Preview R9: Changes vs. Richmond

[Carn The Texan]

One change I'd love to see for the game against Richmond -

Last time we played at the MCG I think we had five or six F50 entries kicked out on the full in the first 30 minutes of match play, all basically in the exact same part of the ground. Our understanding or feel for the ground dimensions was just plain wrong.

I hope this is specifically addressed this week before the game.

 

[Cromulant]

One change I'd love to see for the game against Richmond -

Last time we played at the MCG I think we had five or six F50 entries kicked out on the full in the first 30 minutes of match play, all basically in the exact same part of the ground. Our understanding or feel for the ground dimensions was just plain wrong.

I hope this is specifically addressed this week before the game.

I reckon it had more to do with our horror skill level rather than ground dimensions.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

I thought he looked a bit heavy TBH, but given he had a sore back it would be reasonable to think his conditioning wouldnt be to the level we'd like.

Im happy enough to have him back in the senior side, but he wouldnt have been far off a week in the 2s.

Did he have an operation at the end of last season?

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

I reckon it had more to do with our horror skill level rather than ground dimensions.

I recall that. I think it was a combination. A couple clearly went off the side of the boot but there were three or four that were lace out to the water boy on the half forward flank boundary

 

[Cromulant]

Did he have an operation at the end of last season?

Cant recall if he did, though he had a bung shoulder.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

I recall that. I think it was a combination. A couple clearly went off the side of the boot but there were three or four that were lace out to the water boy on the half forward flank boundary

Yep

Reeked of a team that was intent on playing a precise kicking game, close to the boundary, to limit the damage done on turnover.

What we'd been practising all summer.

Five minutes into the first quarter we realised Gee, this isn't as easy under real match pressure and we don't have the skill level to pull it off.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

There seems to be endless bleating on this thread about which marginal fringe player gets a game. My key concern is our inclination to play injured/underdone players. Sometimes it works but imho more often it fails.

So… this week give Ah Chee and Fog a run in the Twos and give ANB a couple of weeks rest.

Out - Butts. In - Nick Murray. Like for like

Out - Tex. In - ROB. Toby Murray plays as our second tall forward. ROB and McAndrew ruck 50% ToG.

Out - ANB In - Dawson. Give ANB a couple of weeks rest to get back to full fitness

Out - Taylor. In - Edwards. I like Zac but we can play Soligo more forward, give Edwards another couple of games

Bond, Cumming, Pedlar are on notice.

Bit early to be tanking against the bottom team.

We need at least 1 of Thilthorpe or Fogarty to play.

Did you miss the Fremantle game? 1 ruckman who can only ruck is enough.

 

[Ciao Giacomo]

**** me, you're playing McAndrew, ROB and Toby Murray?

Christ, why don't you stick Maley in there, for the maximum level of big lugs?

Personally, is rather being fit players straight into the AFL. But I don't care that much - I WOULD hate to see big thick goons running around barely getting a touch though.

Thank you for your feedback.

1) Toby Murray plays purely as a tall forward. We usually play three tall forwards. Tex is injured. Fog is returning from a 6 week break and looked awful in his 3 matches this year (shaggers back), a week in the Twos makes sense. Thilthorpe is also struggling with his back but is likely to play.

Who would be your second tall forward if not Turray? We need Nick Murray to replace Butts.

2) Would you suggest increasing McAndrew’s ToG and using Turray as our second ruck? That puts even more pressure on Thilthorpe. In a perfect world we rest Thilthorpe this week.

3) Playing ROB is purely to ensure McAndrew is in good nick for the North Melbourne match. I wouldn’t object if we gave him a week off, the Tiger rucks are very, very thin.

 

[Cromulant]

Bit early to be tanking against the bottom team.

We need at least 1 of Thilthorpe or Fogarty to play.

Did you miss the Fremantle game? 1 ruckman who can only ruck is enough.

Yep, those close losses are going to stop us doing the smart things

 

[CrowinNT]

Gee Ciao Giacomo
“shaggers back”
??? How do you come up with this stuff ?
I’m sure it is on our white board
This week . Please take a photo

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

Thank you for your feedback.

