Taylor Out ?

[Jumping Jack]

Based on a conversation late today and a few snippets out of the club this week I'm tipping that Harry Taylor will miss out this week.

Bomber has been big on a "horses for courses" approach to team selection. Logically it stands to reason that with the Dogs going smaller in their forward line (apart from Minson resting) there might not be a match up for Taylor. Milburn exposed Minson last time and had plenty of the ball all day.

Welsh and Johnson are mid size and more suited to Scarlett - Harley - Hunt ...... the longer the week goes on I think Harry might get a week off.

 

[Vegas.]

While you are right re: horses for courses, I think the two forced outs of Pris and Chapman would make them pretty reluctant to make more changes.

 

[shake_and_bake]

i agree. i never thought of that. kelly wojo and gamble in maybe?

 

[SJ]

Surely we can't drop him, we need him the week after with as much experience as possible.

 

[rizzo]

No chance. We should have learned something from the roos game earlier in the year. Never base our selections on how big or small their forward line is. We got exposed that day, and if we do it again the dogs will find a way to expose us.

 

[cats2rise]

If we drop him this week, we cant drop someone else for him the week after. I dont want any changes between the prelim and the grand final!

 

[Vegas.]

If we drop him this week, we cant drop someone else for him the week after. I dont want any changes between the prelim and the grand final!

Chapman?

 

[catempire]

I can see both sides to this coin.

On the one hand, this is a preliminary final and the best team possible must be picked having regard to what we are up against and what will give us the best chance possible of winning. If there's no matchup for Taylor (I say "if"), then the argument for playing him ahead of someone else that could be more damaging (e.g. Wojcinski) is weak.

On the other, stability is a key ingredient at this time of year. To drop someone with the intention of bringing them back a week later doesn't sit well with me. Taylor has earned his spot through solid performances and there needs to be a strong argument for the player who would replace him if we are going to go down that path.

At this stage, I'm willing to put faith in the proven performers that are the Match Committee. That is unless they start to entertain bringing back Byrnes again!

 

[Jumping Jack]

Surely we can't drop him, we need him the week after with as much experience as possible.

I think he'd be guaranteed to play in the GF if we got through.

I'm not saying I agree with the decision if they go with it ......... merely passing on what I'm told. We will have to wait and see.

 

[cats2rise]

Well apart from that..

 

[Turbocat]

Assuming we get thru to the GF , who would then get the "Mark Blake" to bring him back in because a Roughead/Franklin - Riewoldt/Kozy would demand his selection.

For mine , even if there is no match up deep in D , the kid could play further up the ground even as a HFF. He can jump & mark and certainly can kick well on the run.
The point is he deserves his spot and would be required the week after. Do we really want to drop a player for the GF and get them offside? I dont think so.

One chance. Bomber listed several players tonight on AW as a chance fro the side this week. One was Hogan. He would be a better in and probably would be just happy to get his first gig let alone stay in for the GF.

 

[darren forssman]

i would have thought he was a perfect match up for robert murphy...

 

[year of the cat]

After listening to Bomber this evening I would back that the two changes would be Kelly and Gamble in for Prismall and Chappie. He had to be prompted Wojcinski's name by Healy when asked those who are in line to come in (but duly said "..of course Wojcinski"). Maybe I am reading too much into an oversight.

Three changes to a winning team would be a little dangerous in my mind. May depend on the conditions forecast as much as matchups?

 

[Cat_Lady19]

NOOOOOOO!!!!!

I thought the same a good match up for robert murphy and i dont think he will be dropped with losing chappy but i spose you never know. Hope not

 

[Scuderia]

After listening to Bomber this evening I would back that the two changes would be Kelly and Gamble in for Prismall and Chappie. He had to be prompted Wojcinski's name by Healy when asked those who are in line to come in (but duly said "..of course Wojcinski"). Maybe I am reading too much into an oversight.

Three changes to a winning team would be a little dangerous in my mind. May depend on the conditions forecast as much as matchups?

It's interesting actually, the woja thing - I can't see how they'll bring him back at this stage of the year as it seems to late to get AFL match practice into him. If he doesn't make the cut for the dogs game then it's pretty obvious he won't be a dual premiership player this year.. (barring some injury concerns).

Meh... I sound like Captain Obvious

 

[thejester]

You could flip the height issue the other way - throw him down forward and really stretch the Dogs defence.

 

[jman_cool]

Taylor will most likely play on big Will as the dogs will try and stretch us like the Roos did with Hale.

 

[bigcatman]

harry will play


play on will


i dont think dasher has the height for will

 

[bingle]

he has to play i think. And yes i think Robert Murphy could be a good match up for him.

and given we have no reserves playing right now i think (touch wood) we need to go into this game with the side we'd have in next week as well. Chapman aside.

 

[fpm84]

Am I right in thinking that Harry played on Mitch Hahn last time we played them?

I remember Hanh and Murphy having very little impact, and both were in good form leading up to that game.

It's a tough one at the selection table. If we win this week, we'll need Harry in the grand final to help combat the tall forwards of either Hawthorn or St Kilda (the way he played in the qualifying final would give him first crack at Riewoldt again if we played St Kilda).

There would be a match up for him tomorrow, but it's not as vital as needing him against one of the other teams. I can see the merits in dropping Taylor and bringing in Gamble to try and stretch the Dogs' defence.

The only certainty is Kelly to come in for Prismall. The rest will be revealed later today...

 

[HBF]

If we drop him this week, we cant drop someone else for him the week after. I dont want any changes between the prelim and the grand final!

I would have thought Chapman was a certainty to come back into the team should the Cats progress through to the GF.

 

[fpm84]

I would have thought Chapman was a certainty to come back into the team should the Cats progress through to the GF.

He is, should he be fit. It looks like Varcoe will keep his spot for tomorrow night, but he'd be one to make way for Chapman should we make it to next week.

 

[My5t3r10u5]

He is, should he be fit. It looks like Varcoe will keep his spot for tomorrow night, but he'd be one to make way for Chapman should we make it to next week.

More likely to be whoever they bring in this week for Chappy, ie. Gamble, Wojo or Byrnes. Unless of course Varcoe has a shocker or there is another injury.

 

[fpm84]

More likely to be whoever they bring in this week for Chappy, ie. Gamble, Wojo or Byrnes. Unless of course Varcoe has a shocker or there is another injury.

Agree on Gamble and/or Byrnes, but if Wojcinski makes it back tomorrow night and plays well I can't see him being dropped for the GF. He's too experienced and valuable.

I like Varcoe and think he'll be a very valuable player in coming years, but I don't know if he's up to the pressure of prelim/grand finals yet. We saw how some of our players - Blake, Selwood and even Harley among them - make uncharacteristic errors in last year's prelim. I hope they are more prepared tomorrow.

 

[Neville Bartos]

Can you play him as a forward? He would certainly stretch their backline and at least he's on the field should Minson decide to start annihilating your backline (however unlikely)