Changes For Round 2 Vs Adelaide?

[Nick Lions]

One or two players deserve the chop this week but wholesale changes won't get us very far. If Maguire is injured, e should bring in Lester, who, while not as good in a one on one defensive contest, provides better run off halfback and can add to midfield rotations and win a bloody clearance. He can also provide a chop out to Sauce and J-Patz. If Hanley misses because of suspension, bring in Raines to put a hard tag on Dangerfield. He provides outside run too, albeit with sloppier skills than Hanley. Last but not least Harwood deserves Polkinghorne's spot in the side. He will get the ball more than six times and he provides more defensively. He also thrives on the in and under, tough stuff. Something I'm still yet to see from Polkinghorne.

 

[Nick Lions]

In any circumstance, Raines must be an inclusion, most likely at the expense of Polks.

 

[Nick Lions]

Oh and I wouldn't be bringing in debutants like Bartlett or Mayes or Docherty for this match. Puts too much pressure on them to perform.

 

[Balony_pony16]

Oh and I wouldn't be bringing in debutants like Bartlett or Mayes or Docherty for this match. Puts too much pressure on them to perform.

well voss rarely makes changes to a winning team so expecting young players to debut after a win is unlikely...I am convinced players like rockliff, redden, rich, moloney, golby, hanley, green etc... will bounce back. Its the usually passengers like Polks that need to be dropped

 

[Dan12]

I don't think 5 changes is always 'wholesale changes' necessarily. There is a difference between adjusting our side by dropping the spuds, young players and guys without a match up in the Crows' forward line as opposed to dropping a host of senior players.

Polkinghorne and Cornelius aren't very good players, they are out. I wouldn't have played them against the Bulldogs. Bring in Raines and Beams (starting).
Longer for Leuenberger is an easy straight swap.
As for Maguire, even if he isn't injured who does he play on? They have Walker (Merrett), Jenkins (Patfull) and a bunch of smalls... one of which for Lester to play on. So there is four pretty straightforward changes, that's nothing wholesale.
The only change I would make that might be considered swinging the axe is that I would drop Golby and bring in Docherty or Banfield as the sub.

 

[Balony_pony16]

As for Maguire, even if he isn't injured who does he play on? They have Walker (Merrett), Jenkins (Patfull) and a bunch of smalls... .

would think Goose would be injured. But if he did play I would like to see Goose play on Tex, Patful on Jenkins and Merrett loose man

 

[Dan12]

Merrett is not a loose man in defence. He is a gorilla who plays on other gorillas like Walker. We got found out when the small/medium group of Higgins, Murphy, Dickson, Giansiracusa, Cooney and Dalhaus kicked 13 goals against us because we were too top heavy in defence. Wright, Petrenko, Callinan, Douglas, Porplyzia, Johncock, Mackay and Henderson present an even bigger problem.

 

[uzabuz]

Merrett is not a loose man in defence. He is a gorilla who plays on other gorillas like Walker. We got found out when the small/medium group of Higgins, Murphy, Dickson, Giansiracusa, Cooney and Dalhaus kicked 13 goals against us because we were too top heavy in defence. Wright, Petrenko, Callinan, Douglas, Porplyzia, Johncock, Mackay and Henderson present an even bigger problem.

That was one of my concern's coming into the season. Merrett and Maguire are too like for like, against sides without two gorilla forwards Maguire's lack of pace is glaring. We really need to groom one of the young upcomers as a mobile chb going forward.

 

[Dan12]

That was one of my concern's coming into the season. Merrett and Maguire are too like for like, against sides without two gorilla forwards Maguire's lack of pace is glaring. We really need to groom one of the young upcomers as a mobile chb going forward.

Enter Justin Clarke
However I think at this point against this opponent I'd rather have Lester there.

 

[Gibbo_88]

A replacement for Goose most likely won't be Lester. He played as a midfielder last year and did ok at times and it sounds like that's what he will be doing in reserves as well.

