Selection Table week 1

[And_ROOS]

Egan gone for the rest of the year ..maybe. Mmmm. As most have observed on this board , our weakest point is tall defenders and rucks. Egan or Ottens going over was always going to shuffle the Geelong squad. There is no obvious replacement for Egan that doesn't upset our current side , Sam Hunt didn't play and H is simply not up to it. That Thompson kid in the VFL isn't on our list and Spencer........ NO COMMENT

We might have to look at Mooney to the backline , Ottens to the forwardline and King and Blake in the ruck . Not happy with it but what else can we do? Maybe Rooke on the backline.

Mooney to the backline? Are you high? He is a key reason our forward structure has been so excellent this year.

Harley is no slouch at CHB, he was almost AA there not too long ago, so Harley to CHB and DJ to take the small forward, maybe Rooke even.

 

[DanA]

In: King, D.Johnson, Rooke & Bartel
Out: Blake, Egan, Varcoe & Byrnes

- Not a lot separates Blake & King. I just think King adds a bit more hardness.
- D.Johnson gives us another option if one of Wells/Sansberry/Harvey get on top of their opponent.
- Rooke always seems to step up under pressure and is more versatile than Byrnes.
- Bartel is a no brainer.


FB: Hunt Scarlett Milburn
HB: Mackie Harley Enright
C: Wojcinski Bartel Corey
HF: Chaman N.Ablett Rooke
F: Stokes Mooney S.Johnson
R: Ottens G.Ablett Ling
Int: King Selwood, Kelly, D.Johnson

Matchups
Scarlett - Petrie
Harley - Hale
Mackie - Corey Jones
Milburn - Edwards
Enright - Harvey
Hunt - Grant
Ling - Simpson
Rooke - Sinclair (negative role)

 

[Bryceson]

Edited for my opinion.

I would be happy with that

 

[FTW_]

In: King, D.Johnson, Rooke & Bartel
Out: Blake, Egan, Varcoe & Byrnes

Byrnes has his best game of the season and you guys still say he should be dropped?
True there are better players that could come in, but DJ isn't a necessity, therefore it should be Egan out for Rooke & Varcoe out for Bartel.

With the whole Blake v King debate, I think Blake needs more finals experience in the seniors.
King is almost a lost cause, he had his glory days and unfortunately they're well and truly over.
We need to play players of the future - not the past.

 

[sarah.13]

In: King, D.Johnson, Rooke & Bartel
Out: Blake, Egan, Varcoe & Byrnes

- Not a lot separates Blake & King. I just think King adds a bit more hardness.
- D.Johnson gives us another option if one of Wells/Sansberry/Harvey get on top of their opponent.
- Rooke always seems to step up under pressure and is more versatile than Byrnes.
- Bartel is a no brainer.

Dan I understand your logic but IMO 4 changes are far too many at this time of the year.
Bartel for Varcoe -no brainer, agreed.
Now that Egan looks like a loss he can be covered by 1.Rooke in, Harley CHB.
2.King in for Blake and have him play a kick behind the play as protection for Harley.
If Egan plays( ) Rooke in for Byrnes. Blake stays in.
I see no need for DJ.

 

[WE Are Geelong]

Lets all be honest and agree there isnt a perfect solution to this. Egan is Plan A and given his great form this season our next option looks more like Plan C than B.

Lets look at some positives first. Egan didnt do much against the Roos a couple of weeks ago. I believe this is alot to do with how North randomise their attacking options. They dont really play through one player like we often play through Mooney or the Lions through Jonathon Brown. They have many scoring options and like to just pick who is best positioned at the right time rather than consider a certain pattern of bringing the ball forward 50. Given we dont have Egan this week...if they continue this style of footy it could suit us as we will need to spread the responsibilities down back anyway.

So this raises the issue horses for courses...do we need to replace a tall defender with a tall defender against North? This is purely for this week mind you.

My opinion early in the week without much time to really assess the Egan loss is to play an extra tall forward. North are already compromised height wise down back and we need to get competitive and strain their resources rather than plug holes in our own deficiencies. Hawkins has just come off a blinder in the twos and is showing signs his training regime has included him playing finals this year. He has a winning competitive type mentality and wont need anyone to explain to him this is the big time and he will need to step up if selected.

Using a Laidley philosophy...we need to thrive rather than just survive. We need to consider kicking more goals than them by winning the midfield and creating difficult match ups for their shorter defence. We need to consider that our defense held them just a couple of weeks ago without Egan doing that much on the day so backing them to do that again. We need to consider making them drop a taller forward back and unsettling their line up rather than being too reactive and defensive ourselves.

