Preview Round 10: Western Bulldogs vs St.Kilda - Etihad Stadium (A), Saturday 27 May 2017, 1:45pm AEST

[Persevering Saint]

Dunstan, Steele and Stevens. Can't play in the same midfield. It would kill us really bad.

One has go and it's between koby and Dunstan.

Bring back Minch/Long.

If Koby gets dropped and Dunstan stays in, man, I'll do a nut. Stevens played poorly because he was being asked to play in the wrong position. And he was asked to play in that position, because Dunstan was taking his spot. The incessant favouritism directed at Luke is as irritating as it is incomprehensible.

 

[VDS66]

Yes yes and yes.

Get rid of Longer probably get a fourth rounder for him and use Holmes for the bigger types.

My view is that Sandi is a once in a generation height. Gawn is probably your prototype rich with Grundy not far behind him.

Mummy is a monster but the sheer talent of the other 21 players makes up for his around the ground play.

Unfortunately our midfield isn't at that level as yet, so we need taps to advantage.

Edit: Longer may well develop into the best tap ruckman in the comp.

But like traditional full forwards, will that sort of player be relevant in the future?

 

[Persevering Saint]

For mine, here's my selection suggestions.

Newnes comes out injured. For his job on the wing, we put McKenzie in there, as he's performed well in that role at VFL level.

For the role Webster played, we either pick Savage (safe) or Rice (which I'd prefer).

Dunstan is dropped, and is not made to get back his spot until he is dominating VFL. Enough of this garbage, it's beyond a joke now.

Koby takes his rightful spot in the middle, replacing Dunstan.

Wright comes back in if his concussion isn't too bad, and takes the role on the Half-forward flank that Koby was forced to play. And he hunts the Doggies' running half-backs like a greyhound hunting a rabbit: have them looking over their shoulders, knowing he's coming and when he gets there it's gonna hurt bad. If Wright can't because of concussion, bring Minch back in.

Drop Mav for Bruce. Let's see how much of these "form" problems for both Bruce and Paddy ARE actually form-related, and how much of it is them not playing with a complementary foil (even on the VFL, Bruce was all on his lonesome as a tall forward, with Marshall out).

And that, my friends, is called restoring sanity to the selection table.

 

[FlyingSledghamer]

My view is that Sandi is a once in a generation height. Gawn is probably your prototype rich with Grundy not far behind him.

Mummy is a monster but the sheer talent of the other 21 players makes up for his around the ground play.

Unfortunately our midfield isn't at that level as yet, so we need taps to advantage.

Edit: Longer may well develop into the best tap ruckman in the comp.

But like traditional full forwards, will that sort of player be relevant in the future?

If we get Rocky and Fyfe we wont need a ruckman.

 

[VDS66]

If we get Rocky and Fyfe we wont need a ruckman.

Exactamundo!

 

[FlyingSledghamer]

Dogs are too fast by hand guys. Their scrappers like us. They apply just as much pressure as swans and they love the turn over run and gun game.
If we go into this one too top heavy, were done.
We need to bring in players that are willing to pressure, chase and harrass and run.
Minch and Wright have to come in. Even Lonie would help. Newnes il be right i think.
Paddy has to come out for structure. Dunstan too, hes way too unaccountable and doesnt open possesion when he gets it.
Theres no need to get drastic at selection but tweek it so were more contested accountable.

 

[Persevering Saint]

There are two ways that you beat a slingshot team, who intercept and run out of the backline.

You either bring in faster defensive forwards, who can catch them when they run. Or you stop them intercepting in the first place, by both playing effective markers/crumbers AND lowering the eyes and hitting inside 50 targets.

Bringing in players like Wright solve part of the issue. Having proper structures for our talls, so they don't get double-teamed solves another. Changing the idiotic approach to disposal into the forward 50 finishes the deal.

 

[JG22]

That's the spirit! Visitors & bottom feeders also come on these boards to read this - Saints supporters slamming their own players.

A poster on here recently wrote "....Dunstan & Lonie are sh!t..."