 

[theteamtobeat]

B: Jaensch, Rutten, Otten

HB: Smith, Tailia, Reilly

C: Van Berlo, Dangerfield, Vince

Foll: Jacobs, Thompson, Sloane

HF: Johncock, Walker, Douglas

F: Porplyzia, Jenkins, Henderson

I/C: Mackay, Wright, Martin; Petrenko


B: Lester, Merrett, Golby

HB: Adcock, Patful, Hanley

C: Karnezis, Raines, Rich

Foll: Leuenberger, Moloney, Redden

HF: Beams, Brown, Zorko

F: Bewick, Martin, Green

I/C: Yeo, Rockliff, McGrath; Docherty/ Banfield/ Harwood/ Bartlett

Emg: Longer, Polkinghorne, Clarke


Out: Cornelius, Polkinghorne, Longer, Maguire

In: Lester, Raines, Leuenberger, Docherty/ Banfield/ Harwood/ Bartlett


Defence:

Lester has to come in for me. It makes the defense more mobile. Against the dogs there was no run from the backline. Merrett and Patful are more than capable of handling Walker and Jenkins, plus Lester can help Merrett and Patful as the third tall.

Golby, Hanley and Adcock need to lift defensibly and offensively.

Yeo is going to be a good player long term, just needs to cement his position in the best 22 this year.


Midfield:

Raines needs to come in for Polkinghorne. Needs to do a job on Dangerfield. He is an experienced senior player needs to be given a go and will contribute some level of leadership on field. Either play him Vossy (if fit or not injured) or delist him at the end of the year. The list does not need a 28 year old senior player not getting games.

I would like to see Karnezis, Rockliff and Beams resting forward and giving guys like Green, Zorko and Bewick opportunity to rotate through the midfield or wing.

I hope Beams gets a good run through the midfield. Good gut runner who can win the hard ball and link up during play. Can also kick a couple of goals.

Leuenberger needs to come in for Longer and battle Jacobs in the ruck. Leuenberger needs to ruck for at least 50% of the game and play forward. He kicked a couple of goal in the Reserves and plus he is a proven contested marker. Martin can ruck for 50% of the game in order to easy Leuenberger back from his Achilles injury.


Forward:

I’m following Essendon’s forward line structure last week when they beat the Crows. Essendon had the two talls in Hurley, Ryder up forward and Bellchambers rotating with Ryder through the ruck. Crameri is the mobile third tall that I see Bewick playing for us against the Crows. If Cornelius is going to play the third tall, he needs to apply pressure in the forward line, hence why Bewick needs to play that role until guys like Mayes, Paparone and Close develop.

I see Bewick playing that third tall. The reason I dropped Cornelius is because he does not apply pressure when the opposition has the ball in the backline. Bewick can play above his height, rotate through the midfield, apply pressure and has the ability to get around 15-20 touches. Has a decent work rate.

I thought about dropping Green, but he had the second most tackles behind Redden in the team against the Dogs.


Sub:

I would love to see Docherty debuting this week. It would bring some excitement I think for the Fans after the Doggies done a drive by on us last week. The kid is going to be a good player. He would add run and class by foot around the ground. Exactly what we need in the short term and long term future.

Banfield was one of the best among the Reserves this week and would not mind if gets a go. His got around 50 games under his belt and needs to be given a go to determine whether he is going to be part of those core players that are going to lead the Club to success in the future.

Harwood and Bartlett are the dark horses that might get a game this week, but unlikely.

 

[notliondown]

Vossy has said repeatedly that this year will be about stabilization... about settling players and giving the team time to adjust to each other and not to be continually unsettling things with new players. Having said that its more likely changes will occur earlier in the season rather than later if that's his philosophy.

I cant sit here and honestly say that any one player was so bad he stood head and shoulders above his teammates in losing his position.

Our boys lost because of head space, not because of skill. Not because of ability. And that makes it almost impossible to wield the axe knowing that every single one is better than they showed on Saturday.

For mine the changes will be minimal... maybe Polks for Raines in a run with roll on Danger.

Anymore than that and we run that risk of resetting our team and playing round 1 again week after week after week. Winning games isn't just about personnel. Its not just about bodies. Theres so much more to it than that.

Its time we were willing to start showing more faith in the players and to stop acting like we can make headway in rotating 32 players through the team. It cant work that way forever.

Progress comes from stability - its time we rolled with the punches a bit more instead of being so reactionary.