I think we also have to plan for the contigency that if the unthinkable happens and one of Scarlett or Harley gets hurt on Sunday we need to keep two mobile talls operating in our attack. Whether that means Nathan or Mooney spends time down back at various points of the game is debatable right now...but the key is under no circumstances do we compromise our ability to score more than our opposition.

Bartel comes in for Byrnes...and if Rooke is fit Varcoe should make way. If Blake pulled up sore play King otherwise I think given North's rucks are quite mobile I would be sticking with Blake for now.

 

[Slick Dog Johnson]

Blake must be able to step up this week so that we can allow Ottens to play forward more than usual in order to force them to put another tall (Petrie) in the backline. This nullifies the Egan loss.

Either that or another tall is selected.

 

[sarah.13]

Lets all be honest and agree there isnt a perfect solution to this. Egan is Plan A and given his great form this season our next option looks more like Plan C than B.

Lets look at some positives first. Egan didnt do much against the Roos a couple of weeks ago. I believe this is alot to do with how North randomise their attacking options. They dont really play through one player like we often play through Mooney or the Lions through Jonathon Brown. They have many scoring options and like to just pick who is best positioned at the right time rather than consider a certain pattern of bringing the ball forward 50. Given we dont have Egan this week...if they continue this style of footy it could suit us as we will need to spread the responsibilities down back anyway.

So this raises the issue horses for courses...do we need to replace a tall defender with a tall defender against North? This is purely for this week mind you.

My opinion early in the week without much time to really assess the Egan loss is to play an extra tall forward. North are already compromised height wise down back and we need to get competitive and strain their resources rather than plug holes in our own deficiencies. Hawkins has just come off a blinder in the twos and is showing signs his training regime has included him playing finals this year. He has a winning competitive type mentality and wont need anyone to explain to him this is the big time and he will need to step up if selected.

Using a Laidley philsophy...we need to thrive rather than just survive. We need to consider kicking more goals than them by winning the midfield and creating difficult match ups for their shorter defence. We need to consider that our defense held them just a couple of weeks ago without Egan doing that much on the day so backing them to do that again. We need to consider making them drop a taller forward back and unsettling their line up rather than being too reactive and defensive ourselves.

I think we also have to plan for the contigency that if the unthinkable happens and one of Scarlett or Harley gets hurt on Sunday we need to keep two mobile talls operating in our attack. Whether that means Nathan or Mooney spends time down back at various points of the game is debatable right now...but the key is under no circumstances do we compromise our ability to score more than our opposition.

Bartel comes in for Byrnes...and if Rooke is fit Varcoe should make way. If Blake pulled up sore play King otherwise I think given North's rucks are quite mobile I would be sticking with Blake for now.

WAG, from the Malcolm Blight school of thinking. I agree, there is no need for panic,we are the best team ,we keep our mettle and self belief and the rest will fall in place.

 

[winty]

Was thinking about which tall we could bring in to replace Egan, judging on form in the VFL on Sunday. Only tall I could think of is Hawkins, but he wouldn't be a replacement for Egan. Playfair has had his chance and failed to take it, Spencer would be too risky, S.Hunt and Owen are injured, and Lonergan is stuck on the rookie list.

Only other option is to include King and alternate him and Blake in the ruck, play Ottens forward and push Mooney to CHB, but if we do that we'll lose. Simple as that. Ottens is on fire in the ruck, and Mooney is our main target up forward, straightens us up and not only kicks goals but sets them up, either directly or by creating crumbs for Stokes, SJ and co. Can't rely on a Nathan and Hawkins set up either. Too young and inexperienced.

Therefore, I agree with the majority of posters here.

In: Rooke Bartel
Out: Egan Varcoe

Which will make the team look like:

B: Rooke Scarlett Mackie
HB: Milburn Harley Enright
C: Wojcinski Bartel Corey
HF: Chapman N.Ablett Kelly
F: Stokes Mooney SJ
Foll: Ottens Ablett Ling
Int: Byrnes Blake Selwood Hunt

 

[Partridge]

Using a Laidley philosophy...we need to thrive rather than just survive. We need to consider kicking more goals than them by winning the midfield and creating difficult match ups for their shorter defence. We need to consider that our defense held them just a couple of weeks ago without Egan doing that much on the day so backing them to do that again. We need to consider making them drop a taller forward back and unsettling their line up rather than being too reactive and defensive ourselves.

Bartel comes in for Byrnes...and if Rooke is fit Varcoe should make way. If Blake pulled up sore play King otherwise I think given North's rucks are quite mobile I would be sticking with Blake for now.