1) Toby Murray plays purely as a tall forward. We usually play three tall forwards. Tex is injured. Fog is returning from a 6 week break and looked awful in his 3 matches this year (shaggers back), a week in the Twos makes sense. Thilthorpe is also struggling with his back but is likely to play.

Who would be your second tall forward if not Turray? We need Nick Murray to replace Butts.

2) Would you suggest increasing McAndrew’s ToG and using Turray as our second ruck? That puts even more pressure on Thilthorpe. In a perfect world we rest Thilthorpe this week.

3) Playing ROB is purely to ensure McAndrew is in good nick for the North Melbourne match. I wouldn’t object if we gave him a week off, the Tiger rucks are very, very thin.

Why do we need to play 3 tall forwards?

 

[BRL121]

Thank you for your feedback.

1) Toby Murray plays purely as a tall forward. We usually play three tall forwards. Tex is injured. Fog is returning from a 6 week break and looked awful in his 3 matches this year (shaggers back), a week in the Twos makes sense. Thilthorpe is also struggling with his back but is likely to play.

Who would be your second tall forward if not Turray? We need Nick Murray to replace Butts.

2) Would you suggest increasing McAndrew’s ToG and using Turray as our second ruck? That puts even more pressure on Thilthorpe. In a perfect world we rest Thilthorpe this week.

3) Playing ROB is purely to ensure McAndrew is in good nick for the North Melbourne match. I wouldn’t object if we gave him a week off, the Tiger rucks are very, very thin.

Balta was BOG and he was playing ruck.

 

[Ciao Giacomo]

Why do we need to play 3 tall forwards?

Who are the three tall forwards?

Thilthorpe = 1

Toby Murray = 2

ROB and McAndrew have 50% ruck time each. Zero time forward.

Nick Murray replaces Butts as our second tall defender (Worrell plays his usual third tall/ intercept defender role).

Please point out the tall forward I have forgotten (Tex is injured and I said we should play Fog in the SANFL).

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

Ok, let’s apply some logic here. Nicks’ philosophy since 2020 has been “why change a winning side”. In fact he tends not to change a losing side.

Out: Walker, Butts
In: Murray, Dawson

 

[Cromulant]

Balta was BOG and he was playing ruck.

Against Bailey Williams though, Balta was good but his opponent would be the worst starting ruck in the game.

 

[Mutineer]

The 208cm Oliver Hayes Brown actually attended more CBA's than Balta but Balta contested more ruck contests 51 vs 35

 

[Crow_Magnon]

One change I'd love to see for the game against Richmond -

Last time we played at the MCG I think we had five or six F50 entries kicked out on the full in the first 30 minutes of match play, all basically in the exact same part of the ground. Our understanding or feel for the ground dimensions was just plain wrong.

I hope this is specifically addressed this week before the game.

Yep, it's almost a circle whereas as our longer boundaries are pretty straight at AO. Mind you, I think that was the Collingwood game, where we actually won I think.

 

[CromradeCromulent]

Roo says Daws is likely to play mostly behind the ball to condition him back into things.

 

[Mostyn]

Thank you for your feedback.

1) Toby Murray plays purely as a tall forward. We usually play three tall forwards. Tex is injured. Fog is returning from a 6 week break and looked awful in his 3 matches this year (shaggers back), a week in the Twos makes sense. Thilthorpe is also struggling with his back but is likely to play.

Who would be your second tall forward if not Turray? We need Nick Murray to replace Butts.

2) Would you suggest increasing McAndrew’s ToG and using Turray as our second ruck? That puts even more pressure on Thilthorpe. In a perfect world we rest Thilthorpe this week.

3) Playing ROB is purely to ensure McAndrew is in good nick for the North Melbourne match. I wouldn’t object if we gave him a week off, the Tiger rucks are very, very thin.

Look, I like your posts but if you want to just forfeit the game, then we should just say so.

Toby Murray and Maley are very similar warm bodies who are there as the 23rd man to give the ruckman a rest and to give the forward line a big lug who can crash contests. I'm happy for that to be Murray going forward - he is miles off it but has a high ceiling and has bursts of really showing something.

But he's still just that 23rd body. You can have him AND Rob be that. We're playing one short.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Roo says Daws is likely to play mostly behind the ball to condition him back into things.

Can replace Bond then.

