Changes to best 22

[OldStyle2007]

That side is too slow, DanA

 

[catempire]

I think it's a minor problem at the moment but with our Best 22 it's not a problem at all for me

My best 22:

FB: Kelly Scarlett Hunt
HB: Enright Taylor Mackie
C: Corey Ablett Ling
HF: Varcoe Podsiadly Chapman
FF: Johnson Mooney Byrnes
R: Ottens Bartel Selwood
Int: Blake Rooke Milburn + one of Wojak/Lonergan/Stokes

That's how we lined up last Grand Final with only 2 changes.
Pods in for Hawkins - Pods has been a revelation
Hunt in for Harley - Gain Hunt's left peg, lose Harley's marking.

In my view a small forward line would cause us no problems at all. Wojak would be my first choice unless their was a particularly good match up for Lonergan.

That's a pretty good effort. I can only quibble at the edges:

1. I can't see Hawkins being left out if he is fit. But at the same time, I can't see Pods being left out. It's the most difficult selection conundrum of the whole year IMO. On form, I would push Milburn into Hunt's spot and Hunt out of the 22. Very stiff, but this is a very, very strong 22.

2. I can't see Stokes being left out if he is fit. I get the feeling he has become a point of inspiration for the group. I think there is a 2 out of 3 situation when looking at Varcoe/Stokes/Byrnes and at the moment I think Byrnes is at the back of the queue.

At the end of the day though, there's likely to be 1 or 2 long term injuries which make the decision easier and which make it likely that the best 22 available on GF day includes the ones I squeeze out.

 

[DanA]

That side is too slow, DanA

Completely disagree. 1 game in the last 3 1/2 years we've been shown up for pace and suddenly we're too slow?

I'm not buying it.

The game against Carlton was a one off caused as discussed by a lack of forward pressure. We played 2 unfit medium forwards, 3 tall forwards and 2 ruck men. Gibbs, Walker and Armfield had a field day.

We were also missing Scarlett.

It's a completely different side to the Carlton game but one almost identical to the premiership side less than a year ago. Seemed to do fine then.

 

[DanA]

That's a pretty good effort. I can only quibble at the edges:

1. I can't see Hawkins being left out if he is fit. But at the same time, I can't see Pods being left out. It's the most difficult selection conundrum of the whole year IMO. On form, I would push Milburn into Hunt's spot and Hunt out of the 22. Very stiff, but this is a very, very strong 22.

2. I can't see Stokes being left out if he is fit. I get the feeling he has become a point of inspiration for the group. I think there is a 2 out of 3 situation when looking at Varcoe/Stokes/Byrnes and at the moment I think Byrnes is at the back of the queue.

At the end of the day though, there's likely to be 1 or 2 long term injuries which make the decision easier and which make it likely that the best 22 available on GF day includes the ones I squeeze out.

Milburn if he can keeps his mouth shut should be ahead of Hunt. I decided to put Milburn on the bench for versatility I think he's a rock down back but can pinch hit up forward. I personally think Hunt is better than Wojak though so i'd still keep Hunt in.

The main problem with the change though is I can't see where Hawkins plays. I'm not a big fan of three talls and certainly not if Rooke is in the side. With Ottens in the ruck and resting forward it seems to me that Hawkins gets in the way. For me Pods is well ahead of Tomahawk.


I'd rather Byrnes and Varcoe over Stokes but granted it's very close. I personally like having a left footer, a bit of extra speed so went with Byrnes.

 

[catempire]

Yes, I can understand why you went the way you did.

I'm not a fan of 3 talls either. My post was more gut feel about how they would go than a belief that it's the best way to go. I just can't see them leaving Hawk out of a big game (if he's fit).

As for the small forward issue, I think if Byrnes returns to last year's peak form then he is a lock. Right now I think he's battling a little and Stokes is riding a crest of support from his peers. That could, of course, change very quickly. Varcoe picks himself these days I think.

 

[Vdubs]

This. We can speculate all we want, but by the time guys like Corey and Otto are ready to return there will be other players from our best 22 forced out with injury. When was the last time we actually had our best 22 out on the park?

We had our best 22 out on the park against Pies. That team, if fit could be our best 22, yes, without Ottens, Corey and Rooke.

 

[Turbocat]

I think arguments can be made for all sorts of setups , but in the end a player or two will just be unlucky for balance and or matchups. It almost seems 24 or 25 players pick themselves , and in some way Im sure an injury would make the situation a lot easier to sort.

