Changes vs Carlton

[Skeeta Olly]

In my opinion you can't drop someone after just one game. We saw it with Howlett, Myers stays. He wasn't good, but he definitely wasn't the worst out there.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

But if Myers shouldn't have been in there to start with?

 

[Skeeta Olly]

But if Myers shouldn't have been in there to start with?

Yes. But the fact is, he is there. What message does it send to him? We can keep a forward that has done SFA, but we can't keep someone who is a bit rusty from his first game.

 

[Childish Gambino]

But if Myers shouldn't have been in there to start with?

The same could be said for Gumbleton last week. Give him a chance.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

What sort of message was Reimers sent?

It's a harsh business. I want to see the best 22 out there, not pandering to someone's feelings.

 

[Smokin]

anyone's ins/out which dont have at least one of Neagle/Laycock this week is laughable.

That is where we got it totally wrong against Freo - we selected a team which had little hope of scoring a winning score in structure alone.

Gumby the only recognised KP forward? What where you thinking Knights?

That problem extended to the rucks - as we suddenly 'needed' Hille/Ryder at Full Forward - so predictiably, we lost oomph in the ruck, and got nothing up forward as neither of them are proven forwards. Add this to the fact we only afford to play them for 3-4 minutes there per quarter.

It was a right, royal mess on the weekend.

Myers must go out - anyone at the game would have seen that he struggles to keep up with ANYONE out there.

Id nearly suggest Hille and Watson could beat this bloke in a 20m sprint. He is the mother of all turtles.

Reimers, Natrat and Neagle/ Laycock in.

Not sure who joins Myers out at this stage - but I tell ya what, Davey is close.

 

[Skeeta Olly]

What sort of message was Reimers sent?

It's a harsh business. I want to see the best 22 out there, not pandering to someone's feelings.

Apparently it was soreness.

 

[JD11]

OUT: McVeigh, Dyson, Davey

IN: NLM, Houli, Reimers

 

[Daytripper]

anyone's ins/out which dont have at least one of Neagle/Laycock this week is laughable.

That is where we got it totally wrong against Freo - we selected a team which had little hope of scoring a winning score in structure alone.

Gumby the only recognised KP forward? What where you thinking Knights?

That problem extended to the rucks - as we suddenly 'needed' Hille/Ryder at Full Forward - so predictiably, we lost oomph in the ruck, and got nothing up forward as neither of them are proven forwards. Add this to the fact we only afford to play them for 3-4 minutes there per quarter.

It was a right, royal mess on the weekend.

Myers must go out - anyone at the game would have seen that he struggles to keep up with ANYONE out there.

Id nearly suggest Hille and Watson could beat this bloke in a 20m sprint. He is the mother of all turtles.

Reimers, Natrat and Neagle/ Laycock in.

Not sure who joins Myers out at this stage - but I tell ya what, Davey is close.

Agree with all this.

In fact I'd go Laycock over Neagle due in no part that he will cause headaches for Carlton's undersized defense. Jamison/Thornton probably handle Neagle for agility and strength but Laycock gets them for height. Also can give Ryder and Hille a chop out if needs be. Which they will need as Kreuzer is a running machine.

He's been training the place down over summer, looks as fit as he's ever been since he's been at the club and deserves a chance before the imminent return of Hurley next week.

 

[Wheels22]

Dyson...NO...he is not getting dropped. He is not a liability. He is a reliable 15-20 possesion player, who operates at a high efficiency.

The Myers love-in is very strange. The guy looks like he has concrete boots on when he's running, and currently his decision making is beyond bad...run down from behind much?

Our foward setup was non existent against Freo, by this I mean we missed another tall, which means Neagle must come in, atleast until Hurley is back.

