Changes v Swans!!

[Jade]

In: Welsh
Out: Fletcher

So here's why...

I think most of us have got it right in that Hurley will be used down back alongside Pears to take the two marking options of Sydney.

A few of you have pegged the need for an additional forward, which I personally don't think we need. The SCG is a small ground which makes leading forwards a little less effective through lack of space. We already have Gumby, and his ability to burn off an opponent will mean if and when we turn the ball over and rebound off defensive 50 he can be that option.

Paddy/Hille can provide a second tall marking option when required, and they are certainly in form. I don't think this is the game to bring Mark Williams in for two reasons

1) He has done NOTHING to warrant selection

2) He's a leading forward, SCG remember.

The SCG lends itself to stoppages, hence we need a side capable in the trenches. For this reason I would not be tempted to drop Howlett - he finds the hard ball and has the mature body. This is also where Welsh will be useful - not as a stopper.

The only other change I would consider would be Lonergan out for Reimers, who are interchangeable in the forward line.

 

[Captainfletch]

OUT : Fletcher (susp), Lonergan (obviously injured imo)

IN : Reimers, T.Slattery

Tallish and very promising defender in slattery deserves a go. Even if it is only for one week.

I think reimers is definately a more talanted player than Lonergan and can't wait for his second half of the year. Always knows where the goals are.

 

[loopy_cam]

1) He (Williams) has done NOTHING to warrant selection

I doubt this is true. Though he hasn't been starring I assume he has been given specific instructions and is doing them. Hence being emergency every week since he has been at Bendigo (IIRC). The same as Prismall when he was out.

 

[Longy413]

Sorry Longy, I think this is the first time I'm going to have to disagree with you.

Firstly, you're "play three ruckmen incase two get injured" is a ridiculous non-comparison that I'm not even going to go in to.
Secondly, Hurley and/or Pears requiring a rest on the pine at some stage in the game is hardly hypothetical, rather these rotations are to be planned for.
Thirdly, I think all teams are picked to be flexible so that such hypotheticals as injuries or poor form can be accounted for. No senior coach would ever pick a team, which would put them in the situation of: if player X or Y goes down/gets toweled up, we're screwed cos there's no other options.

As for your last point on T. Slattery. Agreed. This was also my suggestion for the same reasons.
I still can't understand why so many don't think we need another KPD in Fletcher's absence.

Okay, I probably got carried away a little with my example.

But remember where we are playing as well.

If we go with Hurley and Pears as our key backs, then Myers becomes their backup. Rotations are planned for and opposition forwards rotate as well.
SCG, given the size is one ground you don't see ruckmen spend too much time forward, which is what required Hurley to push back against the Bulldogs. We also played Pears smaller. We probably didn't need to push Hurley back at all had we been willing to play Pears on their other tall, but we were trying to free him up.

I think we'll see Pears back to fullback this week to play tall, on White.
Hurley to take the second tall, Playfair, if he gets a game.
They can rotate when their opponent rotates, we have Myers as cover.

We're unlikely to see Sydney push a ruckman to play forward. Pyke just isn't good enough to go forward and it isn't something Mumford does a lot of.

With our own setup, our own ruckmen are good enough to go forward and have been a lot lately. We're unlikely to need three tall forwards at the SCG, Gumby, Ryder/Hille and someone else (Daniher has been suggested), so I don't think we're going to need an extra tall.

I think our selection comes down to a couple of things -
1) Does anyone's form at Bendigo scream out for selection. The answer is probably not.

2) Do we need an extra tall at the SCG in light of Fletch being out. I don't think so.

3) What is the match up for Goodes. Is it Slattery, should he come in? If not Myers?

4) Does Welsh come straight back in as Knights has suggested? Howlett looks the unlucky one.

5) Should we bring in someone who can cut up the lines of the small ground by foot (EG Reimers)? Possibly.

or

6) Should we bring in Williams as the second marking forward? Maybe.



My thoughts, horses for courses, I'd just make two changes -

T Slattery for Fletcher. Slattery can play tall, he can run with Goodes, he can cover for Hurley and Pears.
Welsh for Howlett. I like Howlett, but 12 disposals last week isn't enough for a midfielder.

What I think will happen -
Myers will play on Goodes.
Welsh will replace Howlett.
Williams or Reimers will replace Fletcher, Hurley goes back.

 

[Kaan]

In: Williams
Out: Fletcher

Don't want any dropped, we are in great form. Hurley to go back, and a quality player in Williams comes in.

