Analysis Changes vs Weagles Round 11

[doggies ftw]

All I ask is that we give Sweet/English combo 4 weeks, if we scrap it after 1 week without giving it a chance I’ll be *ing pissed.

 

[Custard Guts]

The boys when Bevo names two orthodox ruckmen.

 

[Foxman98]

All I ask is that we give Sweet/English combo 4 weeks, if we scrap it after 1 week without giving it a chance I’ll be f*n pissed.

Why? It'll be fairly obvious if it will work or not this week. West Coast are terrible if Sweet isn't taking marks getting the ball and kicking goals against the worst team in the comp its pretty much safe to say he won't when we play the top end teams

 

[doggie dog]

Interesting to see how Beveridge will utilise the two rucks. Like the start of last year, letting One do the centre square then letting English do his thing around the ground..Or one forward one rucking around the ground..Be an interesting game of new tactics for Bev.

With the soft tissue injuries to Keathy and Oby, I'd like to see Timmy/Sweety rotated down back.
Manage some of Keathy's minutes to lower his work load and improve his effectivness at the end of the season.
Additionally, I've seen both Timmy/Sweety kick for goals eg missing all the big sticks.

 

[TiAn_]

Can people seriously still not comprehend the concept of role players? Every team in the league has flawed players playing important roles and Mccomb is a long way off being the worst of them.

Sidenote, Anthony Scott isn't even in this category, he's a legitimately solid AFL footballer. Almost every team in the league would find a role for him.

Our fanbase clearly has a hatred of recruiting mature VFL players, which is understandable considering some of our previous busts, but it seriously clouds their judgement on players like this.

I think there are good arguments for West and McNeil in our best side.

Scott would be one of the lower possession winners for any mid/flanker going around. But he’s a high floor low ceiling type that doesn’t make many mistakes and is comfortable in all areas of the ground, so he’s a very useful jigsaw piece for Bev. I’d prefer someone a bit more specialised than him in our best team though.

McComb’s doing what’s asked of him, by filling in for Hunter. Yes his disposal is terrible, but he seems to be biting off kicks less the last two weeks and he's reliable in the contest and can go inside if needed. And he’s not keeping anyone else out of the side atm, with West getting games. He should never play in front of West though imo.

 

[Martyn_30_]

Can people seriously still not comprehend the concept of role players? Every team in the league has flawed players playing important roles and Mccomb is a long way off being the worst of them.

Sidenote, Anthony Scott isn't even in this category, he's a legitimately solid AFL footballer. Almost every team in the league would find a role for him.

Our fanbase clearly has a hatred of recruiting mature VFL players, which is understandable considering some of our previous busts, but it seriously clouds their judgement on players like this.

Role players are able to stand up in big games something Scott hasn’t shown so far due to his inability to handle physical pressure.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Charlie Bucket]

Role players are able to stand up in big games something Scott hasn’t shown so far due to his inability to handle physical pressure.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Is that written in the AFL’s Role Player Constitution is it? FMD lol

So until he plays well in a do or die final or H&A game, he should be banished from the side? That’s a pretty silly expectation don’t you think?

Scott’s been pretty good of late, including Saturdays must win game in Ballarat, and is stringing regular games together where his impact is obvious. And I don’t see any issue with his physicality except for some limitations with strength and size. But even saying that, he attacks the contest as well as anyone in our side.

He’s not going to hit 30 and kick multiple goals because his role doesn’t require that.
He’s a defensive minded winger/flanker at the moment and is going well. He’s also working hard when in possession too.

There was a transition from our defensive 50 last week, Scott received a short 45 on the far left flank almost on the boundary (broadcast view). He hit another short inboard and the ball moved laterally across our halfback line. The next kick went long down the line almost to the direct opposite flank in our forward half and Scott was there to take the mark. It would have to have taken some top speed gut running for him to get there to take the mark, and this was partway through the last when other players were dropping off. That work rate/effort is exactly what was missing from too many players in the first 7 weeks and contributed to the s**t start to our season and is the reason he’s in the team.

Richmonds teams from their 3 recent flags were littered with role players who’s sole purpose was to work hard defensively to make transition for the opposition a nightmare. The ball was then turned over and then they went to work. Some of these players also had horrendous skills and only had 10-15 disposals a game. Their game plan between the two arcs was almost built around these types.

Every team has role players. Scott’s one of ours and he’s coming along nicely.

 

[immortalmike]

Ah the old role player argument.
Role players are limited but reliable. Duryea is a role player, Biggs was a role player, Roarke is a role player.
Scott and McComb are definitely limited but far from reliable. They are the types you play when you have lots of injuries.

Scott can't tackle, wilts under body pressure and barely gets the ball. But he sure runs a lot.

McComb can't execute under barely any pressure, handles the ball like it's smothered in butter and destroys forward chains, and barely tackles to boot.

We can do better.