It's hardly a slamming, just a comment that he's going to find it very very tough to keep his spot

 

[PrinceofSeaford]

If his conversion was reversed he would have been looking like he was as good as last year. His goal kicking is killing his game and probably his confidence.

i disagree. his trade mark pressure and defensive forward work is what we are lacking most from him this year. he's averaging 0.9 goals compared to his 1.1 goals last year, so even with the drop in conversion his goal kicking isn't the big difference in his game imo.

 

[DarkSaint]

I will tear my hair if if we bring Wright back in. I have nothing but respect at how he goes about his footy with his hardness, but his disposal level is something shocking. We don't need more players in the team that butcher the ball as was evident with a high pressure game against the swans who turned our half decent kicks players into turnover central.

 

[theprospect]

All of you bagging Dunstan are a disgrace.

 

[Joffaboy]

All of you bagging Dunstan are a disgrace.

Why? I'm not one of them but I can see where they are coming from.

 

[stfan]

Minch and Wright have to come in. Even Lonie would help.

Wright was concussed quite heavily. So he may well not be playing anywhere.


Lonie can harass but is a weak tackler and so not effective. He is also SLOW. I much prefer Minch.

Lonie is also a poor user of the ball and that was our No. 1 problem against the Swans.

 

[stfan]

For this game I would look to do the following changes:
Hickey for Longer - Tom has had a stint in VFL time to unleash him on the dogs his desire and pride against a weak dogs ruck will have him pushing hard to play the game of his life to not get sent back to VFL - plus Tom to me is more mobile and we need that against the dogs

Hickey is actually out injured with a knee injury and so he will not be playing anywhere for some weeks yet

 

[JG22]

Wright was concussed quite heavily. So he may well not be playing anywhere.


Lonie can harass but is a weak tackler and so not effective. He is also SLOW. I much prefer Minch.

Lonie is also a poor user of the ball and that was our No. 1 problem against the Swans.

I feel like Lonie is a good kick but similar to JB in the past has just either made poor decisions or just perhaps unlucky.

Agree though he needs to put on 5kg before thinking about tackling

 

[SaintsSeptember]

All of you bagging Dunstan are a disgrace.

I'm open to other opinions.
Its not that i don't like him.
Its that all the evidence suggests that he hasn't improved since his early games in 2014.

I'm not sure how that happens, but at some point it seems unrealistic to sit back and wait for him to come good.

 

[gringo2011]

If we get Rocky and Fyfe we wont need a ruckman.

Yeah some clubs seem to have got lamp posts as ruck men and don't seem to suffer from it if their midfield is strong enough.

 

[aussierulesrules]

OK so there you have it.

How many games do we play against these big bodied rucks?

5 or 6?

So why not just play Hickey all season and set up differently for those 6 games?

Or, here's a crazy thought, how about when we play teams who have very mobile ruck options who don't physically dominate in the ruck contests we play Hickey (once available, fit and in form again), and when we're playing teams that have the big strong units that monster Hickey in the ruck we play Billy/Holmes?

There's no law that says we have to keep playing one week after week if they're not going to be suited to a particular opponent.

Horses for courses.

 

[Mowman]

All of you bagging Dunstan are a disgrace.

He was very poor Saturday and does not do enough when he hasn't got the ball, I thought our midfield looked better without him.
its just my opinion

 

[VDS66]

All of you bagging Dunstan are a disgrace.

OK then Mrs Dunstan... point taken.

 

[Sab22]

If Bruce doesn't become the player we think he be. I won't mind playing the combo of Marshall with Hickey/Longer.

Battle could be like Roo. Both good runners and he could play up the ground if needed.

Paddy, Marshall, Membrey, Battle.

 

[plugger66]

Or, here's a crazy thought, how about when we play teams who have very mobile ruck options who don't physically dominate in the ruck contests we play Hickey (once available, fit and in form again), and when we're playing teams that have the big strong units that monster Hickey in the ruck we play Billy/Holmes?

There's no law that says we have to keep playing one week after week if they're not going to be suited to a particular opponent.

Horses for courses.

