Changes for next week

[crowralph]

Looks like we'll probably get Dangermouse, Henderson and Sellar back this week - according to the latest article on afc.com.au.

Of those, Dangermouse should come straight into the senior team. Serious consideration would be given to rushing Sellar into the team, given our dire need for a 2nd ruckman - but I'm tipping him to resume via the SANFL after 5 weeks on the sidelines. Henderson is by no means an automatic selection and will have to force his way back into the team via Centrals.

The good news is that Johncock and McLeod have only "strained" their AC joints and may play next week, but the 6-day break is against them.

Assuming that Stiffy and Macca pass their fitness tests, then someone will have to make way for Dangermouse. That someone could very well be Burton (though cases could also be made for several of our less experienced players). I'm thinking we might see Burton dropped, replaced by Dangermouse, with Walker remaining in the SANFL. I could live with that change quite happily.

not sure about any serious need for 2nd ruckman. neil craig has finally proved to one and all that you can win a game of afl footy with a single ruckman being supported by a tall full forward with decent rucking skills. no chance of getting a 2nd ruckman for at least another 10 weeks. or, maybe now he has proved his point, he will add a second ruckman as a bit of a luxury.

 

[Allefgib]

not sure about any serious need for 2nd ruckman. neil craig has finally proved to one and all that you can win a game of afl footy with a single ruckman being supported by a tall full forward with decent rucking skills. no chance of getting a 2nd ruckman for at least another 10 weeks. or, maybe now he has proved his point, he will add a second ruckman as a bit of a luxury.

Mate - we beat Richmond. Can we agree the jury is still out?

Our best form last year had 2 ruckmen in the mix.

I'm all for the Moran and Maric combo myself. M&M.

One can belt you in the mouth whilst the other runs with good hands.

 

[dplggr47]

not sure about any serious need for 2nd ruckman. neil craig has finally proved to one and all that you can win a game of afl footy with a single ruckman being supported by a tall full forward with decent rucking skills. no chance of getting a 2nd ruckman for at least another 10 weeks. or, maybe now he has proved his point, he will add a second ruckman as a bit of a luxury.

if you're talking about that 1 game we've won, Maric was up against a less experienced Tyrone Vickery...whose backup was Graham Polak (chipping in with 4 hitouts).
that's not proving anything.

this week, we're up against Kangaroos...who have two proper ruckman in McIntosh and Goldstein, not to mention former ruckman Hale up forward.

we really need a second ruck against the Kangas, but they wouldn't want to rush Sellar back either.

 

[WAG]

If Stiffy doesn't come up then Walker will come in. Like for like !

 

[Elite Crow]

Steady on son. I couldn't give a rats tossbag if Burton is replaced with Walker but I'm only going on who I think deserves the spot more. I saw Walker Friday night - he was shit.

So you think Burton deserves his spot more? Based on what? His form has been no better, in fact worse, than Walkers when he was dropped. Walker can actually kick 40 metres and will be in the team next year. No brainer really.

 

[Macjoe]

Yes, this week we turned a corner, and didn't have any forced omissions.

This week, however, looks like we've got some first choice players coming back. According to the Superfooty Full Strength Indicator, players out of our best 22 are Knights, Mackay, Dangerfield and Hentschel. Is Sloane good to play this weekend?

Now that players are starting to come back from the horror injury stretch, there will be pressure on players in the side to hold their spots.

Looking purely at the stat sheets, Jaensch, Doughty and Davis are the less performed over the past two weeks.

So assuming Macca and Stiffy get up, there will be no forced omissions, but some omissions to make way for better credentialled players.

So without entering the Walker/Burton debate, I think it would be a good thing to see (omit) after one or two outs for Rd8, or better still, all of the outs (as opposed to (inj)). Nice to see some options at the selection table, it will be very hard to predict the outcome now.

Go Crows! Go and pinch the 4 points off North.

Yes, very much agree. Selection pressure, following a "monkey off the back" win - to quote Kurt Tippett - is the best thing we can see.

As long as Johncock and Macca come up - thats really the best thing.

I will enter the Walker/Burton debate, though.

First, I think Burton should be omitted. Despite how well he has done recently getting to the competition, and sometimes winning the ball, he is burning it on disposal too often. Years ago we knew he was unreliable, and when his disposal got too bad he was dropped for a while. Time to happen again.

Second, who comes in is not a given. Might not be like for like - Danger may come in for Burton, with Stevens playing forward. Stevens is likely to improve week by week after his concussion, even if it is a slow process.

