Prediction Round 10: Changes Vs Geelong + pre-match discussion

[sherrif]

The real issue is who is taking Erasmus’s wing time? Ploz not Hughes…

Well considering Fyfe is in the team and will spend significant time forward I think it will be Freddy spending more time on the wing to make the rotations work. I'm pretty sure Freddy has spent time on the wing in both of the 4th quarters Fyfe has played in the last two weeks. If Hughes is moved back to the wing at any point in the game I think our game day thread and myself individually might actually crash. Hughes has played two decent games this year and they're the games in the last two weeks when he's been moved back to defence.

In my opinion we appear to have too many onballers unless Brayshaw also spends time on the wing too. Geez the team would have looked better balanced in my view if we had dropped Banfield for the sake of team balanced and kept Erasmus or brought in MJ.

 

[sherrif]

Who would you take out of this weeks 22 to fit them in?
I agree they should both be playing and have my opinions on several that could be down at peel but we can’t play 24 players either?

Aish has been very poor over the last month. I would have dropped him for either MJ or Erasmus. I also would have dropped Banfield for either of the two for the sake of team balance.

 

[s_wd6]

Aish has been very poor over the last month. I would have dropped him for either MJ or Erasmus. I also would have dropped Banfield for either of the two for the sake of team balance.

If the last two games are anything to go by then Fyfe will be playing a lot more time in the middle.

Aish should have been dropped, I agree, but I think banners being dropped will actually mess with team balance if we’re playing Fyfe in the middle. Especially if we want to play LJ there for stints too.

 

[Mags98]

A bit worried by Geelong's ins. They still have a few out, but Stengle makes their forward line complete and Close is their version of Switta imo. Jack Henry also a very good player. Our mids need to get right on top like they did last week.

stengle been pretty poor so far this year, and either of him or close will be shut down by walker - no worries

 

[estibador]

In my opinion we appear to have too many onballers unless Brayshaw also spends time on the wing too. Geez the team would have looked better balanced in my view if we had dropped Banfield for the sake of team balanced and kept Erasmus or brought in MJ.

I'm not sure how that logic follows.

Dropping a forward for Ras or MJ would give us even more onballers.

 

[Footskill]

I'm not sure how that logic follows.

Dropping a forward for Ras or MJ would give us even more onballers.

Lol there is no logic..their reasoning is squeeze Ras and MJ in regardless.

Either they really think at this point in time they really can play the forward role better than banners or refuse to accept that Fyfe will be playing more mid, but of course it look silly if they said drop Fyfe instead

Don't think they understand team balance or too many cooks

 

[Purple Suit]

I'm not sure how that logic follows.

Dropping a forward for Ras or MJ would give us even more onballers.

Yep,
We dropped Erasmus so Fyfe can play a full game. If we drop Banners for Fyfe, we need to play him forward & that doesn’t solve our clearance issues.

Some posters want Hughes & Banners dropped but want to play Erasmus & MJ instead which doesn’t work. I think we have learned that team balance & process is better than individual output. Playing your role is more important than stats and getting games into kids will pick up pace with injuries.

 

[Sweetback]

We also need an age balance to a degree. We can’t have kids taking over the midfield and the forward line.

 

[blue shark]

Yep,
We dropped Erasmus so Fyfe can play a full game. If we drop Banners for Fyfe, we need to play him forward & that doesn’t solve our clearance issues.

Some posters want Hughes & Banners dropped but want to play Erasmus & MJ instead which doesn’t work. I think we have learned that team balance & process is better than individual output. Playing your role is more important than stats and getting games into kids will pick up pace with injuries.

Why not use the sub role to rotate players? Aish would be the one ATM that could do with a rest.
Hughes has looked better in defence.
Banfield is good for 2 quarters, Erasmus can play mid/forward why couldn’t they share the position and TOG?

 

[Hamann188]

Why not use the sub role to rotate players? Aish would be the one ATM that could do with a rest.
Hughes has looked better in defence.
Banfield is good for 2 quarters, Erasmus can play mid/forward why couldn’t they share the position and TOG?

That keeps everybody happy then.

 

[sherrif]

I'm not sure how that logic follows.

Dropping a forward for Ras or MJ would give us even more onballers.

Because Fyfe will be playing forward more than onball. He played onball because he was sub. MJ and Erasmus aren't playing onball they are playing on the wings almost exclusively.

 

[Purple Suit]

Why not use the sub role to rotate players? Aish would be the one ATM that could do with a rest.
Hughes has looked better in defence.
Banfield is good for 2 quarters, Erasmus can play mid/forward why couldn’t they share the position and TOG?

They will be, either MJ or Erasmus will be the sub this week. If someone doesn’t perform then they will be out and it’ll be full game / sub if they can do the role.

I’m not convinced Aish is playing that bad. His stats are down but we transitioned the ball thru the guts and the big men a lot vs Sydney. He’s your fall back option annd Mr fix it. It’s fine if he’s not required because plan A is working.