My thinking
We can not play the 2010 Rooke and the 3 talls and SJ in the same forwardline so where does he fit. Im not sure , a fit Rooke adds a finals type hardness that would be hard to go past but a less than fit Rooke is almost a liability. I think our best look has been with the tree talls and three smalls so maybe SJ will be pushed up the ground

Lonergan seems a lock unless he starts getting his pants pulled down , he and Taylor seem the keys down back with Scarlett there to steady the ship. Kelly has become such a strong player , his year in defense last year seems to have made him even better. If Corey comes back I can see him playing back there with Enright. Hunt is our preferred small. Mackie almost seems out of place with Lonergan in the side but he is the golden haired boy so I doubt he misses.

Im glad Im not a selector , at the moment its only injuries that are keeping the players happy.When and if we have a full list to choose from the fun will really start.First it was Blake, the Wojo , then Stokes who will it be this year?

 

[Gogeelong]

order of importance of return

What is your order of preferred return of the list of injured players taking account the current form of our team? Score out of ten for importance?

Scarlett 10/10
Ottens 9/10
Ling 8/10
Corey 7/10
Hawkins 5/10
Rooke 4/10
West 1/10

 

[JUBJUB]

Re: order of importance of return

What is your order of preferred return of the list of injured players taking account the current form of our team? Score out of ten for importance?

Scarlett 10/10
Ottens 9/10
Ling 8/10
Corey 7/10
Hawkins 5/10
Rooke 4/10
West 1/10

WTF
Who the hell was that running around in the VFL last weekend wearing a Geelong jumper with #12 on it ? Must've been Wests twin

 

[Generalissimo]

Re: order of importance of return

Scarlett 10/10
Hawkins 8/10
Ottens 7/10
Ling 7/10
Corey 7/10
Rooke 4/10
West 1/10

 

[winty]

Re: order of importance of return

WTF
Who the hell was that running around in the VFL last weekend wearing a Geelong jumper with #12 on it ? Must've been Wests twin

I agree. Why add West to the list? If you're going to do that, you might as well add all the other players running around in the VFL who have played senior footy, like Gamble, Duncan, Djerrkura, Laidler and Gillies.

 

[YIIIABLETTT]

Re: order of importance of return

Scarlo 10/10 Wont win the flag without him
Ottens 8/10
Ling 7/10
Hawkins 7/10
Corey 6/10
Rooke 5/10

Having said that at least 1 of Ottens and Hawkins needs to be back, getting at least 1 of them back i would also rate as 10/10

 

[pinion]

Re: order of importance of return

we've been covering pretty well without them so far, but it's only a matter of time. i don't think it's a matter of desperately needing 1 or 2 more than the others, but i think it's important to get three of those guys back sooner rather than later before our depth gets tested too much

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Re: order of importance of return

Scarlett 10/10
Ottens 9/10
Corey 9/10
Ling 8/10
Rooke 8/10 (I would have said 9, but with how well Pods is playing, I dropped it back to 8)
Hawk 7/10

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Re: order of importance of return

we've been covering pretty well without them so far, but it's only a matter of time. i don't think it's a matter of desperately needing 1 or 2 more than the others, but i think it's important to get three of those guys back sooner rather than later before our depth gets tested too much

We should be able to win this week and next week with what we have, and at least one of Scarlo, Otto and Corey to be back for the St Kilda game, if not all of them. The unknown is Rooke and maybe Tomahawk.

 

[crunchola]

Re: order of importance of return

10 Scarlett
8 Ling
8 Hawkins
6 Corey
6 Ottens
4 Rooke
Max has been great but is a has been, should retire end season
Ottens has become a liability, most reliable feature is his injury potential
Corey has almost become redundant with our current structure, ALMOST
Hawkins is evolving perfectly
Ling, we haven't started grooming a replacement
Scarlett is indispensable

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Corey for Hogan is a given.

Scarlett should be in for Mackie, simply because for all Mackie brings in other areas, he is our worst defender atm, and is easily expoitable in that area. But Bomber won't drop Mackie so I don't know who.

On paper you would think you could play Ottens and the 3 talls, but maybe not. I still thus think my man Pods will get dropped at some stage as well as he's playing.

Again it's hard to see a place for Maxy, but who knows. If he can get the knee back to a stage where he's playing outstanding footy in the VFL come round 18, he might well be back in.

Anyway, this is all a 'good' problem to have, if there is such a thing.

 

[Vdubs]

Re: order of importance of return

Scarlett critical for winning any game 10
Ling very important 9
Hawkins becoming X factor 8
Ottens can take as long as he needs 5
Corey less important this year 4
Max ,will only be needed if Pods goes down 2

 

[Ricketts]

Re: order of importance of return

10 - Scarlett
8 - Brad
7 - Ling
5 - Corey, Hawkins
2 - Max.

