Preview R2: Changes v Port

[Stiffy_18]

But the tall marking power didn't hurt us last week. Take out the 50m pens and their talls got 5 goals between 3 of them.

They took 11 marks inside 50. That means 11 shots at goal. That is a lot of inside 50 marks to allow to their forward line.

Plus there is more height and goal kicking and contested marking power in Port's forward line. Dixon and Shultz are both fantastic contested marks, Westhoff is a difficult match up because of his height and agility. Both Westhoff and Dixon are ruckman sized forwards.

Let me turn it around on you a bit, if how comfortable would you be if someone line Jonas matched up on Jenkins this week? Personally I would be rubbing my hands in delight.

No matter how people like to slice it and dice it, size does matter. Unfortunately all 3 of Port's tall forwards have the size and the ability and all 3 have caused us some grief in the past. We need coverage for those 3 and Cheney has proven both at Hawthorn and with us that he cannot defend key forwards. He gets killed every time. He is a handy medium defender but he is not a able to defend genuine KPP.

 

[SydCrow]

Lever > Cheney surely

 

[Elite Crow]

But the tall marking power didn't hurt us last week. Take out the 50m pens and their talls got 5 goals between 3 of them, and 2 of those were from broken play.

Pete you need everything to go right to win and yes there were other issues at play but we did concede goals for being too short and not only that, Waite had a big impact over the ground as well.

In the last Petrie outmarked Seedsman goal.
In the third Brown outmarked Laird who gave away 50 and goal. Yes blame the 50, but without the poor match up there was no mark.

Why would we take the risk by going in to short when we don't have to?

What happens if Dixon gets on top of Talia? Without Hartigan there is no plan B.

 

[Elite Crow]

Lever > Cheney surely

And Cheney>VB

VB out Hartigan in and we have all bases covered

 

[Footypie32]

No I am not. I was at the SANFL game on the weekend, looking forward to seeing Knight and Cameron really pressing their claim as I would prefer them in the team, but they were not quite up to the standard we require. You said you wanted Mackay out for either Knight or Cameron and I'm saying, on what I saw, Cameron is not ready and Knight maybe if you only looked at the half a game he did.

I would put Seedsman in the 6/10 mark as well on the weekend, so why is no one calling for his head? Sloane was bad. Why no one calling for him to be dropped? Crouch and Atkins both thought they were playing SANFL. No calling for them to be dropped. Why do those players get a leeway? Because the group think is that Mackay is bad and can't improve on that 6/10. He has played well above that before but hasn't reached those heights in a while, I agree, but there is the possibility there and I'm willing to wait a little longer than one game in the proper season to hang him out to dry. He isn't John Butcher.

We allow the others more leeway because we trust that they can get to the higher level again, except that Sloane has been poor all pre-season, well below his standard that I expect to see from him. Mackay has performed okay, and done some good things.

I found it interesting that he was equal first (with the poor Sloane) for pressure acts, which implies hardness at the ball carrier, which is something people say he doesn't do well. Those stats seem to say otherwise.

Seedsman - Wasn't great, I agree, but when he got the pill he was dangerous.

Brouch - Gets a pass for being his first game in two years. Will want to improve quickly.

Atkins - Is on the block. Needs to impress this week.

Sloane - Has runs on the board. Something Mackay doesn't. Is allowed a poor game once in awhile.

 

[Elite Crow]

The only reason Sloane is being discussed in the same conversation and DMack because with Sloane we actually expect better. He was better than Mackay, it's not even debatable unless you are trying to cut DMack some slack.

 

[Stiffy_18]

The only reason Sloane is being discussed in the same conversation and DMack because with Sloane we actually expect better. He was better than Mackay, it's not even debatable unless you are trying to cut DMack some slack.

I don't think it's just Sloane but we have higher expectations of all of our midfielders, especially experienced ones. Can't remember the last time that Sloaney finished the game and had under 19 touches that had little hurt factor.

 

[Tex200]

Pete you need everything to go right to win and yes there were other issues at play but we did concede goals for being too short and not only that, Waite had a big impact over the ground as well.

In the last Petrie outmarked Seedsman goal.
In the third Brown outmarked Laird who gave away 50 and goal. Yes blame the 50, but without the poor match up there was no mark.

Why would we take the risk by going in to short when we don't have to?

What happens if Dixon gets on top of Talia? Without Hartigan there is no plan B.

Agree to disagree on this one

The good thing is at least we know there is depth and we have options if we decide to change structure.

 

[Elite Crow]

I don't think it's just Sloane but we have higher expectations of all of our midfielders, especially experienced ones. Can't remember the last time that Sloaney finished the game and had under 19 touches that had little hurt factor.

I agree but if you are going to justify someone's game by saying others were worse, you'd at least want to make sure that player was worse. Same for Tex, not up to usual standard, but 18 posessions, 10 marks and 2 goals is a huge game without the 2 shanks.

Must admit though, I'm a little bit worried by Sloane. He looks a bit lost, is it change or role or more attention with Danger going?

 

[DangerSloane]

Cameron underdone.

No way that Hartigan comes in without a tall def going out.