If someone got off the chain or 1-2 key injuries in game then Aish gives us flexibility for high output with multiple positions. Lots of posters want JLo to take more game day risks, then we need to leave flexible players in the team to do so and kids don’t really offer that while they are learning.

 

[Dockeroo]

Johnson and Erasmus are our Rozee and Butters.
Those guys didn’t arrive at Port and take over as an inside midfielder from day 1. In fact that barely ever happens in any club.
You find slots at half forward and half back to get your top 10 picks into the team because they are more talented than the fringe players playing those positions.
That’s exactly what happened with Rozee and butters. 4 or 5 years in, they run the midfield after about 80 games each.

Hell - David Mundy

16

David Mundy

Age

38

Ht

192cm

Wt

92kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

23.1

5star

K

11.2

4star

HB

11.8

5star

M

3.6

4star

T

4.3

5star

CL

5.1

5star

D

15.7

4star

K

6.7

3star

HB

9.0

4star

M

2.3

2star

T

2.7

4star

CL

3.7

5star

D

27.8

5star

K

15.4

5star

HB

12.4

5star

M

5.8

5star

T

6.2

5star

CL

7.2

5star

spent about 5 years on a HBF!!
It’s not a binary choice between playing Ras and Johnno in the midfield at AFL, or down at peel.

 

[wakojako]

Who would you take out of this weeks 22 to fit them in?
I agree they should both be playing and have my opinions on several that could be down at peel but we can’t play 24 players either?

That's the dilemma, idk how the club will fit both of them in. They'll just get opportunities through the sub role. This is why I want to move Brashaw to a wing because one of those boys can replace him.

 

[Scham]

Johnson and Erasmus are our Rozee and Butters.
Those guys didn’t arrive at Port and take over as an inside midfielder from day 1. In fact that barely ever happens in any club.
You find slots at half forward and half back to get your top 10 picks into the team because they are more talented than the fringe players playing those positions.
That’s exactly what happened with Rozee and butters. 4 or 5 years in, they run the midfield after about 80 games each.

Hell - David Mundy spent about 5 years on a HBF!!
It’s not a binary choice between playing Ras and Johnno in the midfield at AFL, or down at peel.

Mundy was drafted as a defender, and I'm fairly certain Rozee was a forward. And I'm not sure we should be taking tips from Ken, as he left Rozee way too long forward when he was needed in the midfield but...

Look, I generally agree with your point and have myself called for Raz to play as a forward until he's ready to go on ball, but the reality is that our forwards have been getting the job done in the last two weeks and there's absolutely no evidence that Jonno or Raz would do a better job. Plus, they're being fast track developed as midfielders because we need them sooner rather than later, we don't have the luxury of allowing them to play a season or two in attack or defence, and as we've seen this year, they're doing ok and getting close to being full time mids which is their strength.

 

[Wobbly Punt]

I'd agree that keeping Banfield this week is a decent call. The mistake was allowing him to play against the bad sides after being so poor previously but that's water under the bridge. I'm hopeful at some stage soon he'll revert to the position I actually think he's perfect for - the sub. I'd have zero complaints at all about him being there for us with the odd rotation out to Peel for game time.

Ras out is not great in my opinion, I get it but don't agree with it. Him or Johnno as sub mitigates that somewhat.

Interestingly, I think the one guy who would benefit most from the recent change of approach around the stoppages and other contests is Brodie. Having him operate in and around contests where numbers are equal and his defensive shortcomings aren't as exposed suits him to a tee. I'm not saying I'd bring him in this week because I wouldn't, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if he blows the door off with his work and performs really well when het gets his next chance in the new setup.

 

[Gussman]

Not a fan of playing Erasmus or Johnson as the sub. 4 quarters in the WAFL would be better for their development than 1 quarter against fatigued AFL players. Brodie should be the sub.

 

[Footskill]

I'd agree that keeping Banfield this week is a decent call. The mistake was allowing him to play against the bad sides after being so poor previously but that's water under the bridge. I'm hopeful at some stage soon he'll revert to the position I actually think he's perfect for - the sub. I'd have zero complaints at all about him being there for us with the odd rotation out to Peel for game time.

Ras out is not great in my opinion, I get it but don't agree with it. Him or Johnno as sub mitigates that somewhat.

Interestingly, I think the one guy who would benefit most from the recent change of approach around the stoppages and other contests is Brodie. Having him operate in and around contests where numbers are equal and his defensive shortcomings aren't as exposed suits him to a tee. I'm not saying I'd bring him in this week because I wouldn't, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if he blows the door off with his work and performs really well when het gets his next chance in the new setup.

There was no 'mistake' . The MC thought he was playing his role and outside of the Bulldogs game, which most of the team were playing poor, he has been showing his worth more in last two games. He also deserves opportunity

Brodie is in a difficult situation. If according to Serong that the mids had switched up their play to how they were in first few games, that have been the contributing factor to the turn around. Although, I think having someone like Fyfe or Erasmus to win the ball inside the clearances has helped.

