Preview Round 17 - Brisbane Lions v West Coast Eagles - Saturday 8 July 2023 1:45 PM @ The Gabba

[BuntonRules]

I’ll be cheering Gunston if he kicks 5. Regardless of how down on Gunston the BF groupthink is, if he comes out of contributes goals and options and makes us a better side, what’s wrong with that?

…now if he kicks 5 this week, then goes 1, 0, 1 over the next 3 weeks and still retains his spot, then i’ll join the groupthink!

I will have a fitty on that right now, if you like.

 

[martinson]

Thats not what you said. It is hard to have a discussion with you because your tactic is just to constantly move goal posts. It is boring.

Fwiiw you cherry pick selectively from whatever anyone says and then seek to drive whatever your argument is to belittle whatever it is they said.

And if it's boring go and do something more interesting.

I'm not sure anyone comes here for to be mentally fulfilled.

 

[Warwick]

Good to see Madden get a chance.

 

[twhowler]

The thing that makes me pessimistic about Gunston coming good is that his goal-kicking has really dropped off. Bar one quarter v the dogs he’s been below par. Talk to hawks fans and they reckon it’s been a gradual decline over 2-3 years.

Against gws we hit him on the lead early twice in the first quarter. He missed both shots. We seemed to avoid him after that.

So his strengths have always been:
Goal-kicking - seems to be in gradual decline
Footy smarts - still there
Getting free on a lead - can do at times but has lost so much speed he struggles to get separation.

I don’t think you can call him a third tall. He doesn’t crash a pack or take contested marks.

So i’m not really sure what be brings. If the MC love 3 talls how does Gunston really help?

The claim he was opening up our forward line is also pretty unconvincing i think. The forward line has seemed to function better without him. Hipwood playing in almost career best form.

I agree that there’s a chance we look a KPF short if we bomb it in a lot against Melbourne. But would Gunston really help that? If that’s our concern then Fort is the best option, and when fit Fullarton can have a go.

If Gunston is the answer, i fear we are asking the wrong question.

Anyway saturday just got a lot more interesting!

 

[martinson]

The thing that makes me pessimistic about Gunston coming good is that his goal-kicking has really dropped off. Bar one quarter v the dogs he’s been below par. Talk to hawks fans and they reckon it’s been a gradual decline over 2-3 years.

Against gws we hit him on the lead early twice in the first quarter. He missed both shots. We seemed to avoid him after that.

So his strengths have always been:
Goal-kicking - seems to be in gradual decline
Footy smarts - still there
Getting free on a lead - can do at times but has lost so much speed he struggles to get separation.

I don’t think you can call him a third tall. He doesn’t crash a pack or take contested marks.

So i’m not really sure what be brings. If the MC love 3 talls how does Gunston really help?

The claim he was opening up our forward line is also pretty unconvincing i think. The forward line has seemed to function better without him. Hipwood playing in almost career best form.

I agree that there’s a chance we look a KPF short if we bomb it in a lot against Melbourne. But would Gunston really help that? If that’s our concern then Fort is the best option, and when fit Fullarton can have a go.

If Gunston is the answer, i fear we are asking the wrong question.

Anyway saturday just got a lot more interesting!

Yeah I've got nothing against the Gunners that was per se. I cracked it when we signed him up . I'm bewildered that he could stink it up most of the year and still get a game.

But who knows. Maybe he can start running ,jumping and leading again.

Probably says more about the lack of faith that we have in some others that he's in this week. And Fages loves him and wants to give him another chance.

I get it. Should be an easy kill for us whatever.

 

[irish]

Gotta say reading about how the older players are done is absolute rubbish , if we are to get close to winning the flag it won’t be the kids who tear the finals up yea they will be fantastic no argument and yes they will play a role but it will be Zorko Lyons rich or Gunston who get us up in huge pressure

Don’t sell em short yet people

 

[martinson]

The one thing I did note from last week is that WCE played with a lot more cohesion than they have in many weeks at times and seemed to be running into a little form.

I wouldn't think they have any hope at the Gabba but I reckon they'll keep improving to year end and it won't be the 100+ point drubbing that we were hoping for.

 

[3KZ is Football]

How lucky are we to have Gunners . Not only with teaching all our other forwards leading patterns but his savage attack on the opposition when they have the ball and 100% reliability with ball in hand ,giving it off to teammates after fighting for the contested ball ,or just nailing shots when he gets the chance. Backing into packs and bringing it to ground goes without question.

Thank God Fages saw common sense and brought him back in in what should be a do or die battle against the fearsome WCE.

I don't think any lover of the game could stomach Gunners playing in the twos.

Backing Gunners to kick 5 this weekend. But if he doesn't just watch for the improvement in our forward set up.