I agree with most of that, but I have to keep asking this - how the hell does Varcoe keep his spot ahead of Byrnes??? Byrnes kicked 2 goals and played a solid game on Saturday night. Varcoe did nothing. Zero. Again. And his alleged skill - "defensive pressure" was non-existent. He should be the first one dropped.

I can't see them making more than 3 changes at most.

In: Bartel, Rooke, King (perhaps)
Out: Varcoe, Byrnes, Blake (perhaps)

In that order too. They may gamble and also throw in Hawkins to stretch North's backline. You never know.

 

[coaster1]

For me it is

In: Bartel, Rooke and Hawkins
Out: Egan, Byrnes, Varcoe

Hawkins to stretch roos defence, allows us to rotate 3 talls and still have Otto play loose across half back.

If Otto goes fwd we can use Nathan/Mooney across HB on a rotation

Mooney, Nathan, Hawkins all would take a good defender
small fwds Johnno, Chappy, Stokes Kelly

not worried as we can cover most injuries and still have the attacking power needed.


Should win by at least 5 goals

 

[Gaz_Brownlow]

As i see it we have a few considerations

Foremost is that North Melbourne do play tall in attack and are good overhead....Especially when you throw in Hale and Mcintosh. We really do need another tall option pushing back and our Rucks have to be prepared to sacrifice their attacking game somewhat to help out.

The King vs Blake debate is as even as they get. King is not finished in the AFL, in fact i imagine there will be some keen bids on him come trade time. He is still a valuable player, and just so happens to play his best footy as a defensive ruck. Blake is damn good, and offers a better tap rucking option, but his defensive pressure is not on par with Kings (just look at Kings effective spoiling and tackling).

We need to be careful with whomever we bring in, it is important to still allow Scarlett freedom and for Harley to be able to zone off and provide marking support around the prime scoring zone (has anyone noticed how good he has been in this role this year?). Rooke would seem like a solid choice, especially on Cory Jones, but as was pointed out earlier, Rooke is more of a hard nut midfielder - still he gets the nod from me for a back pocket role, possibly rotating with Enright on Harvey.

The weather is going to be crucial, if it is dry, then Tomohawk needs to be considered for Varcoe as he will present a massive problem to their defense with Ablett, Mooney, and Tomohawk (even Johnson) capable of strong overhead marking.

The other major issue is making too many changes to a succesfull outfit. Thats why i would go with Rooke, Bartel and Tomahawk for Varcoe, Egan and Byrnes.

Maybe King for Blake, but this would be too many changes i feel.

 

[PoidaCat]

For me it is

In: Bartel, Rooke and Hawkins

I'm actually leaning towards that now aswell.

Keep MOONEY FOWARD though! If he goes down back I will probably end up in hospital with either a) A heart attack, b) A stroke.

Hawkins will mean more acountability for North.

If they stack their Foward Line with talls we should bring on Hawkins.

This will either mean that they man him up. So talls are on talls.

Or we both have tall foward lines and trust our midfielders to win more of the ball.

 

[year of the cat]

I agree with most of that, but I have to keep asking this - how the hell does Varcoe keep his spot ahead of Byrnes??? Byrnes kicked 2 goals and played a solid game on Saturday night. Varcoe did nothing. Zero. Again. And his alleged skill - "defensive pressure" was non-existent. He should be the first one dropped.

I can't see them making more than 3 changes at most.

In: Bartel, Rooke, King (perhaps)
Out: Varcoe, Byrnes, Blake (perhaps)

In that order too. They may gamble and also throw in Hawkins to stretch North's backline. You never know.

I watched the game again and can't see how Byrnes has been given all the credit that he has. In my opinion he kicked two goals and that was about it - one of the goals being from a free kick. Byrnes is a hack and cannot be relied upon in finals simple as that.

With regard to changes for this week I am in two minds. Either just do the minimal changes as you have suggested above, but to me that leaves us a bit exposed if either Harley or Scarlett go down. The other option is to bring Hawkins in (a gamble I know) which forces the Kangaroos to play an extra tall down back. I still don't know the answer. We will probably still win regardless of what we do if we win enough of the footy in the midfield anyway...

I am also a little worried about bringing both Rooke and King in together. Both are injury prone which risks possible problems if one/both go down. Whilst I think a fit King would be the best option I still have nightmares about the Sydney SF a couple of years ago when we fell to pieces when King's hammy went.

 

[cat_fanatic]

I watched the game again and can't see how Byrnes has been given all the credit that he has. In my opinion he kicked two goals and that was about it - one of the goals being from a free kick. Byrnes is a hack and cannot be relied upon in finals simple as that.

