Did you honestly expect any of those guys to play?
Yeah Brick definitely robbed.
Pumped.
Would have liked to go even faster with McKenna or Long, but the balance is about as good as we could have it at this stage.
Go Dons! Letās put the last 4 years behind us and letās make the future awesome!!
I have already done that trip, you going to the march?
One
The way some people carry on, youād think we were going up against a Ruck Combo of Nic Nat and Goldstein.
McEvoy is a good player, but a below average tap ruckman.
McKernan should be able to compete with him.
Effectively, weāve forgone the extra tall forward in Stewart, but with Langford and Watson likely to share forward duties, weāve got plenty of height.
I like the team except for perhaps 1 more grunt mid.
I wonder how long we will continue playing ALL of Goddard, Kelly and Stanton in the same game ?
I think we should rotate them.
Will there be a Smack free kick count?
I would have liked the extra tall up forward, especially with Laverde out, but hopefully Langford can play that role a bit. And those smalls will really stretch Hawthorn.
Smack will be ok to ruck solo for a week, heāll tire quickly though.
Iām surprised we didnāt go with an extra defensive mid in Hocking or Bird, but seeing as though Woosha doesnāt tag at allā¦
Itās a decent side, a lot to be excited about.
[quote=ācul_de_sac, post:81, topic:10057ā
Did you honestly expect any of those guys to play?
[/quote]
I expect nothing, bagarse my friend.
What I think they should have done is another matter entirely.
To leave out McKenna, the best field kick weāve got, is not a wise move.
Iād have cousin McGrath and Baguley in the Magoos for a few weeksā fine-tuning. Langford, too, for that matter.
One of Francis and Begley should be in, along with Dea.
Thatās nowhere near as important as the phucking rucking. Weāll likely get murdered without a real ruckman.
I donāt believe Ambrose will start in the ruck; itāll be SMacK. Ambrose is no ruckman, though heās a ā ā ā ā ā ā fine defender; SMacK is not a real ruckman, either ā heās an old-style ruck-rover (and occasional KPF), just like Hughie Mitchell.
Even if it means bringing the rookie in, for two weeks, they should try it out, and use SMacK to spell him. Or Stewart !!
Surely they wonāt play 4 tall forwards all at once? If they do weāre probably looking at a Gleeson/Pops Kelly on Gunston matchup.
Reckon we will run over them if both teams play selected.
I expect nothing, bagarse my friend.
What I think they should have done is another matter entirely.
To leave out McKenna, the best field kick weāve got, is not a wise move.
Iād have cousin McGrath and Baguley in the Magoos for a few weeksā fine-tuning. Langford, too, for that matter.
One of Francis and Begley should be in, along with Dea.
Thatās nowhere near as important as the phucking rucking. Weāll likely get murdered without a real ruckman.
I donāt believe Ambrose will start in the ruck; itāll be SMacK. Ambrose is no ruckman, though heās a ā ā ā ā ā ā fine defender; SMacK is not a real ruckman, either ā heās an old-style ruck-rover (and occasional KPF), just like Hughie Mitchell.
Even if it means bringing the rookie in, for two weeks, they should try it out, and use SMacK to spell him. Or Stewart !!
[/quote]
Thanks for the weird insult for no apparent reason.
Francis needs to be able to show he can run games out, McKennaās game is defensively incomplete and he still does weird things under pressure, while Begley has done nothing compared to someone like Langford. These are the guys that need fine tuning in the VFL and should all get a chance at somepoint, whereas McGrath looks pretty plug and play right now.
I donāt know who these real ruckmen are. Stewart would have been in strong consideration for the relief role (and could still come in), but heās still just about as much of a ruckman as Daniher is, and at this point in time Draper has only just started full training after beginning pre-season as the player on the list furthest away from a senior game.
Gee, looking at their line-up I would have been tempted to play Matty Dea. He is perfectly suited to playing on some of the oppositionās lesser rated but still taller opponents.
Hurley -> Roughead
Hartley -> Vickery/McEvoy
Ambrose -> Gunston
Dea-> Schoenmakers
Given how they like to have Gibson absolved of the responsibility of a direct opponent, there is the distinct possibility that they play Frawley and Schoenmakers as their true Key Defenders on Joe and Hooker. Allowing Gibson to play the role he admittedly does quite well.
Even if they opt for this though, they still have Sicily who plays like a Key forward who they can throw up there to stretch us.
This probably makes me pretty sad but when Iām at the game live this is sort of stuff I look out for. Fascinates me to see how they are matching up in response to how the opposition do. The merry go round of match-ups.
i.e. in order to gain a competitive advantage in one area, they may take a gamble in another area.
For a day or so, it looked like l was going to have make a flying visit home. l would have flown overnight Friday and gone straight from Tulla to the march. No need to go now, but in spirit l will be marching with all all of you.
Love how riled up people get about the āpositionsā stated in the team line up. As if there are still wingman etc.
Why wasnāt it the team vs Whorethong?
And Ryan Schoenmakers can man up on himself.
I like Long, but no, wouldnāt put him in yet. Still got a long way to go, I reckon. McKenna on the other hand, yes. Hereās hoping he gets some games this year so heāll be ready to go for next year with Kelly not there to take his spot.
dafuq? Langford, excellent during the JLT has to fine tune in the Twoāsā¦ meanwhile Francis whoās played 1 VFL practice match comes inā¦ there is absolutely no logic in that. In spite of Francisā obvious and undeniable talent. Begleyā¦ Begley played 1 decent game and wasnāt sighted in the other.
Langford averaged about 20 disposals a game across the JLT, based on normalized 80% TOG, and hit the scoreboard. He shouldnāt be dropped for the next 5 years!
Jeepers!
If there was a late change, Dea in would be the only one Iād expect, barring injury of course. Possibly for Green, whoād be mighty stiff but the first out on balance. Langford to the HFF, where heāll play anyway, Dea onto that mid sized tall forward you describe. Heād add to our intercept marking capability also.
I guess if their talls really got a hold of us we could always swing Hooker back to help out, although weād be full mosquito fleet spec up forward in that instance.
Whether you were referring to me or not, Iād like to add:
Although the concept has been somewhat diluted, the basic principle of having ākey position playersā who serve the purpose first and foremost as marking targets or aerial threats, still exists.
What I was referring to in my previous post were the potential match-ups tomorrow night among these guys. Are they match-ups within the context of some sort of zone? Yeah at times.
Iām going to give Gleeson a chance this year after not last year. Would have preferred to see Dea in but heās there to rebound given our ruck issues. Chance for Gleeson to shine s our depth wonāt allow too many freebie selections at half back this year.