Other teams are wise to Alwyn Davey's act now, he runs down far-fewer players than he used to...and he has some ridiculous issues HOLDING ONTO THE BALL

In: NLM, Neagle, Reimers
Out: Davey, Myers, Howlett (unluckily, but necessary at this stage)

 

[raskolnikov]

Out: Davey, Slattery, McVeigh, Myers
In; Reimers, Neagle, Lovett Murray, Lonergan

 

[kelvin_sheedy]

Outs: Williams, Davey, Myers, McVeigh(inj), Dyson/Prismall(toss a coin)
Ins: Neagle, Reimers, Houli, NLM, Lonergan

emg - Laycock, Prismal, Dyson

Neagle provides a target and should be played for structure.

Reimers gives us pace and toughness. Lonergan competitiness.

Houli and NLM give us versatility.

Laycock just misses out but he needs a number of games at any level to convince me he can play at AFL level. I don't think you can go into a game with 3 ruckman anyway.

 

[Smokin]

Agree with all this.

In fact I'd go Laycock over Neagle due in no part that he will cause headaches for Carlton's undersized defense. Jamison/Thornton probably handle Neagle for agility and strength but Laycock gets them for height. Also can give Ryder and Hille a chop out if needs be. Which they will need as Kreuzer is a running machine.

He's been training the place down over summer, looks as fit as he's ever been since he's been at the club and deserves a chance before the imminent return of Hurley next week.

i kinda Agree on Laycock - got a strong feel he could be a very useful full forward. At worst, for example last weekend, Freo would have had to give him utmost respect on size alone and play Tarrant there. That suddenly frees up Williams - and Tarrant would have a size issue with Laycock.

By 3/4 time - Knights could have seen we were struggling with skills on the day. Change the mandate from hitting up small forwards (which we had no choice it doing - or gumby, who is a lead up anyway) - and play a longer ball to the skyscraper in the goalsquare - with guys like Zaharakis/Williams/Davey/Monfries told to be at the feet.

Even without Layock touching the ball, we suddenly have a structure to work with.

On the weekend, we had nothing.

And that was the problem - we beat them in contested possessions, we matched em for scoring shots, matched em going inside 50.

It was the structure going inside 50 which made us look second rate.

 

[Smokin]

I don't think you can go into a game with 3 ruckman anyway.

It's him or Neagle I agree, but disagree with this theory.

He wouldnt be a 'ruckman' if he played as a FF.

To the contrary, what we have now is 2 ruckmen trying to play a sometimes FF role - thus giving us neither.

When you combine the fact we were up against Sandilands ontop of our non-key forward approach, it really was the mother of all stuff ups this week with team selection.

On a ground in which bad weather is impossible to have to boot.

Unbelievable. First time in a while I have been genuinely angry with the team selected.

 

[kelvin_sheedy]

It's him or Neagle I agree, but disagree with this theory.

He wouldnt be a 'ruckman' if he played as a FF.

To the contrary, what we have now is 2 ruckmen trying to play a sometimes FF role - thus giving us neither.

When you combine the fact we were up against Sandilands ontop of our non-key forward approach, it really was the mother of all stuff ups this week with team selection.

On a ground in which bad weather is impossible to have to boot.

Unbelievable. First time in a while I have been genuinely angry with the team selected.

I don't think playing a ruckman at FF has ever worked apart from Salmon and he was a special player. Laycock is not it and he can chase less than Neagle.

Two ruckman against Sandilands should have been enough. The third man up should have been employed at every stoppage but the tactics were shitful.

Almost as bad as the stuff up of not playing a ruckman in a final.

 

[Smokin]

I don't think playing a ruckman at FF has ever worked apart from Salmon and he was a special player. Laycock is not it and he can chase less than Neagle.

Two ruckman against Sandilands should have been enough. The third man up should have been employed at every stoppage but the tactics were shitful.

Almost as bad as the stuff up of not playing a ruckman in a final.

yep, nearly as bad as that although in that one I could kinda see what knights was doing - adelaide were bigger, and really Bellchambers isnt ready.

Going the run-them-off-their feet theory may have worked, but in the end it didnt. I dont think Bellchambers would have stopped the flogging in any event. Knights didnt have the cattle to play with, realistically.

In this one - we had the cattle, Knights just left them in the stands.