 

[OldStyle2007]

Completely disagree. 1 game in the last 3 1/2 years we've been shown up for pace and suddenly we're too slow?

I'm not buying it.

The game against Carlton was a one off caused as discussed by a lack of forward pressure. We played 2 unfit medium forwards, 3 tall forwards and 2 ruck men. Gibbs, Walker and Armfield had a field day.

We were also missing Scarlett.

It's a completely different side to the Carlton game but one almost identical to the premiership side less than a year ago. Seemed to do fine then.

I think Hawks took us for pace a little bit in 2008.

But mainly I think this season pace is a massive issue. There are a lot of goals being scored "over the back" and that is done only through quick movement and speedy players to finish the goals

Point being, you need that pace to defend against "over the back" as well as use that tactic offensively yourself

 

[Gaz_Brownlow]

I think Hawks took us for pace a little bit in 2008.

But mainly I think this season pace is a massive issue. There are a lot of goals being scored "over the back" and that is done only through quick movement and speedy players to finish the goals

Point being, you need that pace to defend against "over the back" as well as use that tactic offensively yourself

Don't understimate the importance of Max - I actually thought he was BOG in the grand final last year. Very very inspiring player and just gels with the team. Realistically though, it maybe very hard for him to get the touch and fitness back. However, he is definitely in my 22.

Wojack highlighted his importance last night - seems to be improving and getting faster!

Just such a tough call amongst the others. A few things though -
Hogan has still got some improving to do to be a regular,
Lonergan is now deserved of a starting spot,
Blake is a good ruckman,
Hawkins is a good mobile ruckman.
Corey is a definite Midfield starter to say otherwise is akin to blasphemy!
Byrnes and Stokes are of equal importance to the team
Taylor Hunt and Mitch Duncan both have futures

 

[winty]

I think the only reason we were seen to be beaten by pace against Carlton is, as other people have mentioned, solely due to a lack of defensive pressure in our forward line. In essence, the forward line is the first line of our backline. We put pressure on the opposition's defenders, and the supply going forward isn't anywhere near as good as when we play matador defence like we did against Carlton. I think in that game our starting six in the forward failed to lay a tackle. Compare that to last night, when the starting six in attack laid 15 tackles.

Geelong have shown they can slow down the quicker sides with defensive pressure in the forward line coupled with a good midfield zone. I remember in the first game in 2007, the Doggies ran us off our feet en route to a convincing win. Geelong combatted it in the return encounter by zoning heavily through the middle of the ground. The Doggies could get out of our attacking 50, but were then confronted with a sea of blue and white. Couple that with our small forwards chasing from behind, and the Doggies players were coughing the ball up repeatedly, and continually got burnt on the rebound.

It's not a lack of foot speed that brings us undone against the quicker sides. It's a lack of work rate.

 

[maximus steel]

I think the only reason we were seen to be beaten by pace against Carlton is, as other people have mentioned, solely due to a lack of defensive pressure in our forward line. In essence, the forward line is the first line of our backline. We put pressure on the opposition's defenders, and the supply going forward isn't anywhere near as good as when we play matador defence like we did against Carlton. I think in that game our starting six in the forward failed to lay a tackle. Compare that to last night, when the starting six in attack laid 15 tackles.

Geelong have shown they can slow down the quicker sides with defensive pressure in the forward line coupled with a good midfield zone. I remember in the first game in 2007, the Doggies ran us off our feet en route to a convincing win. Geelong combatted it in the return encounter by zoning heavily through the middle of the ground. The Doggies could get out of our attacking 50, but were then confronted with a sea of blue and white. Couple that with our small forwards chasing from behind, and the Doggies players were coughing the ball up repeatedly, and continually got burnt on the rebound.

It's not a lack of foot speed that brings us undone against the quicker sides. It's a lack of work rate.

spot on. the way teams make us look slow is when there isnt pressure in our forward line, which in turn makes ball delivery into the midfield better, making our zone less effective and allowing teams like carlton carry the ball through the centre without much pressure.

to be fair you do feel sometimes its from the lack of workrate in the midfield, not just the forwards. however i think our defence does its job successfully most of the time, sometimes when we lose as well.

 

[DanA]

Last night's game IMO is a classic example of what defensive pressure in the forward line provides. We were getting absolutely smashed in the clearances in the first half but still managed to hold the lead due to the little guys.

For my money, Varcoe and Byrnes won us the game.