 

[Foxman98]

Ah the old role player argument.
Role players are limited but reliable. Duryea is a role player, Biggs was a role player, Roarke is a role player.
Scott and McComb are definitely limited but far from reliable. They are the types you play when you have lots of injuries.

Scott can't tackle, wilts under body pressure and barely gets the ball. But he sure runs a lot.

McComb can't execute under barely any pressure, handles the ball like it's smothered in butter and destroys forward chains, and barely tackles to boot.

We can do better.

Suggest you watch the game from Saturday again McComb had 7 score involvements and was very clean in possession

 

[True Dog]

Don't expect many to. Think his biggest strength has been his ability to win one on ones and his reading of the play. Neither have been great this year to my eye. Hopefully he's just working through some form issues and not slowing down with age.

I agree he's been down from last year IM I think our teams general performance hasn't helped our defenders with how easy the ball comes in at times? Also we've had some new faces in the back half and with Keath missing so many games and no Woody this year I feel Doc's been a little lost and trying to do too much at times? Bailey Williams has struggled back there for the same reason... That said Doc is still our best one on one defender IMO and will get back to his beast soon enough. I agree with your comments around CD, he might be better playing eleswhere for a bit to get back his mojo

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Two Ruckman and three tall backman in the same line up.

Never thought I'd see it.

And when we lose, Bevo will say “See? Told ya it wouldn’t work!”

 

[doggies ftw]

Why? It'll be fairly obvious if it will work or not this week. West Coast are terrible if Sweet isn't taking marks getting the ball and kicking goals against the worst team in the comp its pretty much safe to say he won't when we play the top end teams

Lmao yep cos that’s how it works, if a completely different structure doesn’t work and a 5 game player doesn’t play well in one game it’ll never work.

I think maybe you need to adjust your expectations, Sweet is not going to take marks and kick goals against any side in the comp what’s your point? That’s not what he’s in the side for, just like Cordy who you’re so happy with who also doesn’t take marks and kick goals.

 

[Foxman98]

Lmao yep cos that’s how it works, if a completely different structure doesn’t work and a 5 game player doesn’t play well in one game it’ll never work.

I think maybe you need to adjust your expectations, Sweet is not going to take marks and kick goals against any side in the comp what’s your point? That’s not what he’s in the side for, just like Cordy who you’re so happy with who also doesn’t take marks and kick goals.

Look at the output of the 2nd rucks in the better teams. Jackson is getting 15 touches 10 hitouts 5 score involvements and a shot at goal a week. English is our best ruckman so comands the 80% ruckload he takes there is no point having Sweet who doesn't mark or get the pill play for 20% of the time for "Hitouts" only when we have won the clearances 4/5 times with English as the sole ruck. 2 rucks is fine if your backup ruckman impacts around the ground otherwise you have a tall immobile liability.

 

[TommyD13]

The whole role player argument...
Yes we have role players. But obviously we don't deliberately pick limited players in those roles. Like think about it, we don't go and look for someone who cannot kick, but works hard and runs in the right spots. We look for someone who works hard and runs in the right spots. I think mine, and a lot of other peoples gripes about this, is, you can always do better. I am sure we can find someone who works just as hard as McComb, AND is a reliable and polished kick. We can always do better and shouldn't simply settle for limited players.

 

[Struggle]

Look at the output of the 2nd rucks in the better teams. Jackson is getting 15 touches 10 hitouts 5 score involvements and a shot at goal a week. English is our best ruckman so comands the 80% ruckload he takes there is no point having Sweet who doesn't mark or get the pill play for 20% of the time for "Hitouts" only when we have won the clearances 4/5 times with English as the sole ruck. 2 rucks is fine if your backup ruckman impacts around the ground otherwise you have a tall immobile liability.

Compare him to what Cordy is doing as a backup ruck, not Jackson. And thats definitely not taking marks or getting the pill while getting dominated in the ruck

 

[Charlie Bucket]

The whole role player argument...
Yes we have role players. But obviously we don't deliberately pick limited players in those roles. Like think about it, we don't go and look for someone who cannot kick, but works hard and runs in the right spots. We look for someone who works hard and runs in the right spots. I think mine, and a lot of other peoples gripes about this, is, you can always do better. I am sure we can find someone who works just as hard as McComb, AND is a reliable and polished kick. We can always do better and shouldn't simply settle for limited players.

Every club settles for limited players, they have no choice. No club has 22 guns running round for the duration of their entire existence.

Some clubs are lucky to have strong lists/best 22’s for extended periods. Geelong from 07, Hawks from 08. But even some of those teams had players their coaches would’ve preferred to leave out over another player but couldn’t because that’s all they had.

It’s a silly argument to make because we’ll always have these types on our list and they’ll always get games at some stage of our supporting life. To get upset they are on the list and or getting games instead of players that don’t exist is a pointless exercise.