Don't think its that easy. Say Longer is clearly best on the ground against Mumford and the next week we play against Kruzer he isn't going to be pleased with the coach saying sorry mate but we know you were great and so does every supporter and the media but your out this week because the player doesn't suit you. He would crack it and who could blame him. Obviously its vica versa with Hickey.

 

[gringo2011]

i disagree. his trade mark pressure and defensive forward work is what we are lacking most from him this year. he's averaging 0.9 goals compared to his 1.1 goals last year, so even with the drop in conversion his goal kicking isn't the big difference in his game imo.

He was never a frantic defensive forward and his biggest strength was getting to contests and making the most of the swarm pressure where he'd finish off with freakish snaps. He played very opportunistic footy and for some reason he's not getting those but doing more marking which he then fails to finish off.

 

[aussierulesrules]

I disagreed with him being in the seniors in the first place.
Has shown nothing more than I thought he would unfortunately.

Not that I want to get into this endlessly again, but that's obviously not true, because here is one of your comments on the matter leading into the game against GWS:

I fear for Friday with Mumford. He will completely dominate Longer in the ruck and around the ground.
Even Lobb will kill Longer let alone Mumford.
It is a HUGE concern.

then 4 days later:

And this is where I am happy to have been proven wrong.

I absolutely loved Longers ruck work last night.
I was thrilled watching it live and the favt he got better as the game went on.

So even if you just go by that one game he's clearly shown more than you thought he would. He dominated a guy who has monstered Hick in the ruck contests in the past and it was potentially the difference between wining and losing the game, as they weren't getting silver-service out of the midfield all night, like they otherwise might have. He then comfortably beat Kreuzer and Casboult in the ruck contests the following week, and the week before the Mumford game, he got well on top of an in-form McEvoy in the ruck contests as the game wore on.

You were bagging Longer out so much leading into the GWS game I think it was that you were even saying that his ruckwork is poor, yet in the last 4 games Billy has on his own had more hitouts than the other team combined in each of those 4 games. More than Mac and O'Brien v Hawthorn, more than Mumford and Lobb v GWS, more than Kreuzer and Casboult v Carlton and more than Sinclair and Tippett combined on the weekend. And that's all in spite of the fact that in those 4 games whoever has rucked against Gilbo has dominated the hitouts during those periods, since Sam has had just 5 hitouts in those 4 games he's been doing the back-up rucking!

So the main two that Billy is rucking against for each game still haven't managed to have as many hitouts between the two of them as Billy has on his own, despite the fact that they get almost guaranteed hitouts (and I imagine a good % of their hitouts to advantage for the game) when they're rucking against Gilbo!

And in those 4 games we've won the clearances in each game, after we were from memory last for clearances after about 4 rounds, and despite the fact we've played two of the best midfields in the comp in the last 4 weeks, in Sydney and GWS.

Billy is very poor around the ground, but you're giving him no credit at all for what good work he's doing in the ruck, and what effect it's had on our ability to win clearances.

On the weekend he also had the 4th most pressure acts for us (twice as many as Sinclair) and also laid 5 tackles (5 times as many as Sinclair), so at least he's having a serious crack at the things he has the ability to contribute in.

Whoever we pick to play in the ruck is going to get dominated every couple of weeks or so in the area they're weak in though, so we're just going to have to get used to it, until either one of them really improves overall, we go a horses for courses policy, or we get someone in who is better overall than all the options we currently have.

 

[Hayes4PM]

No doubt Dunstan is struggling this year, his tank isn't good enough, not sure if he's tried to put on too much muscle or what, and he's had the fumbles this year. Which for me is the real surprise, he's never had a huge tank and apart from 1st year hasn't been the kind of player to rack up heaps of touches, but he's always had clean hands and was a good player to set up play from stoppages over the last few years, he seems to be struggling with that this year. If he gets dropped again I won't be unhappy, but I also wouldn't mind seeing him get another game.

And you campaigners are ****ed asking for Paddy to be dropped. 1 game in the seniors after tearing the VFL a new sphincter and we play our poorest game in weeks and he gets no service and for some reason you expected him to dominate..? He still worked his way into the game with 11 touches at 72% and kicked 1.2 with a goal assist as well. What do you want him to do when our inside 50's are a piece of poo?