 

[Grasshopper17]

I saw it on sale at the Brunswick Street Oval on Saturday. It looks great. They can be purchased here:
140th Anniversary Heritage Guernsey

I really like this maroon. Still remember we wore a very similar guernsey in 2003 when we ripped Collingwood a new one at the MCG. Would much prefer this colour scheme for our away games.

 

[3KZ is Football]

I really like this maroon. Still remember we wore a very similar guernsey in 2003 when we ripped Collingwood a new one at the MCG. Would much prefer this colour scheme for our away games.

I was at that game. It was a cracker! It is a nice looking guernsey.

 

[Grasshopper17]

Who's fault was it last year when we only won by 70 or so against a team that had to field WAFL players?

The weather's, primarily. Forecast for Saturday:

 

[Grasshopper17]

I assume Fort is injured??

Suspect they want to give Fort a full game. Hasn't had one since the Sydney game, when he got subbed out in the last quarter.

 

[Grasshopper17]

They actually think Gunston is going to play any better after 2 or 3 weeks off ?. He might kick a couple of cheapies against the WCE Reserves. The forward line has functioned way better without him. He offers absolutely nothing. Continuing to play him is detrimental to our finals chances. Opposition knows that. Fagan & selection committee can resign if they blow it playing this spud.

So clearly there is some concern still over the amount of intercept marks we have afforded St Kilda and Richmond's tall defenders in the past fortnight, hence the inclusion of Gunston.

I'm a bit in the camp of "if he kicks 5, it proves nothing". But if he goes goalless and barely touches it, I think it proves a lot, and surely then the experiment has to be over.

What I'm far more interested in though is not what he offers in an attacking sense, but in a defensive sense. How does he chase, harass, pressure, smother and tackle when we don't have the ball? If he still looks like a glacier as he did in his most recent handful of games for us, this will be far more damning than any attacking output, or lack thereof.

On the other hand, I'd be quite happy if he has minimal impact on the scoreboard, but plays an integral role in helping us lock the ball inside 50, whether that be via on-ball pressure or forming part of our zone behind the ball which makes it hard for West Coast to transition forward on slower plays.

 

[Grasshopper17]

Did they say what the issue was on there mate? Remembering back now to last weeks game he had a fair amount of strapping on the hamstring/quad? in that game but obviously played. I wonder if he’s dealing with a bit of tightness there perhaps?

Edit. Sorry that doesn’t give a timeline for return but just trying to work out what the injury issue is.

It was reported on the 3AW call by their boundary reporter in the St Kilda game that he was having some work done on his hamstring on the boundary, before going down to the rooms and emerging with it heavily strapped.

He did return to the playing field (took a great intercept mark to have a shot for goal late in the game) but I'd imagine this is a knock-on effect of that injury.

 

[Grasshopper17]

Fagan's hubris is on full display and he obviously hasn't read the room.

This was likely always the plan.

It's as if the guy hasn't been watching since Gunston dropped himself.

I simply think he is placing greater emphasis on certain things than perhaps we are.

We are placing emphasis on how quick we look and how well we moved the ball through the midfield against Richmond.

Fages and the coaching group are placing emphasis on the amount of times we gave the ball back to opposing tall defenders via pretty easy intercept marks. And as much as I enjoyed seeing how well we defended the ground and kicking 20 goals against Richmond, we did give the ball up in this manner A LOT, in both games.

We have been able to defend ball movement from a 5-8 team (a very negative and defensive 5-8 team) and from a bottom 10 team. Can we defend that ball movement against a top 4 team in a Preliminary Final?

I believe Fages' preference is to pick a team which allows us to avoid this question altogether. Let's see.

 

[McIvor]

It frustrates me that it's self evident he doesn't have the physical capacity any more to play effectively in the role that we designated and people seem to have this blind fantasy belief that he'll miraculously start being a weapon again.

Having red this thread - i find it ammusing that many of the people supporting Fagan and justiying the return of Gunstan were the same ones saying Lester was done and Fagan was right not playing him and similar in regards to Ah Chee. All the while those same people are saying we shoud have blind faith in Fagans selection policy because its not unlike hes never been wrong before.

Just a truly weird decision to bring Gunstan based on what I have no idea - he trained well - give me a break

 

[McIvor]

Devil's advocate, but if Gunston's training block wasn't the answer, wouldn't the time to find out once and for all be sooner, rather than later?

It seems like he must have impressed over the past few weeks, time to find out once and for all if it can translate onto the field. If he is to be permanently ruled out as no longer an option, let's find out now.

For all the banal cliches about Fagan and people having photos etc, the man just wants to win. If Gunners looks nowhere near it in 3 or so weeks I have no doubt Fages will have the conversation.