 

[immortalmike]

Suggest you watch the game from Saturday again McComb had 7 score involvements and was very clean in possession

Yep he played okay last week. Doesn't really change my overall point.

I agree he's been down from last year IM I think our teams general performance hasn't helped our defenders with how easy the ball comes in at times? Also we've had some new faces in the back half and with Keath missing so many games and no Woody this year I feel Doc's been a little lost and trying to do too much at times? Bailey Williams has struggled back there for the same reason... That said Doc is still our best one on one defender IMO and will get back to his beast soon enough. I agree with your comments around CD, he might be better playing eleswhere for a bit to get back his mojo

Agree TD. And very well put.

 

[TommyD13]

Every club settles for limited players, they have no choice. No club has 22 guns running round for the duration of their entire existence.

Some clubs are lucky to have strong lists/best 22’s for extended periods. Geelong from 07, Hawks from 08. But even some of those teams had players their coaches would’ve preferred to leave out over another player but couldn’t because that’s all they had.

It’s a silly argument to make because we’ll always have these types on our list and they’ll always get games at some stage of our supporting life. To get upset they are on the list and or getting games instead of players that don’t exist is a pointless exercise.

Obviously, there is a salary cap and no one can have a list of guns as you say. What myself and a lot of people are saying, is McComb, Roarke and a few others are limited, as is everyone, but surely we can find others less limited on our list, or give the opportunity to someone who has a bit more upside. There has to be someone on the list not getting a game who has better skills and can still do the required role effectively.

 

[Foxman98]

Compare him to what Cordy is doing as a backup ruck, not Jackson. And thats definitely not taking marks or getting the pill while getting dominated in the ruck

Cordy has flexibility he can play forward and back and chop out in the ruck. Sweet is a CBA ruck and that's it and he isn't a very good one at that. He got dominated in the ruck himself last week. If we have an injury hit game like we did against Port you can throw the magnets around more with Cordy then Sweet hence why you need a 2nd ruckman who can do more then just tap work

 

[Foxman98]

Obviously, there is a salary cap and no one can have a list of guns as you say. What myself and a lot of people are saying, is McComb, Roarke and a few others are limited, as is everyone, but surely we can find others less limited on our list, or give the opportunity to someone who has a bit more upside. There has to be someone on the list not getting a game who has better skills and can still do the required role effectively.

Are we rebuilding or trying to win games? McComb is a better player right now then what we have playing in the VFL. He was the standout in the team when playing down there which doesn't say much about the current level of output for those with more upside

 

[Charlie Bucket]

Obviously, there is a salary cap and no one can have a list of guns as you say. What myself and a lot of people are saying, is McComb, Roarke and a few others are limited, as is everyone, but surely we can find others less limited on our list, or give the opportunity to someone who has a bit more upside. There has to be someone on the list not getting a game who has better skills and can still do the required role effectively.

Yeah, possibly. Maybe not this season due to injuries as nearly everyone else has been in the team the last few weeks.

The reality is that there are expectations at football clubs whether it be training or VFL expectations that us supporters will have no idea about. I can tell you from experience that the 22 that are selected each week for lower grades are never the best/naturally gifted 22 players at the club. Far from it. If players don’t do what’s required by the TEAM, they play 2’s.

AFL wouldn’t be any different. Although, it wouldn’t be as prevalent because it’s a highly professional environment and the work rate/input differences would be minor.

At full strength, there’s a few I’d have ahead of all of Scott, McNeil and McComb. I’m no different to most in here. But just because that what I’d prefer, doesn’t mean that’s what’s best for the team.

The coaches know what they’re doing.

 

[Struggle]

Cordy has flexibility he can play forward and back and chop out in the ruck. Sweet is a CBA ruck and that's it and he isn't a very good one at that. He got dominated in the ruck himself last week. If we have an injury hit game like we did against Port you can throw the magnets around more with Cordy then Sweet hence why you need a 2nd ruckman who can do more then just tap work

Dominated in the ruck? Lol

 

[Foxman98]

Dominated in the ruck? Lol

Did you miss the game where Witts was Gold Coast's best player by a mile and kept them in it?

 

[Bald]

Did you miss the game where Witts was Gold Coast's best player by a mile and kept them in it?

I don’t recall Sweet being dominated when he actually was rucking. It was when he was tired and was either benched or resting that it became an issue.

 

[Dog 36]

Did you miss the game where Witts was Gold Coast's best player by a mile and kept them in it?

Sweet has played 7 games and we have won 6 of those.

Although the above does not paint the whole picture it certainly mounts a case to keep playing him.

Witts best Gold Coast player by a mile? Not sure about that in fact he wasn't, there were 4 or 5 ahead of him easily. He wasn't able to dictate as much as he has in other games.

There were times English was dominated by opposition rucks but I am not seeing this with Sweet in his first 7 games.

Play Sweet and English for next 6 weeks then happy to make a decision on a 2nd ruck .