Cant play Talia, Lever, Hartigan and Cheney.

In: Knight, Henderson
Out: VB, Mackay

Or alternatively

In: Knight
Out: VB

 

[Elite Crow]

Cameron underdone.

No way that Hartigan comes in without a tall def going out.

Cant play Talia, Lever, Hartigan and Cheney.

In: Knight, Henderson
Out: VB, Mackay

Or alternatively

In: Knight
Out: VB

Who plays half back if its only VB going out?

 

[DangerSloane]

Who plays half back if its only VB going out?

Well you could bring in Hendo instead, but Knight must play IMO so if that's at the expense of Atkins, or Mackay...I dont know.
VB isnt exactly providing a lot off half back.

 

[DangerSloane]

The discussion on our defence is pretty pointless when the captain misses set shots from 10n

Not really.
Danger missed 2 from straight infront and Geelong still won?

If our defence plays better we win.

If we put a body on Goldstein in the 4th quarter we win.

 

[Elite Crow]

Well you could bring in Hendo instead, but Knight must play IMO so if that's at the expense of Atkins, or Mackay...I dont know.
VB isnt exactly providing a lot off half back.

Mate I think we all agree on VB, well maybe not Vader and Bickley.

And I agree Knight has to come in, so without 2 changes VB stays. It wont be Knight for VB unless they have earmarked someone else for halfback and I would love to see Milera in that role with Knight playing Milera's role.

 

[DangerSloane]

Mate I think we all agree on VB, well maybe not Vader and Bickley.

And I agree Knight has to come in, so without 2 changes VB stays. It wont be Knight for VB unless they have earmarked someone else for halfback and I would love to see Milera in that role with Knight playing Milera's role.

Food for thought.
Cant see Milera being any worse than VB.
His disposal is far superior already.

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

Who plays half back if its only VB going out?

I think the only change will be VB for knight. Seedsman and smith will spend more time at HB and knight will cover the wing.

 

[SydCrow]

Lever on Schultz, Talia on Dixon. Beaker is the problem. If only Hendo knew how to spoil or tackle he could chase him around.

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

Lever on Schultz, Talia on Dixon. Beaker is the problem. If only Hendo knew how to spoil or tackle he could chase him around.

Seedsman can spoil and has pace. 191cm too.

 

[Elite Crow]

Food for thought.
Cant see Milera being any worse than VB.
His disposal is far superior already.

Played the role in the championships.
Has more poise than VB.
Is quicker than VB.
Can kick unlike VB.
Can provide run unlike VB.

His place in the team will come under threat as Cameron, Knight and Menzel come in and he is too good to leave out and not develop in the AFL.

 

[Elite Crow]

I think the only change will be VB for knight. Seedsman and smith will spend more time at HB and knight will cover the wing.

Smith is already spending all his time at half back.

 

[crows dude]

Ladder Predictor

 

[Elite Crow]

I don't know who I am more let down by, redhorse or TheMetricSystem

 

[dylan123]

I'd be happy for Hartigan to play if you think Lever needs replacing.

So for me it's either;

Talia, Lever, Cheney
Talia, Hartigan, Cheney

I just don't think we need Talia, Hartigan, Lever and Cheney. This wasn't the reason we lost on Saturday.

Just my view and selectors may well disagree

Why does Cheney need to be pinned as a KPD by Adelaide? Surely we could bring in a bigger defender to play in the role Cheney did last round and then have Cheney play in the role Van Berlo does in which we'll get a better 1v1 defender who without such a big responsibility on his plate (although you'd suspect he'd man guys like Gray if pushed forward) could then help out in filling holes/those KP contests.

To me he seems to be someone that's always battling above his height/weight division, he does a reasonable job but we've never really played him in the role you'd imagine he'd be most suited to.

 

[Stiffy_18]

I agree but if you are going to justify someone's game by saying others were worse, you'd at least want to make sure that player was worse. Same for Tex, not up to usual standard, but 18 posessions, 10 marks and 2 goals is a huge game without the 2 shanks.

Must admit though, I'm a little bit worried by Sloane. He looks a bit lost, is it change or role or more attention with Danger going?

It's the exact concern I raised in one of the other threads. Is it a case of working into the work or is it a bit of a struggle now that Dangerfield is not around to get all the attention so the team now look at Thompson and Sloane/Douglas as our prime movers rather than Dangerfield/Thompson?

I guess we will have a better idea in about 3 weeks time. It will be interesting to see how all the other midfielder (except Thompson) seem to adjust now that they are getting more attention.

 

[Tex200]

Why does Cheney need to be pinned as a KPD by Adelaide? Surely we could bring in a bigger defender to play in the role Cheney did last round and then have Cheney play in the role Van Berlo does in which we'll get a better 1v1 defender who without such a big responsibility on his plate (although you'd suspect he'd man guys like Gray if pushed forward) could then help out in filling holes/those KP contests.

To me he seems to be someone that's always battling above his height/weight division, he does a reasonable job but we've never really played him in the role you'd imagine he'd be most suited to.

Don't think he's being pinned as a KPD. His role is to peel off and support the 2 talls