Or Walker for Burton (unless Burton is given another chance, and Stevens is replaced), Danger for Jeansch. Don't get me wrong, last week's emergency Taylor Walker is the most likely in after Danger.

However, on the Walker issue - surely he must show something at AFL level before he gets the Champion Full-forward label? He's played 18 AFL games in 3 or 4 separate bursts, and I can't ever remember him ripping a game apart. He's had a good game or so, then gradually disappears. If he's so good, even if he is played out of position shouldn't we have seen a Rich, Rioli, Ottens or Natanui moment sometime in those 18 games? I'm sure he has a future, as Cook, Davis, Henderson, Jaensch, Martin, McKernan, Petrenko, Schmidt, Sellar, and Sloane have a future at the Crows. But to win a place in the side he must actually do something good in a game.

He's probably potentially a better player than Pets, but so far Pets has actually had a few exciting moments (and some clangers, admittedly) - Walker hasn't.

I don't watch much SANFL, so rely on your comments and the club footage to judge how he is going there, but I do know AFL and SANFL are different games. To hold a spot he must perform in AFL. Even though Walker had 16 disp, 6 marks and 3 goals for Norwood, don't forget that the out of form Burton, who I think should be dropped, had 12 disposals and 7 marks in a winning Crows side. And he has 250+ career goals. And I think he should be dropped!

Just why should Walker be so stridently proclaimed his obvious replacement? Gunston kicked 5 goals for Centrals, Stevens will probably improve, Hendo may be available and looks faster.

 

[TheLeftFist8]

However, on the Walker issue - surely he must show something at AFL level before he gets the Champion Full-forward label? He's played 18 AFL games in 3 or 4 separate bursts, and I can't ever remember him ripping a game apart. He's had a good game or so, then gradually disappears. If he's so good, even if he is played out of position shouldn't we have seen a Rich, Rioli, Ottens or Natanui moment sometime in those 18 games?

He's probably potentially a better player than Pets, but so far Pets has actually had a few exciting moments (and some clangers, admittedly) - Walker hasn't.

5 goals in a half as a ...wait for it...full forward, against Hawthorn to set up a match-winning lead would count as 'showing something' i would have thought?

He's also had plenty of other glimpses, it's just harder to kick goals from backward of centre, or when you're buggered from running to the HBF for a handball before sprinting back to get deep forward to provide an option...maybe he just doesn't have the power running required?

 

[spexau]

Not many of the current day Superstar Full Forwards lit up the AFL after 18 games either. Walker just needs AFL experience and he'll be fine. Problem is he isn't getting any

 

[Crow-mo]

This from the horses mouth:

“Our challenge is to try and get back to a healthy squad again, physically healthy, but losing two players tonight and two very experienced players, who have been in pretty good form for us (doesn’t help),” Craig said after the game.

Oh how his tune has changed

 

[ruscy002]

In hindsight, it wasn't the worst decision to go into the Richmond match unchanged. It did give us the chance to introduce some stability to the 22, but what we need to do now is move on an improve on the 22 that played yesterday. We can do that because it looks like we're injury free (hopefully Stiffy/Macca come up) and we've got some players coming back and in form.

Stevens has to come out...well Stevens OR Davis, but Davis is in front of Stevens for mine. They're just too similar in what they offer as an overall package, and omitting one of them allows us to fix up an area of concern - the second ruckman.

Sellar will come in when fit, that's a lock down guarantee, but he needs to gain some form and fitness in the SANFL after five weeks off. We should be adjusting out team's structure now to prepare for his return, and there's no better time than this week against the Kangaroos, a team that will play three ruckmen. The opportunity to give McKernan another run at AFL is too good to pass up - two or three weeks while Sellar gains form, or ongoing if he can put his spot beyond doubt

So, change number one...
IN: McKernan
OUT: Stevens

For our next change, Dangerfield has to come straight in. Unfortunately Cook didn't put his position beyond doubt against the only team we can consider as "lesser" opposition. That's not to say that he hasn't put in some decent performances against quality opposition, but it's down to him and Jaensch, who I'd like to persist with. It'll be good for the cookie monster to go back to the SANFL and get a feel for domination again, no doubt he'll be back later in the season.

Change number two...
IN: Dangerfield
OUT: Cook

The final change is Walker in for Burton. Enough has been said about this so I don't need to elaborate.

