Preview Round 6 Changes and Pre-Match Discussion Vs Essendon (MCG)

[Maggie5]

you might be surprised how little interest people have in talking footy with you lot.

Oh I don't know, a little friendly banter won't hurt.

 

[mattys123]

I'm always wary of the under dog on ANZAC day, and it seems as if this year we are not that under dog (wouldn't have said that 2 weeks ago).

Yes Essendon will play better than they have the last 2 weeks, that's almost guaranteed but have we seen reasons why they've played poorly?

A real lack of dangerous forwards, a defense which is really struggling to contain opposition forward lines and a reliance on Brendan Goddard to the extreme in several places.

I'm not sure what Goddard's injury concerns are (Thompson named about 4 things in the presser) but if he plays and is fit they are a different team.

Having said that this is hhhhuuuugggggggeeeee for us now, we could be 5-2 heading into the bye if we win this.

 

[Lockyer24]

I think Langdon for Dwyer will be a definite change - as for Thomas for Adams it's a tough one. Dwyer/Blair to be sub.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

you might be surprised how little interest people have in talking footy with you lot.

But I think the drugs are starting to loose their effect

 

[Maggie5]

I'm always wary of the under dog on ANZAC day, and it seems as if this year we are not that under dog (wouldn't have said that 2 weeks ago).

Yes Essendon will play better than they have the last 2 weeks, that's almost guaranteed but have we seen reasons why they've played poorly?

A real lack of dangerous forwards, a defense which is really struggling to contain opposition forward lines and a reliance on Brendan Goddard to the extreme in several places.

I'm not sure what Goddard's injury concerns are (Thompson named about 4 things in the presser) but if he plays and is fit they are a different team.

Having said that this is hhhhuuuugggggggeeeee for us now, we could be 5-2 heading into the bye if we win this.

I agree Goddard out was huge for them. He adds experience and and stabilises them as he can be moved forward, centre or back and does give Watson a bit of respite. Besides they really stand taller on Anzac day and against us.

Insofar as changes - very difficult to drop anyone at this stage and with Ryder back, may as well stick with two rucks.

 

[TradeDraft]

I'm always wary of the under dog on ANZAC day, and it seems as if this year we are not that under dog (wouldn't have said that 2 weeks ago).

Yes Essendon will play better than they have the last 2 weeks, that's almost guaranteed but have we seen reasons why they've played poorly?

A real lack of dangerous forwards, a defense which is really struggling to contain opposition forward lines and a reliance on Brendan Goddard to the extreme in several places.

I'm not sure what Goddard's injury concerns are (Thompson named about 4 things in the presser) but if he plays and is fit they are a different team.

Having said that this is hhhhuuuugggggggeeeee for us now, we could be 5-2 heading into the bye if we win this.

I still have us underdogs. I think Bombers are better then us at there best

 

[eth-dog]

you might be surprised how little interest people have in talking footy with you lot.

Because it's all our fault the other clubs bring that up whenever we try to talk footy. Oh wait.

 

[MAGPIE2013]

in:brown,dwyer
out:langdon(time for a rest),blair

sam dwyer to be the sub

 

[BeechyMagpie]

Thought Josh Thomas was really good yesterday. He's not going to rack up huge numbers as he's going to be our 5th 6th midfielder and not involved in the clearance work as much as Pendles Beams and co, but when he was, he was clean, got the ball to an outside player and started our press forward.

He's a super clean player, very courageous and has a defensive mindset which allows the others to push forward a bit.

At this stage, with what Adams has shown, he keeps his spot and Adams (and even Ball) have to work to get it back.

 

[Lockyer24]

Can't say I like the idea of three talls in defence...need a mobile backline to run back into space.

 

[MAGPIE2013]

we might have to go with the three defenders. There is a possibility that bellchambers might return.
frost vs daniher
keefe vs carlise
brown vs (resting ruckman)

 

[jonbe54]

Can't say I like the idea of three talls in defence...need a mobile backline to run back into space.

Keefe, Langdon and Frosty all mobile, maybe not particularly so off the straight line but mobile at least.

 

[Lockyer24]

I can't remember us playing 3 defensive talls in the last few years....Keeffe has played with Reid and Brown I think but up forward.
More important to play the way we want to play...our current defensive setup is working as it is very mobile.

 

[SApies]

I'd like to see Dwyer, Adams, Brown come in..
But I cant see anyone going out?
Langdon could do with a rest but if it aint broke why fix it?

I guess Blair, Thomas, Langdon and maybe Goldsack could be possible outs.
But have done nothing to deserve to miss.

In: Dwyer
Out: Langdon

 

[jonbe54]

I can't remember us playing 3 defensive talls in the last few years....Keeffe has played with Reid and Brown I think but up forward.
More important to play the way we want to play...our current defensive setup is working as it is very mobile.

One of the possible reasons is that the last few years our defensive stocks have almost constantly been decimated by injuries

 

[robertg22]

I can't remember us playing 3 defensive talls in the last few years....Keeffe has played with Reid and Brown I think but up forward.
More important to play the way we want to play...our current defensive setup is working as it is very mobile.

Yeah agree with this. Happy with the back 6. Brown's assignment in Essendon games previously was Crameri who is no longer at the club. I can't understand the idea of dropping Langdon for Brown, Langdon keeps his spot until someone like Sinclair, Williams or even Seedsman comes up to take it from him. Brown offers little to no rebound.