 

[Golumless]

yeah this doesnt make any sense. all of zorko, whitfield and ash would KILL taylor for sustained pace, initial acceleration AND endurance

clearly you and many others rate zac much more highly than i do. i would LOVE to be wrong and he turns out a good quality afl player

but lets face facts. after 4 years at the club at the end of last year he was deemed a marginal player at best, given a one year extension with logically NO OTHER TEAM having any interest otherwise zac would have taken a 2-3 year contract elsewhere

he is a very marginal afl player at this stage

I did explain my point very poorly. There is a point with selections where teams have to sacrifice things for the greater good. A side who is struggling to move the ball out of defense is likely to be unphased about the match up with a pacy forward, because the overall damage caused from that lack of ball movement is higher. You can't cover everything, so it's more a question of what risks are acceptable.

I don't rate Taylor particularly highly for the reasons you mention. He's a 4th year player who can't push past the fringes. Still, he is a very neat ball mover (and eyebrows should be raised at anyone going over 70% as a half forward flank), doesn't do forward defense at a high click (he's not a high tackle/pressure* guy) and someone who does win a good number of the contests he is in. Equally, Adelaide are completely ****ed if they don't solve their ball movement against good teams and where it is breaking down is defense. We are too easy to trap there because it's a unit that lacks skill (and is forced into low skill gameplans because of it).

Ultimately, this is the kind of move that could benefit both. It covers a lot of Taylors weaknesses whilst it puts his strength in a role that desperately needs that strength. If it fails or puts up middling performances, well, it's not like that situation degrades that much. It's just swapping what the weakness is, though that too may end up an improvement.

*borderline irrelevant stats for a defender but very important for half forwards. After all, it as much measure of how frequenly someone gets to (and halves) contests, something Taylor isn't good at (and it's likely the getting to contests part). Not something that's super relevant to defense because something has gone horribly wrong if players are going at a high click.

 

[StonesThrow]

Underdone or back injury hampered him?

I'm not using this as an excuse because there have been a number of 'within our control' problems this year, but we've had a fair few players with issues during pre season and/or into the season going by bigmans reports. It never bodes well if this happens.

Conversely the players with good pre seasons are mostly doing really well e.g. Cook, Rachele, Milera, McAndrew

Add to that a cooked game plan within our control and an out of form Dawson and Rankine, not hard to see why our year has been so mediocre so far.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

I'm not using this as an excuse because there have been a number of 'within our control' problems this year, but we've had a fair few players with issues during pre season and/or into the season going by bigmans reports. It never bodes well if this happens.

Conversely the players with good pre seasons are mostly doing really well e.g. Cook, Rachele, Milera, McAndrew

Add to that a cooked game plan within our control and an out of form Dawson and Rankine, not hard to see why our year has been so mediocre so far.

Nankervis also has a great preseason & has hardly been given a decent go... again.

 

[Mattrox]

Fog is fine to return - he’s only missed a month and a 70% match fit Fog better than a 100% Maley

Ah Chee on the other hand needs a week or two in the sanfl - he’s had three hammy’s since joining the club and need some continuity

Especially against a depleted Richmond.
Fog in.

The more I think about it the more I reckon we keep McAndrew in due to the 9 day break.

I'd be more incline to rest Thilthorpe.

If we could squeeze Draper in that would be good too.

I'd be ok with Nick Murray, Fog, Dawson and Draper in.

Have Ah Chee run around in the SANFL if he's fit.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Ins - Outs
N Murray - Butts
Dawson - Bond
Fogarty - Walker
O'Brien - McAndrew
Edwards.- ANB
Nankervis - Cumming

Dawson gets his chance to play behind the ball & gives us another decent ball user along with Milera down back.

ROB to give McAndrewa decent break to take on Xerri as looked last week like he needed a break.

Allows T Murray to play mostly as a forward & manager minutes for both Fog & Filthy.

Give Edwards a decent run in the midfield & manage the minutes of our main midfielders needed v Roos as most can play up forward too.

B: Michaelanny, Murray, Borlase
HB: Milera, Worrell, Dawson
C: Cook, Edwards, Curtin
HF:Rachele, Fogarty, Keays
F: Pedlar, T Murray, Rankine
R: O’Brien, Berry, Soligo
I: Laird, Nankervis, Peatling, Taylor, Thilthorpe