Opinion Round 4 Changes vs. Melbourne

[malpaso]

Hughes coughed it up too much for me. Logue had a brain fart, but was strong in the air and reasonably neat with his disposal. Logue appeared to enjoy the increased pressure. Hughes seems to regress with the pressure. I'd prefer Tucker or Sutcliffe. I understand we need to build his confidence, and a game in isolation won't help, but he was pretty bad (Hughes).

I can understand where your coming from but I really didn't see anything bad about his game. I think he has a 'smoothness' to his game which will only get better with playing time, stays in for me.

 

[wayToGo_]

It's hard to think we'll have the same license in jumping the enemy this week, Roos is too good a coach and will be prepared for that. So therein already lies the next great challenge for our young guys - to play on blokes who expect quality football from you.

We're lucky Goodwin is now their coach then

 

[StingBitten]

We're lucky Goodwin is now their coach then

Whoops! I was still wondering where Will Minson was last weekend as well.

 

[Dockernut]

I've watched the game in full again. Having read the WAFL report, Tucker played HBF and wing, Sutcliffe had 10 rebound 50s. I'd bring one of them in for Hughes.

Tucker.

 

[Walshy1]

What time are the teams coming for our game?

 

[Wally Walpamur]

What time are the teams coming for our game?

Tomorrow 4:20

 

[Big Animal]

IN: Tucker
OUT: Hughes

 

[Freeeoo]

All those calling for Hughes to be dropped are off the mark imo. Sure he made a couple of errors last week but you can't just put a young bloke in and then drop him the very next week for making a few mistakes. I thought overall he was serviceable and we won't know what we've got with him unless he gets at least a few weeks to find his feet.

 

[scon]

Yeah I tend to agree he showed enough to warrant another game or two.
Need to find out whether he can settle, eliminate the errors and improve.
Tucker performed well in the WAFL but I'm guessing he'll have to do it again.

 

[Logue]

What are the chances of Big Darcy getting a game as some support for Sandi?

 

[scon]

I'd think zero.
Sean didn't set the world alight for Peel and Dees have a weakened ruck division.
Barring injury I'd say he'll be left to develop in the magoos for a bit.

 

[igon value]

All those calling for Hughes to be dropped are off the mark imo. Sure he made a couple of errors last week but you can't just put a young bloke in and then drop him the very next week for making a few mistakes. I thought overall he was serviceable and we won't know what we've got with him unless he gets at least a few weeks to find his feet.

I agree normally - but I also believe you have to reward WAFL form, and both Tucker and Sutcliffe were very good. Happy with whatever decision the coaches make on Hughes. If he is dropped, they will let him know what he needs to improve on and what his route to getting back in the side

Competition for spots and selection based on form can only be a good thing. If he is dropped, he will be back.

 

[wayToGo_]

I agree normally - but I also believe you have to reward WAFL form, and both Tucker and Sutcliffe were very good. Happy with whatever decision the coaches make on Hughes. If he is dropped, they will let him know what he needs to improve on and what his route to getting back in the side

Competition for spots and selection based on form can only be a good thing. If he is dropped, he will be back.

It will be interesting to see what they do. He played two pretty impressive games for Peel in Rds 1 & 2 - arguably as good as the possible ins this week. Then they interrupted that by making him the travelling emergency for the Port game, before bringing him in for Freo last weekend. So he was the only player in that B22 that didn't play a game of footy the week before. Maybe they have their reasoning but I personally thought it was a dumb move, especially for an inexperienced youngster that is a confidence player. Ideally he should have played an extra game at Peel, and carried his good form through.

It doesn't really matter, he can go back to Peel and build good form again if that's what they decide. I just hope next time they bring him in they do it immediately and then give him a run of more than 1-2 games. But I still think he is being judged harshly on here - managed to keep Stringer pretty quiet in the forward line when he was on him, and that's no easy task - and was involved in most of the scores during our burst at the start. And if you watch the first quarter again, I loved seeing how he supported his team mates that had ball in hand by helping identify the open options down field to kick/handball to - a bit of the MJ pointing action going on

 

[Logue]

I'd think zero.
Sean didn't set the world alight for Peel and Dees have a weakened ruck division.
Barring injury I'd say he'll be left to develop in the magoos for a bit.

Given the ruck situation at Melb, and our status as a rebuilding team, I think this is a perfect opportunity to give the kid a taste.

 

[theGav56]

Just a couple of thoughts on Tucker V Hughes.

With having won unexpectedly last weekend things have changed slightly. Another win and we are no longer rebuilding for 2018/19. We are in the season as it stands.

Secondly, I think Tucker has greater versatility and a higher ceiling. His pace and delivery are exciting, plus I think is a smarter footballer. In short, dropping him to learn a lesson should only keep him out of the side until that is ticked off.

I am not strong either way, and while the argument that bringing in, then dropping Hughes is not fair, has weight, it is all part of the learning curve whatever happens.

I think it is a close call and the decision should weigh in Hughes favour. Tucker responded well, and challenging him to force his way in is far better than dropping Hughes for being slightly disappointing.

