Preview R19: Essendon vs Bulldogs, 21/7 @ 7:50pm - DC is Better Stadium - CHANGES ARE IN

[DallasCrane316]

OFFICIAL CHANGES:

Out - Weideman, Menzie and Hind.
In - Cox, Phillips

 

[ant555]

Isn’t the game going away from playing two designated rucks?
Melbourne issues with Brodie and Gawn
Freo issues with Jackson and Darcy
Doggies with going too tall early in the year.

Geelong, Brisbane, Collingwood seem to play one designated ruck and others pinch hit.

Phillips offers nothing around the ground.

We have played a lot of our better footy with two rucks this year .

 

[FlyingV]

We have played a lot of our better footy with two rucks this year .

We’ve also subbed one of our two ruckman out of the game on 4 occasions this season. And that’s not including all the time Harrison Jones has been subbed this year. We also played arguably our best football of the year against Adelaide with one pure ruck.

It would be nice to have some versatility with our talls. Perhaps Jones, Cox, Reid can provide that in the future.

 

[owen87]

Against the Cats, Menzie had 4 score involvements out of 10 scores, so it can't be that. He had 1 tackle from 80% ToG. His season average is 2.3 tackles. Down, but still not a hanging offence in context with his body of work for the season.



If it's not because Stringer is sore, I wonder if there's a bit of reverse-psychology at play to try to get Stringer to lift his game against his old club to have him primed for finals; he has been ordinary for weeks. Menzie gets a rest as a young body. Putting 'omitted' next to his name is to push him to go next level? Scott did say he wants to find out about the players. Maybe this weekend he focuses on Stringer and Cox.

Interested in this game to see what Scott's vision is with Cox. Hopefully forward with a view to CHF roaming up the ground for a leading Wright or Langford.

Lore isn't there something about the reason behind the omission that dictates whether a player can play VFL games that week or not?

e.g. Injured / Omitted / Managed? Or is that not a thing?

 

[owen87]

We’ve also subbed one of our two ruckman out of the game on 4 occasions this season. And that’s not including all the time Harrison Jones has been subbed this year. We also played arguably our best football of the year against Adelaide with one pure ruck.

It would be nice to have some versatility with our talls. Perhaps Jones, Cox, Reid can provide that in the future.

We've subbed out a KPF for a 200cm Ruckman and/or a 200cm 'Flanker' type.

That's more versatile given Cox can play as a true roaming CHF like a Nick Reiwoldt or Richardson and Phillips can provide proper ruck support and is generally a decent physical presence inside the forward-line.

Our dearth of genuine (fit) KPF options kind of limits us to playing undersized guys or a second ruckman.

 

[cAsEy_18]

Lore isn't there something about the reason behind the omission that dictates whether a player can play VFL games that week or not?

e.g. Injured / Omitted / Managed? Or is that not a thing?

Can't answer about vfl and being able to play.

I know there is definitely something regarding match payments, and whether you are considered fit and not picked (omitted) or unavailable injured. If you're deemed unavailable, I believe you still receive or are eligible for some sort of match payments.

 

[jdstorm]

Isn’t the game going away from playing two designated rucks?
Melbourne issues with Brodie and Gawn
Freo issues with Jackson and Darcy
Doggies with going too tall early in the year.

Geelong, Brisbane, Collingwood seem to play one designated ruck and others pinch hit.

Phillips offers nothing around the ground.

I think Freo/Melbournes issues is just their Rucks aren’t good forwards.

Ideally you want 1 ruck and 1 50/50 ruck/forward and 1 player who can pinch hit in case of injury.

Cameron/Cox are both primary rucks who can both play forward. Biclavs is a ruck/utility who takes the 2nd spot.

So the ideal is 2 200cm players who can ruck and play forward(or another position)

In the case of Flip/Bryan it’s just that Flip is a better forward then Weed and Bryan is a better ruck then weed is a forward.

With Draper back it complicates things.

 

[fairbump_playon]

We have played a lot of our better footy with two rucks this year .

Agreed. Horses for courses. Any club nailing it with one ruck has better tall forwards than we do.

We don't have Carey and Longmire up forward. Scott has had to patch together a makeshift strategy for talls, and it's all the harder because our rucks have been injured & suspended and none of them show a lot of genuine forward craft.

 

[Lore]

Lore isn't there something about the reason behind the omission that dictates whether a player can play VFL games that week or not?

e.g. Injured / Omitted / Managed? Or is that not a thing?

The only thing in the CBA that relates to the reason for omission is around how they get paid, which is probably easier to conceptualise if you think of it as work-related injury cover (instead of claiming WorkSafe).

1. If you play AFL and then don't play either level because:
   • You were injured during an AFL game
   • You were injured during training the week following playing an AFL game
   • Your workload is managed at the club's initiative
   • You were injured during an AFL game, then re-injured within 2 VFL games of returning to play
     
     then you are paid your AFL match fee with no loss of pay while you recover.
     
2. If you play at VFL level and then don't play because:
   • You were injured during a VFL game
   • You were injured during training the week following playing an VFL game
   • Your workload is managed at the club's initiative
     
     then you are paid your VFL match fee with no loss of pay while you recover.
     
