Preview Changes vs WCE

[kanga kanga kanga]

*ing *View attachment 2635649

The picture was taken straight after last weeks game

 

[chubbspeterson]

Just pick one.

And then if they don’t respond pick another.

But they will likely respond our output likely much higher.

And then at some point we will have below standard games from players that really should not be putting them out on the park. Because we accept it and then do nothing about it.

We appear to be playing such a short term game. We’re only looking one ahead rather than saying we need to make bigger changes for longer term results.

Reactive Football Club.

I'd agree. If you drop them both with Fisher, then it's less blaming one individual.

 

[Caracas]

A. That is incorrect. West Coast are far from dubious, they have beaten some teams this year, including us that other people would not have expected them to beat.

B. We should be developing players of all ages capable of winning games regularly in the future. Developing in the VFL and earning a game does not necessarily hinder our prospects of winning future AFL games. Conversely, playing players who do not improve our chances of winning AFL games now does not increase our chances of winning games regularly in the future or even occasionally.

C. There are at LEAST 5 games that we are a real chance of winning in the last half of the year. We could realistically win one or two more despite what the soft emotional types around here would have you believe.

Despite everything, our season thus far shows us winning two games as outsiders and losing one game as favourites, I think. Based on that “suspect” analysis, things are going to plan. We are favourites to win the next 3 games. If all goes to plan, we’ll be 8-7. I’d be very happy with that. Honestly, I don’t expect things to pan out like that. However, that is how we’re trending.

 

[The Lone Latic]

there was more than one.

Not a single player won their position.

That was actually a typo... I meant to say somehow. I don't disagree with you that we didn't have a single winner last week

 

[Harvey Manfrenjensenden]

Despite everything, our season thus far shows us winning two games as outsiders and losing one game as favourites, I think. Based on that “suspect” analysis, things are going to plan. We are favourites to win the next 3 games. If all goes to plan, we’ll be 8-7. I’d be very happy with that. Honestly, I don’t expect things to pan out like that. However, that is how we’re trending.

A fair and reasonable assessment.

 

[tales129]

View attachment 2635489

Would have loved them to make a ****ing statement and kept Dawson in over Logue.

Weak outs

 

[TennisPlayerAndy]

Would have loved them to make a ****ing statement and kept Dawson in over Logue.

Weak outs

Soft, limp team selection.

Daniel. Logue. McDonald.

Indescribably shit.

Get another week.

 

[shintemaster]

Smells like a no win situation this week. Win and it doesn’t mean much because of the calibre of their outs. Lose and it’s more lolnorf.


in agreement with much of what’s been said. Some good ins (at least to see them get a crack) but a lot of useless pricks still getting a free ride in the team.

Oh well

It might be a no win situation, but it is definitely a lose situation. We lose it's bad, we win it means nothing more than they did exactly what they should.

 

[sheridan]

Good for Goady, go well son! super badluck for fos/stiffy last few weeks.
blamires was super stiff, last chance saloon for coops me thinks.

would much rather untried youth than alot of these senior imposters being gifted games. its insanity.

Clarko better have put the heat/acid on the leadership group especially, as none were dropped unsurprisingly. There nowhere to hide if they dish up the same as last week.

get it done!

 

[shintemaster]

1. We have to pick a team each week that is capable of winning the game against the opposition that is in front of us. That is where we are at. Winning games has to be our number one priority.

2. Dropping senior players who had a bad week or two should only be considered if there is a viable option to replace them given the goal is to win games.

3. Despite what people say, there isn't a single player in the team picked this week that doesn't fall into at least one of the above categories i.e. we simply do not have a better option on our list that improves our chances of winning this game if they do not play.

I don't agree, but you're welcome to your opinion.

Actually, that's not true, I believe in #1, but I don't agree that the other conclusions naturally follow from it.

 

[Harvey Manfrenjensenden]

I don't agree, but you're welcome to your opinion.

Actually, that's not true, I believe in #1, but I don't agree that the other conclusions naturally follow from it.

Fair enough. We disagree but neither of us resorted to name calling, shitting on our club or players or outrageous claims that we know better than anyone else.

Where am I?

 

[King Corey]

The more I think about it, the more it feels like the Clarkson dream has become a nightmare.

A historically bad loss for the club and sleepy Al (he never left) looks like he's bending over backwards not to hurt his sacred cows.

It doesn't have to be about the options being in blistering form.

Why can't Banch replace ol 2'kicks Krakansty?

Why can't Pink replace the smiling campaigner?

Goater can have a go instead of Clarkson's little mini-me.

To cop a club impacting loss and drop our only young key defender being exposed this year and 1 single game shitmen is deplorable.

Only Forwards nailed it. We might well win, hope we do. But it'll be a shot in the arm for our "jobs for life" selection policy.

We feel like a local amateurs club, where the same slobs skip preseason each year then roll up and assume their senior spots when the real stuff begins.