Think Brodie only comes in if JOM has few poor games or gets injured. Seems to be behind Ras and MJ now

 

[Eski3]

The midfields read like this:

Darcy/Jackson, Brayshaw, Serong, Jaeger, Fyfe, O'Driscoll, Aish

vs

Ceglar/Blicavs, Holmes, Atkins, Smith, Parfitt/Bruhn/Bews (not sure who else has been rolling inside for them)


We really should get on top in the middle.

 

[MadMundy]

Banfield really can't win can he? If he plays badly, drop him (common sense), but when he plays well, it's also time to drop him??

I get you guys don't like him because he ran over your dog or something but he deserves to be in the team right now, you have guys like Aish underperforming, where are the calls for him to come out? I've only seen a few.

 

[Wobbly Punt]

Banfield really can't win can he? If he plays badly, drop him (common sense), but when he plays well, it's also time to drop him??

I get you guys don't like him because he ran over your dog or something but he deserves to be in the team right now, you have guys like Aish underperforming, where are the calls for him to come out? I've only seen a few.

That's an argument you can turn around pretty easily.

Aish has been bad for a few weeks, and before that and for most of his time there he has been in the top half of the performers in the team.

The focus on keeping BB in the team by pointing to others who should go first is a shaky one for BB because there are very, very few people who've been given the rope BB has when underperforming and kept a spot.

I'd agree Aish is not playing well right now and if he went out it'd be hard to argue against it. But why would he only get 3 weeks or so when BB gets much, much longer than that? Same with Schultz prior to last week. He'd been playing badly enough the previous 2-3 weeks to go but he didn't and that's fine given his prior performance. he came back hard last week which is great and which is why you keep him.

BB has had 2 decent games against 2 poorly performing teams. If he was to make way for someone else after those games because there was a better option (like a Fyfe, MJ, Ras etc) then it'd be much less surprising than him keeping his spot after 4-5 weeks this year and lots of last year when he was doing very little.

It seems the BB acolytes are the ones who struggle to find reasons for their support other than "he's not the worst" or "he tries really hard". Those who don't support his ongoing preferential treatment have provided reasons for it with a bit more substance than that in my opinion.

I say that and also say I wouldn't have dropped him this week. I get why he's in right now. What I struggle with is how long he's given to put up a decent performance compared to others.

The fact you're singling Aish out now actually supports those who struggle with BB in the team. Aish has done SO much more for us recently and over the journey than BB yet a few weeks of not so good and you want him out yet you'll seemingly put up with months of BB's bad gear because he might give us a goal and a tackle or 2 against bottom feeders.

 

[Taylor]

Banfield really can't win can he? If he plays badly, drop him (common sense), but when he plays well, it's also time to drop him??

I get you guys don't like him because he ran over your dog or something but he deserves to be in the team right now, you have guys like Aish underperforming, where are the calls for him to come out? I've only seen a few.

Now I really want Banfield to get 30 playing on the wing with 10 inside fifties and 10 goal assists.

 

[Footskill]

That's an argument you can turn around pretty easily.

Aish has been bad for a few weeks, and before that and for most of his time there he has been in the top half of the performers in the team.

The focus on keeping BB in the team by pointing to others who should go first is a shaky one for BB because there are very, very few people who've been given the rope BB has when underperforming and kept a spot.

I'd agree Aish is not playing well right now and if he went out it'd be hard to argue against it. But why would he only get 3 weeks or so when BB gets much, much longer than that? Same with Schultz prior to last week. He'd been playing badly enough the previous 2-3 weeks to go but he didn't and that's fine given his prior performance. he came back hard last week which is great and which is why you keep him.

BB has had 2 decent games against 2 poorly performing teams. If he was to make way for someone else after those games because there was a better option (like a Fyfe, MJ, Ras etc) then it'd be much less surprising than him keeping his spot after 4-5 weeks this year and lots of last year when he was doing very little.

It seems the BB acolytes are the ones who struggle to find reasons for their support other than "he's not the worst" or "he tries really hard". Those who don't support his ongoing preferential treatment have provided reasons for it with a bit more substance than that in my opinion.

I say that and also say I wouldn't have dropped him this week. I get why he's in right now. What I struggle with is how long he's given to put up a decent performance compared to others.

The fact you're singling Aish out now actually supports those who struggle with BB in the team. Aish has done SO much more for us recently and over the journey than BB yet a few weeks of not so good and you want him out yet you'll seemingly put up with months of BB's bad gear because he might give us a goal and a tackle or 2 against bottom feeders.

Months of bad performances last year he was playing sub and still probably out performed in that role. Sure it wouldn't have been easy.

There are better options in that same role. According to you? Or do the MC know better

 

[Retzlaff]

Now I really want Banfield to get 30 playing on the wing with 10 inside fifties and 10 goal assists.

Zero tackles. Drop him

 

[kp junior]

This reeks of waiting for a loss to make changes, rather than improving the team win, lose or draw.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk