Preview Sydney Swans vs Port Adelaide Power, Rd 15, Saturday June 26 @ Adelaide Oval

[SwansProudly]

We are excited too Errol

 

[caesar88]

Still twitch every time I see Hewett named in defence. I'll allow it if he's tagging Rozee.

I hope he's in the midfield tagging Wines.

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

Why drop Logan thats just one less focus point forward.

 

[Bloods86]

You can tell Longmire's emphasis by the INs and outs this week. The main one being Macdonald out for Brand. Gulden on for Wicks is like for like. But to send a key forward out for a key back trumpets a total defensive mindset.

I think the three talls would have been very beneficial against Port, who are a little undersized in defence. But not to be. This now puts far more pressure on Amartey and Franklin. Franklin has never been a pack mark specialist and for a few weeks now we have seen him in that sort of role. Not his forte. As far actually taking a pack Mark it will be left to Amartey and Hickey

On JAT-L29 using BigFooty.com mobile app

At the same time, you don't want to load up too much on talls. I'm hoping we can be solid at the back, allowing for turnovers and rebound, with decent delivery into the forward line and hey presto you don't need pack marks (I definitely wouldn't rate McDonald over Buddy or Amartey in this anyway). Heeney, Papley and Hayward become just as dangerous as a hulking brute (which we don't have on our list) and Reid is injured as our best relief mark anyway.

If we end up bombing it into F50, we've lost the game regardless.

 

[Wolftone]

Pack marks? Most effective i50s this season have been medium kicks to leads or one-on-ones. Bombing to packs is not a typical forward entry.

I agree with that but when there is no alternative, in other words all options are covered, you need coverage

On JAT-L29 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[S120]

Interesting as well from a strategy perspective that we're going with one less tall forward to take on Aliir et al. I now suspect Hayward might get the job to occupy Aliir.

 

[sthmelb_dimmies]

Why drop Logan thats just one less focus point forward.

So that the team gains a KPD?

 

[Onwards_to_victory]

Why drop McDonald

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

So that the team gains a KPD?

Bell is still in the side.

 

[Punts]

McDonald should not have been dropped imo

 

[Nuggetz]

Also sensing swapping a tall for another tall rather than a small/mid sized player means we want to have some pace in the game style. I don't mind it, Amartey has been in good form. Also forces our players to lower their eyes and hit targets going inside fwd 50 with our smaller fwd line.

 

[Nuggetz]

I'm more worried about the long gameday preparation for the players. Have heard they fly in several hours before the match, do their tests, wait for results then play the match.

 

[Wolfgang West]

Maybe he isn't. Maybe he is though. Crazy to think but he's actually only played 4 games for us. And never in consecutive weeks.

Guys who seem to have preference over him like Melican and Fox (and even Rampe and McCartin) have had more poor games in that time than Brand but are at least given chances to atone.

And down the other end, Horse has stuck fat with McLean and McDonald's not-so-great games for the sake of keeping structure. But he doesn't seem as willing to do so with Brand... Very strange.

Agree. Hasn't been played enough to get that answer. Which I've always thought why the **** pick him up ? Roos was always good at playing blokes for blocks of games to find out just that. Use Ted Richards as an example. Told what he was specifically brought into the club to do, was tried at it and look how that turned out. Got to give Brand a block of games and he either sinks or swims. Only opinion I have of the bloke of the small sample size we have had is he has a crack, has reasonable size and strength for the position he was supposed to fill but can he play ? Would not have a ****ing clue.

 

[mikey_san]

You'd' all surely have to concede Amartey did more than McD last game. His time will come.
Heeney plays bigger than he is with his marking too. A mobile 3rd marking option and Hayward too. I like it.

Sanity to see Brand picked. Allowing McCartin a bit more freedom to intercept.

 

[swanssince2002]

Sorta get the selections but gee the Swans match committee must be really seething about Blakey's performance against Freo. Resulted in a long stint in the 2s... not high on Blakey but sorta expected him there in place of Bell at least.

 

[mikey_san]

Agree. Hasn't been played enough to get that answer. Which I've always thought why the **** pick him up ? Roos was always good at playing blokes for blocks of games to find out just that. Use Ted Richards as an example. Told what he was specifically brought into the club to do, was tried at it and look how that turned out. Got to give Brand a block of games and he either sinks or swims. Only opinion I have of the bloke of the small sample size we have had is he has a crack, has reasonable size and strength for the position he was supposed to fill but can he play ? Would not have a ****ing clue.

We've seen him do a decent job on opposition bigs a few times now. I don't need him to be peeling off defenders and initiating the offense.
I want him stopping their bigs get easy markNgoals. That's it. That's the job IMHO.

 

[Bloods86]

Sorta get the selections but gee the Swans match committee must be really seething about Blakey's performance against Freo. Resulted in a long stint in the 2s... not high on Blakey but sorta expected him there in place of Bell at least.

He also needs to show he deserves his spot back. There's a few in ressies I'd bring in before him.

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

Sorta get the selections but gee the Swans match committee must be really seething about Blakey's performance against Freo. Resulted in a long stint in the 2s... not high on Blakey but sorta expected him there in place of Bell at least.

Blakey against Freo was just putrid.

 

[caesar88]

Have a feeling that Horse suspected it was a fool's errand trying to negate a back-line of Aliir, Jonas, Houston, McKenzie and Burton (all good in the air) with our young talls of McDonald & Amartey. Trying to kick to them all night would just be playing into Port's hands. I suspect we're going for more of a ground level game inside 50.

Which is fine, but it relies on two things: precise delivery and forward pressure. If we don't bring either, then we'll just be left wondering why the hell we don't look like scoring.

 

[Wolfgang West]

So ronke then if gulden not ready

We need forward pressure as we lack it and ball walks out

That is the only reason you would play him. Waste of time having him not being able to get his hands on the footy and Papley with lets face it spasmodic in and out of the game footy he is producing.

 

[Dubai Quacker]

Bell < McD
Bell < Stephens
Bell < Blakey

And yet Bell gets selected. Again.

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

Bell < McD
Bell < Stephens
Bell < Blakey

And yet Bell gets selected. Again.

Not sure on Blakey lol but the rest offer more than Bell.

 

[Donza]

Errol in is fantastic.

I've never met a Errol i didn't like.









*never actually met a Errol.

 

[Donza]

Bell < McD
Bell < Stephens
Bell < Blakey

And yet Bell gets selected. Again.

Bell was better than McD, DS and the lizard vs Hawthorn.

 

[SeanM]

I don't mind the changes. Good to have an extra tall defender in Brand. Hopefully Fox plays more of a running role off half back.

I don't think Mcdonald takes a lot of pack marks at this stage of his career. He seems to play more like a medium forward making smart leads.