 

[zoomba23]

Fair enough. We disagree but neither of us resorted to name calling, shitting on our club or players or outrageous claims that we know better than anyone else.

Where am I?

You even managed to avoid mentioning transgender refugees. Well done to the pair of you

 

[TennisPlayerAndy]

The more I think about it, the more it feels like the Clarkson dream has become a nightmare.

A historically bad loss for the club and sleepy Al (he never left) looks like he's bending over backwards not to hurt his sacred cows.

It doesn't have to be about the options being in blistering form.

Why can't Banch replace ol 2'kicks Krakansty?

Why can't Pink replace the smiling campaigner?

Goater can have a go instead of Clarkson's little mini-me.

To cop a club impacting loss and drop our only young key defender being exposed this year and 1 single game shitmen is deplorable.

Only Forwards nailed it. We might well win, hope we do. But it'll be a shot in the arm for our "jobs for life" selection policy.

We feel like a local amateurs club, where the same slobs skip preseason each year then roll up and assume their senior spots when the real stuff begins.

You mean two unforced changes isn’t enough?

What?

What are on?

We only lost by….

Nevermind.

 

[ferball]

LDU at least chased defensively when others wouldn't.
Larkey likely to have a good game this week. Chom and X too important.
Daniel you can at least give Harvey that role.
Pink or Dawson could've taken Logue role, but both couldn't go with their best forward on the lead.

Watch the first five minutes of the second quarter.

You'll see LDU chase with his potential appropriate intensity. He had two htb free kicks within a minute, that was his total frees and tackles for the day. Must have been happy with his efforts cos he didn't run like that again all day.

 

[FlyHigh18]

“It’s criminal / negligent that player xyz isn’t named. Bewildered!”

Said player comes in and plays shit.

Forget, and repeat with another player.

 

[ferball]

I don't agree, but you're welcome to your opinion.

Actually, that's not true, I believe in #1, but I don't agree that the other conclusions naturally follow from it.

Option two is fair enough.

Its more than a week or two for some of them tho.

 

[King Corey]

Who tags Reid?

dus

 

[Chadwiko]

Why can't Banch replace ol 2'kicks Krakansty?

Banch just isn't good. Wildly undersized for an AFL footballer, and doesn't have the X-factor. He's a bust, and I'm bummed about it.

Why can't Pink replace the smiling campaigner?

Agreed, should have happened.

Goater can have a go instead of Clarkson's little mini-me.

Given the injury history, I'm fine with the club taking an ultra-conservative approach with Goater.

To cop a club impacting loss and drop our only young key defender being exposed this year and 1 single game shitmen is deplorable.

Dawson deserved to be dropped. He was outright bad as a KPD last week. Yes, even worse than Logue.

The problem is we didn't replace him with another KPD. So we're just leaving ourselves exposed for... reasons?

 

[Harvey Manfrenjensenden]

You even managed to avoid mentioning transgender refugees. Well done to the pair of you

It was misgendered but I appreciate you being honest about your priorities.

 

[Harvey Manfrenjensenden]

Option two is fair enough.

Its more than a week or two for some of them tho.

True but to clarify I meant a week or two in a row. Most if not all of those players I was referring to have had some good to serviceable games in between some poor performances

 

[Moti]

I was worried we went in too slow the last game against the Eagles. Think our back line has become even more glacial

 

[footy2016]

Co

Mentioned this in the Wil Dawson thread, but I am O F F I C I A L L Y C O N C E R N E D with what our plan down back is this week.

After we played him as a KPD for the first time last week, now we've dropped Wil Dawson (which I think was the right call), but have not replaced him with any tall KPD. We've brought in Goad who will probably play a similar role to what Dawson did his first two weeks in the AFL as a low ToG% chop-out ruck for Xerri.

The West Coast named forward line includes;

Waterman - 192cm
Duff-Tytler - 201cm
Shanahan - 195cm
Cole - 189cm

We're left with Logue and Comben as the only "tall" KPDs with defensive experience to cover these guys.

Mentioned this in the Wil Dawson thread, but I am O F F I C I A L L Y C O N C E R N E D with what our plan down back is this week.

After we played him as a KPD for the first time last week, now we've dropped Wil Dawson (which I think was the right call), but have not replaced him with any tall KPD. We've brought in Goad who will probably play a similar role to what Dawson did his first two weeks in the AFL as a low ToG% chop-out ruck for Xerri.

The West Coast named forward line includes;

Waterman - 192cm
Duff-Tytler - 201cm
Shanahan - 195cm
Cole - 189cm

We're left with Logue and Comben as the only "tall" KPDs with defensive experience to cover these guys.

Commentwd on the other thread, will again here.

LMAC is playing on Waterman; did it in Round 2 and has in the past, with mixed results.

Leaves Comben for CDT and Logue for Shanahan. Parker will play on Cole.

Personally not a fan, however its what will happen.

Trembath will be the emergency situation if 1 goes down.