And we didnt play 2 ruckmen against Sandilands - we played two ruckmen who had to worry about Sandlilands, and be the KEY FORWARD for the afternoon.

Huge difference. They were both useless at both, which invariably happens when you try the jack of all trades, master of none type thinking.

Laycock can play key forward, plus his size alone commands respect (as I explained earlier). He can give us structure without touching the damn thing.

If we had of played a full forward, relieving Williams of their best defender - THEN had our ruckmen floating down (like Sandilands did to us) it would have caused problems for their backline - because our mids were getting enough of the ball. All this in guaranteed perfect conditions.

Bottom line, He or Neagle MUST BE PLAYED, at least until we get Hurley back.

 

[eth-dog]

I don't think playing a ruckman at FF has ever worked apart from Salmon and he was a special player. Laycock is not it and he can chase less than Neagle.

So you're saying Tippett, White and Kozi didn't work last season? news to me. Kruezer too? How about Sandi? Or Ottens yesterday? They can't have worked, you said so. How can you explain that? Provide evidence that "Ruckmen at FF don't work" before you post that s***.

Back on topic, here are my Ins/Outs:

IN: Laycock, Reimers, Houli
OUT: McVeigh (inj), Davey, Myers

Laycock at FF might work, give him 2 weeks, Reimers was one of our best vs Geelong, and Houli deserves a chance.

Spike I don't want to risk, Davey's been poor and Myers ain't ready yet, give him 2-3 weeks in Bendigo until he's ready

 

[IM_REAL]

Out: Davey, Dyson, Slattery, McVeigh (if not ready)In: NLM, Neagle, Houli, Reimers
Although: I would love to see Welsh, williams and prismall given the arse as well

 

[HighettBomber]

Out: Slattery, Davey, McVeigh (only because he is ill)
In: NLM, Reimers, Neagle

Our forward structure worked against Geelong, even without great individual efforts from Neagle, Willimas or Gumby. It was stupid to drop Neagle, and even more stupid not to replace him with a similer player. Slattery and Davey were both awful and should be dropped.

Myers is lucky as he certainly didn't demand another game, but three changes are enough and if we are going to promote him he should be given a bit of a run before he is dropped. Otherwise i would have had Houli in for him.

 

[Daytripper]

To answer the Neagle/Laycock question.

Which player do you think would cause more headaches for the Carlton coaching staff and their defenders ?

Thats the player we should be picking.

 

[Smokin]

and one more thing on Laycock.

I have always felt he is a KP (full forward) at heart, and not a ruckman.

Because he is over 200cm - he is suddenly ruckman height and has been pushed down that path for a long time. We are trying to place square peg in a round hole, and his body has never been able to take the rigors of the ruck.

He can gain separation on the lead, is a good kick and has great hands.

When I think back to his 'highlights' - not many of em are as a ruck, in fact it is all as him as a forward.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

That's Laycock. He should be played ahead of Neagle, despite what I said above.

 

[Daytripper]

and one more thing on Laycock.

I have always felt he is a KP (full forward) at heart, and not a ruckman.

Because he is over 200cm - he is suddenly ruckman height and has been pushed down that path for a long time. We are trying to place square peg in a round hole, and his body has never been able to take the rigors of the ruck.

He can gain separation on the lead, is a good kick and has great hands.

When I think back to his 'highlights' - not many of em are as a ruck, in fact it is all as him as a forward.

Agree again with this.

He looks really good at the moment. Has slimmed down and is as fit as I've ever seen him.

I don't know if he has been put on a program over summer to lose some bulk so he can play forward but that certainly seems the best position for his body shape now.

 

[ghostdog]

Yes. But the fact is, he is there. What message does it send to him? We can keep a forward that has done SFA, but we can't keep someone who is a bit rusty from his first game.

Isn't the difference in terms of players available to fill those positions? Unfortunately for Myers there is simply a lot of competition for midfield spots. The message that gets sent to him is the truth then. There is more competition for the role.

 

[DonMania#5]

In: Houli
Out: I don't care