 

[FAIRANDBALANCED]

If you look at the whole team into the future, you'd probably like to have Reid, Brown (barely), Williams and Seedsman into the side for Witts, Keefe, Langdon and at the moment Young. Blair is holding the small forward/rotating mid spot infront of Adams, Dwyer and Kennedy due to his defensive pressure which is better than any of those three. So the same with Goldsack, despite the fact I'd rather take him out for Seedsman, the team needs his defensive pressure.
The great thing is we have pressure on spots.
The only place where performance doesn't really reflect selection is in the ruck. I have a feeling Hudson would be better than both Witts and Grundy, but Im happy to give them game time. Witts especially is starting to show some really good signs.

I can't see Dwyer being in our best team. Too slow and not good enough defensively.
Adams and Thomas put Ball at risk of being out of the side at some point. That will be a huge motivator for Ball.
Keefe is a better ball user than many give him credit for. He is a little slow at times, but that is probably because he has only played 10 games of footy at the level. He is much better than Nathan Brown with the ball in his hands, though I think Brown has him covered defensively. That could change though, and amazingly we could get to a point where Nathan Brown is tradeable at seasons end. (not saying he shoudl be traded, rather he could struggle to be in our best 22). As others have talked about, Jack Frost is giving us something completely different. He is so quick and agile and agressive at ground level, that he rebounds like a runner rather than a key back. You can't help but be impressed by his improvement this year.

I don't see any reason to change the team this week. Goldsack or Blair for sub this week. I'd give Ball and Thomas a chance to put the pressure on up forward.

 

[Shaneprice97]

I can't remember us playing 3 defensive talls in the last few years....Keeffe has played with Reid and Brown I think but up forward.
More important to play the way we want to play...our current defensive setup is working as it is very mobile.

Against North Melbourne and Hawthorn last year we played 3 tall backs.

 

[MightyPies1]

I think Langdon for Dwyer will be a definite change - as for Thomas for Adams it's a tough one. Dwyer/Blair to be sub.

No way Thomas will be dropped or maybe I hope you are wrong. He has more talent and upside than Adams and is playing some good games coming back from injury.

Agreed though Dwyer and Adams will be in contention, I think it might be one change, Langdon out for Dwyer. If there's another change I'd like it to be Blair for Adams but I doubt the selection panel will drop Blair as they seem to love him. Can see why you did choose Thomas now. Trying to think. Well it would be out of Blair, Goldsack and Thomas would be the other possibility and any three would be extremely unlucky.

I think Langdon will get the chop, Dwyer will be brought in and Goldsack moved to defense. That will be all, Adams very unlucky.

 

[Bugglz]

OUT: Langdon, Witts/Grundy
IN: Adams, Dwyer

I think its time Langdon gets a rest, Send H down back to cover for him. We look far too tall with two rucks, Essendon look relatively weak in the ruck with Bellchambers out (will he be back for this game?), so leave one of Grundy or Witts out and let White and Keeffe help out.

 

[Baird]

^thomas played yesterday?

 

[MAGPIE2013]

OUT: Langdon, Witts/Grundy
IN: Thomas, Dwyer

I think its time Langdon gets a rest, Send H down back to cover for him. We look far too tall with two rucks, Essendon look relatively weak in the ruck with Bellchambers out (will he be back for this game?), so leave one of Grundy or Witts out and let White and Keeffe help out.

no i would not tampering with our rucks and tall system for this mactch. I have liked what we have built over the past two weeks, and i would prefer if could maintain this consistency. Regarding sending H down back- ABSOLUTELY NOT. H has become a very skilled rebounder with his pace and foot kicking skills. I say make changes if we desperately have to, otherwise maintain this team and develop some consistency

 

[Bugglz]

^thomas played yesterday?

Adams*

 

[Bugglz]

no i would not tampering with our rucks and tall system for this mactch. I have liked what we have built over the past two weeks, and i would prefer if could maintain this consistency. Regarding sending H down back- ABSOLUTELY NOT. H has become a very skilled rebounder with his pace and foot kicking skills. I say make changes if we desperately have to, otherwise maintain this team and develop some consistency

We have looked good against average opposition, but we have also looked slow at times and neither of Witts or Grundy have been setting the world on fire. In both games they have played together one of them has been subbed, what happens if we get an injury to a mid and we're forced to play both Grundy and Witts in the last quarter? We already struggle running out games.
Regarding H, he will still be rebounding from the defensive 50, he will just be running off a man from defence rather then on a wing, similar to the role he played in 2010/11 (where he was AA)

 

[MAGPIE2013]

i hope we can

We have looked good against average opposition, but we have also looked slow at times and neither of Witts or Grundy have been setting the world on fire. In both games they have played together one of them has been subbed, what happens if we get an injury to a mid and we're forced to play both Grundy and Witts in the last quarter? We already struggle running out games.
Regarding H, he will still be rebounding from the defensive 50, he will just be running off a man from defence rather then on a wing, similar to the role he played in 2010/11 (where he was AA)

but witts and grundy have been doing their role admirably. They have also allowed white to become a very dangerous second fwd, and buckley has clearly stated that white is best suited as the 3rd tall instead of being a second ruck option. In time witts and grundy will both imrove their mobility and their nuance around the fwd 50 will only get better