So why not play him in the reserves - which shouldnt be beneath anyone, clearly it is for Gunstan and the bias attitiude Fagan has towards him. I mean what has Gunston done at the Lions that warrants such preferential treatmen?

 

[McIvor]

I’ll be cheering Gunston if he kicks 5. Regardless of how down on Gunston the BF groupthink is, if he comes out of contributes goals and options and makes us a better side, what’s wrong with that?

…now if he kicks 5 this week, then goes 1, 0, 1 over the next 3 weeks and still retains his spot, then i’ll join the groupthink!

Even if he does kick 5 this week, seriously what does it achieve; that he is back? hardly, I think Fagan will wrongly point to such a display that he is back and justifies his selection in future games even if he goes 1 0 1 over the next 3 weeks by doing the training block. Gunstan should have had to display multiple good efforts in the twos before he was even considered for the ones.

Anyone who thinks a multiple goal display by Jack this week justofies anything is kidding themselves. If Fagan has any credibility, irrespective of what happens this week, he gets omitted next week for any of Linc or Cal.

 

[McIvor]

Yeah I've got nothing against the Gunners that was per se. I cracked it when we signed him up . I'm bewildered that he could stink it up most of the year and still get a game.

But who knows. Maybe he can start running ,jumping and leading again.

Probably says more about the lack of faith that we have in some others that he's in this week. And Fages loves him and wants to give him another chance.

I get it. Should be an easy kill for us whatever.

Im still laughing at the countless posts in the off season by many posters on here advocating for his selection on here today that he was a significant upgrade on McStay which i knew was just ludicrous and is pretty evident that that was always so far from the truth its not funny. A bit like Froggy Lester being done or that there was no room in our team for Cal.

 

[Grasshopper17]

Whether we have a three tall forward setup or two will have no bearing on lever or may taking intercept marks.
It’s all about not kicking blindly or to their advantage and keeping our eyes lower.

Don't agree with this at all. Having a third tall forward means one of them is required to play on him.

The only way Lever and May etc would be able to "float off" and impact the contest in that situation is if his positioning was so poor that it became obvious he wouldn't get the ball. Now, Gunston has been criticised of a lot of things this year, and rightly so, but having a poor footy brain ain't one of them.

 

[Quested]

I've really enjoyed the way we have played with two talls plus Rayner - we look stronger, faster and smarter with ball use. If I ignore Gunston's history and just look at what he's delivered this year, it just doesn't stack up. Can't see why he wasn't sent to the reserves to show what his training block has delivered.

 

[Grasshopper17]

But Gunners can't play 3rd tall any more . It's ridiculous to call him a tall . He can't jump . They keep jumping over him or running around him . Ah Chee , Fort would be better , Rayner , I'd even hack Lohmann if we went smaller.

Your 3rd tall if you want 3 talls should at least be able to mark over their head in a contested situation. Or bring it to ground. He's done neither all that often on anything seen this year.

He has rarely been outmarked overhead this year however. That ability to bring the ball to ground is almost equally important.

What happens once it does is my next concern (as above).

 

[HereIGoAgain]

Geez and I thought those Poms melted hard.

When Gunston pulls on the Lions jersey on Saturday I'll still back him to come good. Let the selectors get on with their job. It will become apparent enough before the end of the Melbourne game whether they've got it right or not.

Go Lions!

 

[mpal6]

But Gunners can't play 3rd tall any more . It's ridiculous to call him a tall . He can't jump . They keep jumping over him or running around him . Ah Chee , Fort would be better , Rayner , I'd even hack Lohmann if we went smaller.

Your 3rd tall if you want 3 talls should at least be able to mark over their head in a contested situation. Or bring it to ground. He's done neither all that often on anything seen this year.

We just have to look at the bright side of Fagan bringing him in now. If he truly finds form, good for him and the team. If he tanks (I don't wish this on him but evidence this year proves otherwise), it'll become glaringly obvious against a side like Demons at MCG. Gunston Rich murmurs started in media after Hawks loss and went away once they were on a training block. I'm sure it'll resurface if his addition is not working.

I'll be on Hipwood watch as well this week. If he becomes too Gunston aware again and recedes in output, that'll be a clear sign of other issues cropping up in forward line.

 

[Toffee Lion]

I really like this maroon. Still remember we wore a very similar guernsey in 2003 when we ripped Collingwood a new one at the MCG. Would much prefer this colour scheme for our away games.

One of my favourite H&A games of all time. IIRC it was a beautiful sunny day and we smashed them so badly in the first quarter that some went for the exits.

All while wearing that beautiful Fitzroy jumper.