 

[Logue]

Just a couple of thoughts on Tucker V Hughes.

With having won unexpectedly last weekend things have changed slightly. Another win and we are no longer rebuilding for 2018/19. We are in the season as it stands.

Secondly, I think Tucker has greater versatility and a higher ceiling. His pace and delivery are exciting, plus I think is a smarter footballer. In short, dropping him to learn a lesson should only keep him out of the side until that is ticked off.

I am not strong either way, and while the argument that bringing in, then dropping Hughes is not fair, has weight, it is all part of the learning curve whatever happens.

I think it is a close call and the decision should weigh in Hughes favour. Tucker responded well, and challenging him to force his way in is far better than dropping Hughes for being slightly disappointing.

Let's be clear here, we are not in contention for 16/17 - this will not be a quick process, there will be some bright spots like the weekend just gone, but we do not have the quality or depth of player, yet, to be a top 8 contender.

When Mundy/Sandi and Johnno fall off the perch, there will be another drop and from there we can really begin to rise.

Personally, if in doubt on who goes down, we favour youth, if it's a hard call on someone like Spurr for Tucker, I'm ok with that.

 

[Unique Name]

Given the ruck situation at Melb, and our status as a rebuilding team, I think this is a perfect opportunity to give the kid a taste.

Rebuilding or not I think we've learnt that the team simply cannot have two slow lumbering ruckman. Yes it helps win the taps and the clearances but we get absolutely spanked around the ground for pace.

If Darcy is to gets games this year it has to be instead of Sandi. I just don't think we could afford to carry both.

 

[theGav56]

Given the ruck situation at Melb, and our status as a rebuilding team, I think this is a perfect opportunity to give the kid a taste.

Darcy may have rucked against him previously? ??

 

[theGav56]

Let's be clear here, we are not in contention for 16/17 - this will not be a quick process, there will be some bright spots like the weekend just gone, but we do not have the quality or depth of player, yet, to be a top 8 contender.

When Mundy/Sandi and Johnno fall off the perch, there will be another drop and from there we can really begin to rise.

Personally, if in doubt on who goes down, we favour youth, if it's a hard call on someone like Spurr for Tucker, I'm ok with that.

No, not in contention. But developing the structure and game style is important. I think the club has Tucker before Hughes because he fits the developing game plan better

 

[wayToGo_]

No, not in contention. But developing the structure and game style is important. I think the club has Tucker before Hughes because he fits the developing game plan better

Definitely think Tucker has a higher ceiling but they aren't like for like. Tucker wouldn't have been played on Stringer on the weekend just gone for instance. I do think Logue, Hughes, MJ and Ibbo is probably one (maybe even two) too many of those versatile defenders, although they managed ok as a group on the weekend so who knows what they'll do?

 

[Unique Name]

Definitely think Tucker has a higher ceiling but they aren't like for like. Tucker wouldn't have been played on Stringer on the weekend just gone for instance. I do think Logue, Hughes, MJ and Ibbo is probably one (maybe even two) too many of those versatile defenders, although they managed ok as a group on the weekend so who knows what they'll do?

Most if us in the best 22 thread always had Tucker listed on the bench. I think more because none of us are sure of where his future lies on the field. Wing/HBF/Midfield.

Where do you reckon he will play eventually?


Sidepoint: The Saints board keep bringing up Tucker in their trade thread along with the pictures of him as a kid dressed all in Saints gear. **** off!

 

[Wally Walpamur]

Most if us in the best 22 thread always had Tucker listed on the bench. I think more because none of us are sure of where his future lies on the field. Wing/HBF/Midfield.

Where do you reckon he will play eventually?


Sidepoint: The Saints board keep bringing up Tucker in their trade thread along with the pictures of him as a kid dressed all in Saints gear. **** off!

Based on his game for Peel on the weekend, play him off a half back flank. He's the Ibbo replacement IMO.

Could be the Duff/Rog we've been screaming out for.

 

[meima]

Based on his game for Peel on the weekend, play him off a half back flank. He's the Ibbo replacement IMO.

Could be the Duff/Rog we've been screaming out for.

What about move Hughes to play ibbo role and tucker playing Hughes role. I really like weller ( roger) and tucker ( duff) as half back plus intercepted marking of logue and Hughes with hammer ( Elvis) . Collins can come in when Johnson is rested.

 

[Van_Dyke]

Sidepoint: The Saints board keep bringing up Tucker in their trade thread along with the pictures of him as a kid dressed all in Saints gear. **** off!

To be fair the Saints board brings up pretty much anyone under 25 with a pulse

 

[Wally Walpamur]

What about move Hughes to play ibbo role and tucker playing Hughes role. I really like weller ( roger) and tucker ( duff) as half back plus intercepted marking of logue and Hughes with hammer ( Elvis) . Collins can come in when Johnson is rested.

I'd be putting my eggs in the Logue basket and prefer to see Hughes at Peel. When Logue needs a rest or needs to find form, bring Hughes in for him. I'm just not sure about playing both of them in the seniors at the same time at this point of their development, being late comers to AFL.