Change number three...
IN: Walker
OUT: Burton

The noticable omission here would be Sloane, who had a good hit out on the weekend. We could bring him in for Jaensch and that'd be fine, but I'd like to see how Jaensch/Petrenko/Walker/Doughty etc. perform with some genuine pressure coming from the SANFL, which should hopefully be generated with Cook, Stevens, Burton, and Sloane performing out of their skin to get back in to the 22.

The team

B: Johncock, Rutten, Doughty
HB: Davis, Bock, Goodwin
C: Reilly, Thompson, McLeod
HF: Douglas, Tippett, Jaensch
F: Petrenko, Walker, Porplyzia

R: Maric, Vince, Van Berlo
INT: McKernan, Edwards, Dangerfield, Schmidt

EMG: Gunston, Armstrong, Sloane

A few notes about the team...

Gunston is the travelling emergency because Centrals have the bye. Sloane to come in on Friday if one of Macca or Stiffy don't come up by then.

Jaensch is a bit of an ace up the sleeve this week. He's a smooth mover and has beautiful penetration on his kick - I'd be looking for him to play the Knights HFF/Wingman role. We really miss Knighta and looking at our team, Jaensch seems to be the best fit for this role...big shoes to fill but I'd like to see if he's up for the challenge.

Davis also becomes pretty important in this match. He'll have to take a smaller opponent like Edwards or Warren - if this doesn't work out then we'll have to use Schmidt and/or Petrenko and Davis will have to push forward and make a real nuisance of himself.

In reality, Danger in for Cook (or Jaensch) is almost a certainty, but the other two changes probably won't happen. There's good reasons for both of these changes happening, but "stability" may win out.

 

[Crow-mo]

This week, however, looks like we've got some first choice players coming back. According to the Superfooty Full Strength Indicator, players out of our best 22 are Knights, Mackay, Dangerfield and Hentschel.

the FSI would get more attention on this board if it didn't clash so badly with what many people want to believe.

 

[spexau]

If we had 2 Dangerfield's we wouldn't have one as an emergency!!

 

[marvin]

this week, we're up against Kangaroos...who have two proper ruckman in McIntosh and Goldstein, not to mention former ruckman Hale up forward.

McIntosh would have to be in some doubt - his shoulder didn't look that terrific on Saturday night.

 

[ruscy002]

If we had 2 Dangerfield's we wouldn't have one as an emergency!!

Very good point

Have fixed

 

[WALL-e]

the FSI would get more attention on this board if it didn't clash so badly with what many people want to believe.

FSI is still based on an opinion, not a fact.

What the FSI believes is the best 22 may not be fact, and then again, it may be. That's why it's just another tool that means a little, but not much.

For example, FSI doesn't have Phil Davis in our team, but he may be now.

Last year it wouldn't have had Otten.

 

[relapse]

FSI is still based on an opinion, not a fact.

What the FSI believes is the best 22 may not be fact, and then again, it may be. That's why it's just another tool that means a little, but not much.

For example, FSI doesn't have Phil Davis in our team, but he may be now.

Last year it wouldn't have had Otten.

Crow-Mo's point was more about the FSI showing that our injury problems are nowhere near the extent that some people are making them out to be.

 

[LC40]

Last week numerous posters were all saying we needed 2 rucks, what has changed in a week?........Nothing!

It is inevitable that we must eventually have two ruckman in our 22.
This allows us the luxury of keeping Tippett in the forward line and also gives Maric a rest.
Allows the team to structure up differently if Maric is getting beaten and enables us a lot more flexibilty if Craigy does decide to ruck Tippett for a few centre bounces ( not my preferred option.) The other ruckman can play forward for awhile.

You could get away with having one ruck-man against Richmond because Vickery is still learning his craft and Polak is really only a makeshift ruck.

McIntosh and Goldstein, Hale are a far different proposition they are all very capable and will keep jumping, in turn at Maric all night.
Maric is developing into a quality player but give him some specialised help he must get tired towards the end of a physical game.

I'm flabbergasted at our reluctance to play two bigmen. Yes, Sellars and Moran are injured but McKernan and Griffin are available and by all reports playing well in the SANFL.

We are only 1-6 and no matter how that win buoyed our outlook the same problems still remain.
We need our rucks to be jumping into opposition ruckman and wearing down them down.
Teams we play down the track will all have two specialised ruckman why is that a requirement for them and not us.