With regard to changes for this week I am in two minds. Either just do the minimal changes as you have suggested above, but to me that leaves us a bit exposed if either Harley or Scarlett go down. The other option is to bring Hawkins in (a gamble I know) which forces the Kangaroos to play an extra tall down back. I still don't know the answer. We will probably still win regardless of what we do if we win enough of the footy in the midfield anyway...

I am also a little worried about bringing both Rooke and King in together. Both are injury prone which risks possible problems if one/both go down. Whilst I think a fit King would be the best option I still have nightmares about the Sydney SF a couple of years ago when we fell to pieces when King's hammy went.

I also watched the game again and came to the same conclusion.

Whenever we scored a point or Brisbane rushed a behind it seemed that the player kicking it in would alway look for Byrnes' man as Byrnes is weak/small and easily out-marked.

There must have been five or six occasions where Byrnes' man took the overhead mark which would then result in a forward fifty entry to the Lions.

It is not just the fact that he has a poor kicking efficiency and no goal sense that i want him out, its his lack of ability in contested situations.

 

[Cattery]

Bartel comes in for Byrnes...and if Rooke is fit Varcoe should make way. If Blake pulled up sore play King otherwise I think given North's rucks are quite mobile I would be sticking with Blake for now.

Pretty much agreed with all you said until I arrived at that last sentence.

Now I realise you hold Travis in fairly high regard, and possibly it's just rehashing what's already been discussed before, but like Partridge I'm surprised, well amazed actually, at how you would drop Byrnes before Varcoe.

 

[WE Are Geelong]

Pretty much agreed with all you said until I arrived at that last sentence.

Now I realise you hold Travis in fairly high regard, and possibly it's just rehashing what's already been discussed before, but like Partridge I'm surprised, well amazed actually, at how you would drop Byrnes before Varcoe.

I do hold Travis in fairly high regard...but I think as a young kid his season has pretty much run its race on present form.

The real question is do I rate Byrnes? Not really. He always plays his best footy in games where we always look like winning...take Saturday night against the Lions for example.

I think both should be dropped but if I had to make a choice between the two I will always pick a player who can at least do something with the footy when he gets it under pressure. Varcoe can also lay a decent tackle and come finals that will be important.

Finals is about pressure, tackling and quick thinking....so Byrnes isnt my first pick even if he looks more likely to get the footy. There is more to it than that simplistic analysis.

 

[WE Are Geelong]

I agree with most of that, but I have to keep asking this - how the hell does Varcoe keep his spot ahead of Byrnes??? Byrnes kicked 2 goals and played a solid game on Saturday night. Varcoe did nothing. Zero. Again. And his alleged skill - "defensive pressure" was non-existent. He should be the first one dropped.

I can't see them making more than 3 changes at most.

In: Bartel, Rooke, King (perhaps)
Out: Varcoe, Byrnes, Blake (perhaps)

In that order too. They may gamble and also throw in Hawkins to stretch North's backline. You never know.

Read above for response to same query on Varcoe. I agree he is not in good form but he has more chance of doing something in a pressure cooker game on a big ground than Byrnes IMO. Has a bit more size, is quicker, makes better decisions, can tackle.

If Byrnes gets picked Sunday and plays well I will be the first to say I was wrong and well done to him. The reality is we agree...both should be dropped.

 

[Rosso]

Dropping Byrnes & Varcoe probably won't happen. Bomber won't drop two players with decent leg speed. With the game being on Sunday 4 will be named (with Ego out of course), most likely out of Rooke, Bartel, Playfair / Hawkins & King . I'd imagine that, combined with there being no VFL match for us this week would keep them guessing. Rooke & Bartel I think will be the end result with Ego and Varcoe to miss.

 

[Hoffy95]

Interesting about the talk of Hawkins as a possible inclusion.

I agree that he will force North to be more accountable, thus potentially drawing someone they would normally try and use up forward (to exploit the lack of height Egan's absence leaves), like a Leigh Brown or Drew Petrie.

Drawing someone like Petrie back would be a win in my eyes and make life more comfortable for the backmen.

I really don't think it will happen though.

I still think the only changes will be:
IN: Rooke, Bartel,
Out: Egan, Varcoe

As I've said in previous posts, Harley will go to CHB, and that is fine...he has played there plenty of times.

Now the empty back pocket needs to get filled by either Rooke or possibly Enright if Boomer's going to stay up forward mostly, as he can just follow him around the general backline area.

Basically, Bomber will back the men that have done the job back there all year minus Egan, and so he should. We all should have confidence in the guys that have done so well there all year, and we don't need some radical solution to fix Egan's absence.

We have two great players coming back in Bartel and Rooke.

Look on the brightside, we will be naming a bloody good side still, and if we only have the one gun player out through injury coming into the finals, then we are a pretty lucky side.