 

[bombersaway]

Trying to look at thge match ups to some this one up

syd match winners to stop/key match ups

goodes pears/myers
o'keffe hocking/myers
malceski monfries/reimers/jetta
mcveigh welsh/howlett/lonergan

no doubt malceski has been their best this year,
runs off halfback so obviosly we look to exploit him when it gets turned over, reimers is the one for mine really knows how to loose his man and 2/3 goals could be very handy. Other match ups for him gus/jetta again both can hurt on the rebound jetta prob best one as far as deffence(run downs)


bit worried about myers in the air with goodes, pears same height more natural deffender and again running off goodes could go along way to winning myers hasnt had the exp in getting back, hurley at fb for his height with jessie white

purely on match ups i think

ins

welsh??? Mcveigh.okeffe match up

slattery??? Could tag a midfeilder or take small fwd's jetta,mcglynn

reimers

outs

fletch

prismal/howlett

lonergan/atkinson

 

[anf06]

Out: Fletcher
In: M. Bolton


..well, we are playing Sydney aren't we?

 

[bombersaway]

B> HANK-HURLEY-DEMPSY
McGLYNN-WHITE-?????

HB> McVEIGH-PEARS-BUDDA
JETTA-GOODES-O'KEFFE

C> MYERS-JOBE-STANTON
McVEIGH-KIRK-JACK
RUCKS> PADDY-NAT RAT-WINDERLICH
MUMFORD-BOLTON-HANNABERY

HF> JETTA-GUMBY-REIMERS
SHAW-R-THOMPSON-MALCESKI

F> GUS-HILLE-DAVEY
MATTNER-GRUNDY-????

BENCH ZAKA-HOWLETT-WELSH-ATKINSON
PRISMALL-LONERGAN-T.SLATTERY

 

[Eleven 38]

everyone said great for howletts confidence after he got dropped after round 2...then he gets back in the side plays 4 games has a quiet one in his 4th and everyone wants him dropped again??

replace fletch with a forward. may aswell have another look at our No.33 what was his name again??

 

[silk]

I wonder if they would consider playing Mcveigh on Mcveigh.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

Howlett dropped. u all mad.

Out: Fletch, Lonergan
In: Melksham, Reimers

 

[Longy413]

everyone said great for howletts confidence after he got dropped after round 2...then he gets back in the side plays 4 games has a quiet one in his 4th and everyone wants him dropped again??

This isn't under 12's, we don't need to protect blokes.
He doesn't appear to be the type that will benefit from an extended run as per someone like Myers or Jetta.

He's playing as midfielder and whilst he has shown good signs, has had 13, 21 and 12 disposals in his last three games. He's just not winning enough ball at the moment to warrant his spot.

It's all about form and he should be treated the same way as any other player. If Stanton was getting those returns, we'd want him out of the side and rightly so. When your team is playing well and you have blokes waiting in the reserves or returning from injury, you need to be making an impact and Howlett hasn't been doing that to any significant degree.

 

[Vass38]

With Fletch out Hurley will go back and maybe NLM to chop out as well down there. The way I see it theres 17 guys that wont get dropped and will spend a fair amount of time on the ground - so the structure of the side will look something like this:

Dempsey Hurley Hocking
NLM Pears McVeigh
Prismal Watson Jetta
Monfries Gumby Davey
Zahar Ryder ????

Hille Stanton Winders

Interchange ???? ???? ???? ????

So really there are 5 spots up for grabs between about 15 players.

Those most likely to get the nod in the 5 remaining spots are our vice captain Welsh, Melksham, Atkinson, Myers & Howlett.

Lonergan, Reimers, H.Slat, Dyson, & Colyer all have very strong claims and it wouldn't suprise to see any of these guys picked.

T.Slat, Hardingham, Houli, M.Williams & Neagle outside chances and have been overlooked for various reasons so far so it would suprise to see any of these guys come in for this game.

Id love to see M.Williams get a run but have kind of given up on the idea as he seems to get continuosly overlooked inspite of his class and decent form at Bendigo.

 

[hank31]

Outs: Fletcher, Lonergan.
Ins: T.Slattery, Melksham.

Lonergan looks a bit off the boil atm, whether it be injury or just kicking form, i think he needs a rest. Melksham can play his role across half forward and push into the midfield also.

Tyson Slattery sounds as though he is going really well at Bendigo. I personally haven't seen this but we need to give him a go sooner or later, this should be his chance i think! If we keep him on the list and dont play him, he might be looking elsewhere come the end of the year, which would be a shame because in the games i have seen him play, he looks like he has talent!

 

[Smyth94]

IN: Welsh, Reimers, Williams

OUT: Howlett, Lonergan, Fletcher

Anyone who suggests that Zaka is to be "rested" should be carded.

Just looking back on my changes, 3 changes is too many for a winning side.

IN: Welsh, Reimers
OUT: Fletcher (susp), Lonergan

Reimers can come in and play as a leading forward, he did quite well last year at the SCG and if it wasn't for wayward kicking, should've kicked 4-5 goals.

