isn't yet up to the task of especially with our atrocious ball movement. Whilst his form has been something of a liability, last weekend was pretty difficult weather conditions for talls (though this weekend looks similar) and the week previous there were a lot greater problems than his inability to get into the game. I think he's pretty important for our versatility going forward so hopefully a brief sojourn to the VFL will see him gain some form and confidence.
 
I have been thinking this for a while , but Hawthorn and Box Hill suggest it is possible to work . Maybe a long term ambition when the finances are more solid.
As for Fitz , his form doesn't warrant selection and it may be we just don't want to go in with too many talls given it may be a wet afternoon tomorrow .
I haven't seen what the weather is going to be like, but if it's wet (as in raining), then fair enough.

I like the fact that the demons are down here in casey, but I just think that it's possible that things with casey dont work the same way as they do with the MFC in regards to continuity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top