 

[Footballator]

OUT - Polks Golby Martin Maguire Cornelius

In Raines Harwood Lisle Berger and Docherty

Polks just isn't up to it. Make the change now with Raines and get the stability going. He grabs Polka dots spot.
Golby just looked rusty and underdone. Let Harwood have a crack while Golby gets his mojo back in the twos. Harwood excelled in that position at times last year and must of been sweating on a performance like that.
Lisle in for Martin. Like for like there but Martin's fingers were just not sticky enough and Lisle was going well at CHF towards the backend of last year when we were winning. Lets Longer and Luey share the ruck from the pine.
Maguire will be injured and Docherty can have a crack and see if he can carry on NAB form because no one else could from what I saw.
Cornelius a swap for the Berger. Just didn't play with enough want and mongrel from what I could see and he needs to really prove a point if he ever gets back in the ones.

We have depth and no stability yet. Swing the changes use the depth we have and send a message.

 

[Luke Kathutian]

B: Jaensch, Rutten, Otten



B: Lester, Merrett, Golby

HB: Adcock, Patful, Hanley

C: Karnezis, Raines, Rich

Foll: Leuenberger, Moloney, Redden

HF: Beams, Brown, Zorko

F: Bewick, Martin, Green

I/C: Yeo, Rockliff, McGrath; Docherty/ Banfield/ Harwood/ Bartlett

Excellent post by team to beat. Thinking along very similar lines however I thought Golby was again really poor defensively and needs to spend time developing the defensive aspect of his game. Also think we desperately need to do something about our kicking efficiency and decision making under pressure. Had the worst kicking efficiency of all teams by a mile on the weekend and I include Melbourne in that. Therefore:

IN: Leunberger OUT: Longer
(Longers done well but he needs time in the 2s learning how to play out of full fwd)

IN: Docherty OUT: Golby
(Need his kicking out of defence. That simple)

IN: Raines OUT: Polkinghorne
(no brainer)

IN: Mayes OUT: Cornelius
(Ace needs time in the 2s to salvage whats left of his confidence. For some reason he can't play in the same team as J Brown. No idea why. At the moment there's only one spot for a 3rd tall and Bewick is playin that role better. Mayes comes in as the explosive sub and Beams starts.)

IN: Lester OUT: Maguire
(injured and as above)

 

[Dan12]

Vossy has said repeatedly that this year will be about stabilization... about settling players and giving the team time to adjust to each other and not to be continually unsettling things with new players. Having said that its more likely changes will occur earlier in the season rather than later if that's his philosophy.

I cant sit here and honestly say that any one player was so bad he stood head and shoulders above his teammates in losing his position.

Our boys lost because of head space, not because of skill. Not because of ability. And that makes it almost impossible to wield the axe knowing that every single one is better than they showed on Saturday.

For mine the changes will be minimal... maybe Polks for Raines in a run with roll on Danger.

Anymore than that and we run that risk of resetting our team and playing round 1 again week after week after week. Winning games isn't just about personnel. Its not just about bodies. Theres so much more to it than that.

Its time we were willing to start showing more faith in the players and to stop acting like we can make headway in rotating 32 players through the team. It cant work that way forever.

Progress comes from stability - its time we rolled with the punches a bit more instead of being so reactionary.

People aren't suggesting change for the sake of change or for the sake of not accepting what happened on the weekend. It's all common sense to structure our side better.
Longer for Leuenberger is like for like, out second ruck, in first ruck. Maguire for a small defender is planning for the structure of Adelaide's forward line. That's not reactionary it's sensible.
Acorn and Polks add very little to the team. Unless there's something others can see that I can't, Raines, Beams, Lester and Banfield add more to the team.
Longer, Acorn, Polks and Maguire are the four players who have been mentioned by far the most and that is not about swinging the axe, culling players who aren't up to standard, stability amongst the team. Nothing about dropping players after one poor game and not showing faith.
If we dropped Stefan Martin, Bewick, Green, Yeo etc. after one bad game then I would be concerned. That's where in my opinion your point is very valid. Consistent non-performance, better structure, returns from injury or a defence needing to match the opposition's strengths is different and won't affect the team's headspace. That said I'll probably be proven completely wrong when we go in unchanged this week

 

[pauldrc]

My changes for the next round would be:

OUT - Polks Longer Maguire Cornelius

IN - Raines Berger Lester/Clarke Lisle

 

[GoTheLions]

I think our tall back line was an issue, the Bulldog small forwards seemed to have the ball on an elastic string, tied to the goal posts.