If a ruckman can float forward and kick a couple of goals all of a sudden opposition teams have to make matchup adjustments with defenders who could be used elsewhere, this can free up other players around them.

It seems we are beginning to play the football of old and have now began to cut our number of handballs ,attacking slighty more direct and kicking long and strong to a contest(on occasions) and trying to move the ball quicker. Why don't we go the next step and have a structure like the football of old.......Two ruckmen it seems to be a tried and true method that works.

 

[Huntercrow]

Our injuries are a figment of our imagination?

 

[Huntercrow]

This smells of vendetta!

 

[Allbetsroff]

Crow-Mo's point was more about the FSI showing that our injury problems are nowhere near the extent that some people are making them out to be.

What are you talking about, Sloane, Moran, Shaw and Henderson are superstars and first choice 22 players.

 

[dplggr47]

I'm flabbergasted at our reluctance to play two bigmen. Yes, Sellars and Moran are injured but McKernan and Griffin are available and by all reports playing well in the SANFL.

i think the question for these two available players is:
- is McKernan still too young, is he AFL ready?
- Griffin provided absolutely nothing last time he played for the Crows, so has his SANFL form showed enough improvement to take the risk on him again? wasn't he always quite dominant at SANFL level anyway?

...Sellar may also be available for selection this week, so how would he rate (even if underdone) against the above two.

HMac had his AC joint restrapped and finished out the game, so i would expect him to play this coming week. if he doesn't (small chance), that would be a huge PLUS for us and the Crows will most definitely go with a single ruckman.

 

[SydCrow]

Oh how his tune has changed

eventually injuries become a legitimate excuse, even for Craigy

blind freddy can see how important Stiffy is to our side - his absence really hurt us - and would hurt us again

and we don't have that many players in decent form - although some of them are looking better (Porps, Tippett) - Stiffy and McLeod are a couple who are playing well

 

[Crow-mo]

FSI is still based on an opinion, not a fact.

What the FSI believes is the best 22 may not be fact, and then again, it may be. That's why it's just another tool that means a little, but not much.

For example, FSI doesn't have Phil Davis in our team, but he may be now.

Last year it wouldn't have had Otten.

um, that's random gibberish.

a few things:
- it doesn't really matter if you agree with whether a player is #22 or #24 on our list, it doesn't change very much. whether you now happen to think Davis is in our very best 22 or not is irrelevant as his weighting as a player will be low. meaningful differences are not at the fringes.

- all players are not ranked equally. form, quality, games played etc. all count. the bulk of any teams FSI is vested in the best players, as it should be.

- the same method is applied to all teams equally.

- Whilst its pretty clear you don't understand very much about it at all, you're in luck as there are a few good articles out there you can follow up on.

 

[Crow-mo]

Our injuries are a figment of our imagination?

our injuries have affected our depth players more than our front line players.

Geelong beat Richmond by 100 pts minus Gablett, Corey, Scarlett, Rooke & Stokes

We struggled against a richmond team, that was even lower on relative strength minus: Knights, MacKay, Dangerfield & Hentschel.

not exactly apocalyptical now is it?

the mistake people make talking about our injuries is that they overstate the importance of our lesser/fringe players, and they ignore the injuries to other teams.

Geelong have had worse injuries than us, Hawthorn have had much worse than us, Freo has debuted more young players than us...

in other years we wouldn't even be talking about these things.

 

[WALL-e]

um, that's random gibberish.

a few things:
- it doesn't really matter if you agree with whether a player is #22 or #24 on our list, it doesn't change very much. whether you now happen to think Davis is in our very best 22 or not is irrelevant as his weighting as a player will be low. meaningful differences are not at the fringes.

- all players are not ranked equally. form, quality, games played etc. all count. the bulk of any teams FSI is vested in the best players, as it should be.

- the same method is applied to all teams equally.

- Whilst its pretty clear you don't understand very much about it at all, you're in luck as there are a few good articles out there you can follow up on.

You're a fair dinkum goose.

Keep to stats and percentages and have a stat orgy with D_One, hell invite Mike Sheahan and Robert Walls and just let loose in ecstacy. You can talk about how much ball Stanton gets and how Sellar is LULZ.

Sellar's probably out of our 22 on the FSI and yet him coming in provides a versatile ruck, competitive at stoppages giving Ivan rest and Tippett the ability to stay forward. Yet no, he's on the fringe.....

You can't measure intangilbles and what certain players bring to a team.

Nice one on neglecting Otten too