3. If you play at either level, and then don't play because:
   1. You were injured while trying to microwave a steak at home
   2. You have an illness
      
      then it's not covered by the clause and you don't get paid a match fee under this clause (might have personal leave though).

It wouldn't be logical to be medically ruled out and then play VFL, as that would make the club a liar and as a player you wouldn't play VFL because you get paid less that way.

There's a bit of a grey area if you're managed by playing a half game though, like on a weird extended break before/after Anzac Day.

 

[Keystone agony]

I think its less that we actually want 2 rucks but more so the lack of available KPFs

Weideman and Wright have both played together since fit except for this week

 

[Duster]

1. If you play at either level, and then don't play because:
   1. You were injured while trying to microwave a steak at home

Delist.

 

[jdstorm]

If there’s one thing about Scott I think it’s that Seniority matters a lot to him.

Guys have their place in the side until they lose it due to poor performance or a player knocks down the door and forces a call up.

Weed got dropped because he’s been bad for a few weeks and Byran played well vs Geelong and deserved a run in the side.

Also now Bryan and Flip will be competing for R2 once Draper returns over the next few weeks.

When it comes to SFs seems like Langford playing Deep has helped team balance/happiness as your small Mid/FWD types are playing HF and there’s only really one deep SF spot available

Snelling/Guelfi have seniority there for now and didn’t do much wrong (though Menzie was stiff to get dropped)

Makes you wonder who goes there when Sheil/Setterfield return.

Still think it will be AMTs spot for the finals. He really is a class above every other option there if he’s fit enough

 

[Keystone agony]

If there’s one thing about Scott I think it’s that Seniority matters a lot to him.

Guys have their place in the side until they lose it due to poor performance or a player knocks down the door and forces a call up.

Weed got dropped because he’s been bad for a few weeks and Byran played well vs Geelong and deserved a run in the side.

Also now Bryan and Flip will be competing for R2 once Draper returns over the next few weeks.

When it comes to SFs seems like Langford playing Deep has helped team balance/happiness as your small Mid/FWD types are playing HF and there’s only really one deep SF spot available

Snelling/Guelfi have seniority there for now and didn’t do much wrong (though Menzie was stiff to get dropped)

Makes you wonder who goes there when Sheil/Setterfield return.

Still think it will be AMTs spot for the finals. He really is a class above every other option there if he’s fit enough

Scott just picks the 22 he thinks gives him the best chance of winning. There isnt anything scientific to it

 

[ant555]

I think its less that we actually want 2 rucks but more so the lack of available KPFs

Weideman and Wright have both played together since fit except for this week

Jones / Weideman / Draper / Phillips played some games as well .
Comes down to personal I think. Draper not really good at rucking a whole game . Bryan not 100 percent ready as far as the ruck goes .

 

[I Remember Bluey]

I'd like to get a look at all the Nicks in the team together at some stage.

Pervert

 

[Don_Gia]

Getting fired up for tonight…Does anyone else feel like we could either win or cop 21 goals in a row like a few years ago?

The response from last week will be key in determining if we are a changed club imo.

Go Dons!

 

[Milanista28]

I've got little confidence of a win here, have had that feeling all week.

 

[jdstorm]

I felt like we were going to lose to Geelong. The question was just by how much.

Against the bulldogs I think there’s a chance we win. Faster ground more opportunities to play outside football.

 

[eth-dog]

I think Cox plays forward. Think we're trying to get Wright one out then play a bunch of stylistic mediums in Cox, Langers and Stringer.

 

[jdstorm]

I think Cox plays forward. Think we're trying to get Wright one out then play a bunch of stylistic mediums in Cox, Langers and Stringer.

Also could be

Stringer to Mid
Cox to HF (and defender swingman)
Small mid like Hobbs/Caldwell to SF (Menzie out)

So the move is really about getting Jake back on ball

 

[ant555]

Also could be

Stringer to Mid
Cox to HF (and defender swingman)
Small mid like Hobbs/Caldwell to SF (Menzie out)

So the move is really about getting Jake back on ball

Perkins has taken Stringers midfield time so any move with Stringer would probably have something to do with where Perkins plays .

 

[jdstorm]

Perkins has taken Stringers midfield time so any move with Stringer would probably have something to do with where Perkins plays .

Think it’s more about increasing the overall size of the mids.

Zerrett, Parish, Hobbs, Caldwell, Perkins is very small.

Could move Caldwell/Hobbs to HF, Guelfi/Snelling to FP and Stringer on ball

That leaves a 3/2 mix of small to big mids, which seems better (until Setterfield returns and someone needs to get shifted)

 

[MiguelM]

Perkins has taken Stringers midfield time so any move with Stringer would probably have something to do with where Perkins plays .

What are your thoughts on Perk as a mid? Didn't get close to Danger last week.

My gut feel is he isn't a midfielder, feels like Langford experiment markII.

Stringer must have been sore last week, 3 goals in the move should have been made IMO.

 

[Dave]

Have 4 tickets spare if anyone is interested. DM me.

 

[frodos gardener]

If anyone wants two tickets to the game tonight, they’re yours for free. I can’t go as planned. PM me if interested.

 

[owen87]

Undercutting Dave there... next up Dave offers to PAY someone to take the tickets