With Goose most likely out, and as we are playing Adelaide, would prefer a defender like Harwood to come in to add some on defensive clearance ability, hardness at the ball.

Martin fumbles a lot, can recall a few times the small bulldogs supporters waited at his feet to pick up his slops, and took it to the other end for a goal. I'd back Longer in for this role, and bring in Leuie to share the ruck/forward role 50/50 this week.

Other changes, I would start Beams, drop Polks for Banfield/Mayes who would offer defensive pressure plus attacking nous, and give Mckever the sub vest.(Gives us options up forward and down back).

I was at the game, didn't watch the broadcast, and did see Cornelius putting in a decent effort on numerous occasions. He positioned himself in front of his opponents a number of times, only to be rag-dolled by bigger guys, one of which looked to be a hand in the back. He really needs to add 5kg of bulk in the role he is playing, but I would give him a few more weeks to see what he can offer.

 

[notliondown]

People aren't suggesting change for the sake of change or for the sake of not accepting what happened on the weekend. It's all common sense to structure our side better.
Longer for Leuenberger is like for like, out second ruck, in first ruck. Maguire for a small defender is planning for the structure of Adelaide's forward line. That's not reactionary it's sensible.
Acorn and Polks add very little to the team. Unless there's something others can see that I can't, Raines, Beams, Lester and Banfield add more to the team.
Longer, Acorn, Polks and Maguire are the four players who have been mentioned by far the most and that is not about swinging the axe, culling players who aren't up to standard, stability amongst the team. Nothing about dropping players after one poor game and not showing faith.
If we dropped Stefan Martin, Bewick, Green, Yeo etc. after one bad game then I would be concerned. That's where in my opinion your point is very valid. Consistent non-performance, better structure, returns from injury or a defence needing to match the opposition's strengths is different and won't affect the team's headspace. That said I'll probably be proven completely wrong when we go in unchanged this week

We'll probably both be wrong when the team is named

The trouble is, there are a lot of people who are calling for change for the sake of change. For a the sake of a bad game. And how anyone has the ability to say with any certainty that someone was BAD in that side at the end of the game is what I have trouble with. We were beaten everywhere.

Clearly if opposition structure dictates change we change... or injury or some sort of freakish form in the 2nds. But to swap like for like after one game?

Acorn for Lisle? Acorn for Mckeever? Whats the gain right now? I'm not suggesting that in the future one of those guys doesn't clearly stand up... but right now? Pound for pound all you are doing is creating instability - because as far as I can see they all bring different characteristics for sure - but the nett affect on the team will be pretty much the same... FOR NOW. I cant stress that enough. For now.

It would be a reactionary change based on anger and frustration not one based on clear cut ability and advantage.

The same with Longer and Berger. For sure the Bergs is a better ruck... when hes fit, firing and ready to go. But after one full game is he the great white hope we all want? Right now does he offer more that Longer?

The calls for Golby to go... to be replaced with Doc. What clear cut guaranteed advantage would Doc bring - right now? Is he a better player than Golby when they are their best RIGHT NOW?

I'm not for one minute suggesting that we all don't have logical and understandable reasons for suggesting the changes we all have... and it sure doesn't make me right and everyone else wrong.

But I just cant see the logic in taking a player out of the team to replace him with another without the clear cut and immediate benefit of his inclusion. Why replace a player you rate as a 7 out of 10 with another player that you rate 7 out of 10? Especially after a poor effort by everyone. As far as I can see to headhunt anyone based on something other than a needs basis after that game will single that player out as a scapegoat and nothing else.

We are surely past that point as team? We know enough and have seen enough over the last 2 years with rotation after rotation to know strengths and weaknesses. We cant go on cycling like that forever or we stall. Cohesion, stability and chance are what the guys need. Not fear, intimidation and punishment at a whim. Our guys can see our depth. They feel the pressure. But we need to create an environment of stability, of patience and reward - not the continual head games and disillusionment that comes with a rotating door policy.

Knowing the guy beside you will turn left or right, knowing he'll fade or check kick or run straight at his man is what we need now. Familiarity, confidence in each other and trust. Those things are pretty hard to create if the guy beside you changes every week.