Welsh straight back in despite the grumblings of a few, he was in-form before his suspension (smashed Hodge) and in the corresponding fixture last year, smashed Kirk.

Hurley to go back in defence, whilst the talls will be Gumby, Hille/Ryder mixed with our mediums Reimers and Monfries and supported with our smalls Davey and Jetta. I think it's a pretty good mix we've got in our forward line at the moment.

Notwithstanding this being an interstate trip, I feel that if we bring our tackling pressure and intensity then we should win this game, I would be disappointed if we didn't.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

I'm not convinced Williams needs to come in. A small forwardline v Sydney forces blokes like Malceski, Shaw, Mattner and Heath to be accountable. 2 talls is enough IMO.

I'm genuinely scared of the O'Keefe matchup. He's playing as a forward pushing into the midfield, and that's the player Atkinson has been taking. O'Keefe will maul Atko. I'm struggling to find a matchup for O'Keefe though.

IMO, Fletcher and Lonergan out for Welsh and Reimers. If Lonergan is fit, either Howlett goes out or Reimers doesn't come in.

 

[half time raffle]

Why are people calling for anything but forced changes, we have just had our best win for the year! The blokes that are avaliable should be made to come through Bendigo and earn their spot, i'm not convinced that Welsh or Slattery are in our best 22 anyway.

In: Riemers

Out: Fletcher

 

[Kaiser Powser]

I don't agree with it, but Welsh will come in. Knights as much as said so in his post match interview on Friday. Howlett is the obvious omission, but he played a good role with Welsh in the team in rounds 1 & 2, so could stay.

My gut feeling:

Out: Howlett In: Welsh
Out: Fletcher In: T.Slattery/Williams
Out: Lonergan In: Reimers

 

[AG]

I'm genuinely scared of the O'Keefe matchup.

He is due a very good game, as is Goodes. Both have been a bit down over the past month.

Jack, Smith, Hannebery and Kennedy are the in form players for us. Stopping the influence of Malceski and Mumford is crucial for Essendon as well.

 

[Godzke]

I'm not convinced Williams needs to come in. A small forwardline v Sydney forces blokes like Malceski, Shaw, Mattner and Heath to be accountable. 2 talls is enough IMO.

excellent point.

For me...

OUTs: Fletch, Lonergan (just doesn't cut it for mine)
INs: Welsh (due for a big game, owes us), Reimers

Not enough positive feedback from Bendigo regarding Daniher, so I'm not convinced we need another tall in the team. Not for the Swans anyway.

 

[lamaros]

Outs:

Fletcher, Lonergan, Atkinson

Ins:

Reimers, Welsh, Dyson

Hurley to go back, Dyson to play Atkinson's position, Welsh to push Howlett in to Lonergan's role. Reimers to play forward in Hurley's position.

Goodes is the only worry for me.

I'd say Hurley on him in the defensive 50 and Dempsey when he pushes up the ground.

Dyson on O'Keefe >>>> Atkinson on O'Keefe

 

[hank31]

He is due a very good game, as is Goodes. Both have been a bit down over the past month.

Jack, Smith, Hannebery and Kennedy are the in form players for us. Stopping the influence of Malceski and Mumford is crucial for Essendon as well.

No offence AG, but i think the Swans should be more worried about our rucks, not us worrying about Mumford. Yes he can influence a game, but i think he will be chasing butt this weekend with the Hille and Ryder combo working him pretty hard!

 

[AG]

Only worried about Hille and Ryder in the F50. In the actual ruck I'd expect Mumford to have the upper hand similar to what Hudson did last week considering they are pretty much identical players.

 

[hank31]

Outs:

Fletcher, Lonergan, Atkinson

Ins:

Reimers, Welsh, Dyson

Hurley to go back, Dyson to play Atkinson's position, Welsh to push Howlett in to Lonergan's role. Reimers to play forward in Hurley's position.

Goodes is the only worry for me.

I'd say Hurley on him in the defensive 50 and Dempsey when he pushes up the ground.

Dyson on O'Keefe >>>> Atkinson on O'Keefe

Sorry Lamaros, but IMO your wrong about dropping Atko.
His run from defence has been an integral part to our revival!
Dyson doesnt deserve to displace him just yet.
Atko did nothing wrong last week, i actually thought he was good.
IMO we cant drop him for nothing....

 

[lamaros]

Only worried about Hille and Ryder in the F50. In the actual ruck I'd expect Mumford to have the upper hand similar to what Hudson did last week considering they are pretty much identical players.

Hudson didn't have the upper hand in the ruck so much as in his contested marking around the ground (on Hille for the most part), they just won the clearances because their midfield sharked a lot of Essendon's tap too.

I don't think Mumford will has as good a game as Hudson, and I don't think we'll lose the clearances as poorly this time, but you're absolutely right that Ryder and Hille will have to pay Mumford some respect.