Well thats my 5 cents anyway

 

[Viceregal]

Can't help but think that unless Cornelius is already gone there is not a whole lot more he is going to learn in the seconds - he doesn't need to build his confidence that he can play at NEAFL level - he already *knows* that - it is the confidence that he can mix it up at AFL level that he needs to get and the confidence that the coaching staff will keep him in as long as he keeps trying so he is not worrying about if-I-drop-this-I-am-back-in-the-two's-for-a-month-again-oh-God-I-hope-I-don't-drop-it which can be a rather self destructive self fulfilling personal prophecy

 

[Monster]

I find it interesting how everyone is wanting Raines back in the team.

Everyone was reasonably happy with his exclusion from the round 1 team, now he is seen as a critical part of our structure and an important reason why we lost. Seems like a bit of an excuse to me.

I dare say that if Raines played against the bulldogs it wouldn't have made a huge difference and he would appear in a lot of peoples OUT list.

 

[LicoriceAllsorts]

I find it interesting how everyone is wanting Raines back in the team.

Everyone was reasonably happy with his exclusion from the round 1 team, now he is seen as a critical part of our structure and an important reason why we lost. Seems like a bit of an excuse to me.

I dare say that if Raines played against the bulldogs it wouldn't have made a huge difference and he would appear in a lot of peoples OUT list.

because we were so arrogant to think that we wouldn't need a tagger, dangerfield is up this week, ew need one, especially after last week.

 

[PTizzle]

Raines has to come in. I was shocked when I saw he wasn't - he plays an integral role and it reeked a little of complacency to me. He's not flashy but he does an important job and he does it well.

Polkinghorne has to have at least one game in the ressies. That kind of display is unacceptable.

The ruck situation is interesting and I'll leave the club to make the call on what they think should be done there. Leuey obviously comes in if he's fully fit but if not I'd rather make sure he's 100% good to go round 3/4.

Also for me, I don't think Martin should necessarily stay in. He wasn't absolutely terrible but with Lisle and McKeever showing big signs in the ressies (also both able to chop out the ruck) then one of them should come in and be given a crack. I'd like to see McKeever being given some reward, he's athletic and could be an awkward matchup.

Ace has to stay in for mine as this is his make or break season. We simply have to see if he's good enough and dropping him/bringing him back after he kicks 10 in the ressies will just continue the current cycle.

 

[PTizzle]

Also I agree on the calls for Maguire to be replaced with a Harwood or a Lester. Patfull will do fine on Jenkins I think, he plays above his height. Adelaide's medium/smalls could cause absolute nightmares for us (we often struggle against smalls in general).

I don't like making a lot of changes, but most of them are just putting first choice players back in really, and I think making Martin fight for a spot with Lisle/McKeever will be good for all three (as when Brown goes it'll likely be two of them playing every game, at least in the near future).

 

[iBeng]

B: Lester, Merrett, Golby

HB: Adcock, Patful, Hanley

C: Karnezis, Raines, Rich

Foll: Leuenberger, Moloney, Redden

HF: Beams, Brown, Zorko

F: Bewick, Martin, Green

I/C: Yeo, Rockliff, McGrath; Docherty/ Banfield/ Harwood/ Bartlett

Emg: Longer, Polkinghorne, Clarke


Out: Cornelius, Polkinghorne, Longer, Maguire

In: Lester, Raines, Leuenberger, Docherty/ Banfield/ Harwood/ Bartlett

As much as we would LOVE to see this, hes is a Rookie and wasnt elevated at the start of the season, Clarke was.

 

[dlanod]

I find it interesting how everyone is wanting Raines back in the team.

Everyone was reasonably happy with his exclusion from the round 1 team, now he is seen as a critical part of our structure and an important reason why we lost. Seems like a bit of an excuse to me.

I dare say that if Raines played against the bulldogs it wouldn't have made a huge difference and he would appear in a lot of peoples OUT list.

If you went back I'd suspect you'd find people broke down into three categories:

1) Those glad Raines was out.
2) Those not glad Raines was out, but could hypothesise as to a reason why he was.
3) Those not glad Raines was out and couldn't see why.

The same people are probably in the same groups. The amount the respective categories have been posting about Raines has probably fluctuated from since the teams were named until post-game. I doubt that anyone's magically changed their mind about Raines in 72 hours unless you can show me specific posters' posting histories that indicate that from before and after?