Prediction 2023 - Best 22 + Emergencies - Rolling

[Blue By Blood]

Little bit of a different setup I’ve been tinkering with. I wouldn’t mind seeing how the team goes lining up like this.

FB: McGovern, Weitering, Boyd
HB: Williams, S.Durdin, Saad
CT: Acres, Cerra, Walsh
HF: Martin, Young, C. Curnow
FF: Motlop, McKay, Durdin
RU: De Koning, Cripps, Hewett

INT: Kennedy, Docherty, Marchbank, JSOS/Kemp, Pittonet (if 5 bench is introduced)

Main things here:
1. Young is moved up forward and becomes the chop out ruck instead of JSOS. My thinking here may change if they introduce 5 bench spots and we are able to take the 2 genuine rucks in. I’d still like to see how this setup goes though. S. Durdin I feel can adequately replace Young down back in this setup. This makes Charlie the third tall where he clearly has the mobility and x-factor to shred teams.
2. Boyd makes the backline look better balanced. Is able to play on the opposition’s best small and lock down. Tidy skills also, which I think needs to be a priority for this team going forward.
3. Marchbank and McGovern to interchange. I’m torn on Gov because I really still think he should be forward as the third tall. He’s dynamic, quick off the mark and basically more of a goal threat than JSOS. The only reason he ‘failed’ up forward is the injuries and lack of continuity in my opinion. Plus I don’t recall him playing a large chunk with both Charlie and H at the same time. So I’d love to see that that would work.
4. Walsh to spend a good chunk of the time on the wing where his running power has more impact.
5. Martin retains the half forward spot for now but I’d not at all be surprised to see Cuningham be the preferred option if he has a healthy run at it. Though there is room for both as they are both pure class at top flight. Kennedy is like to see spend chunks of time forward too. He’s strong above his head and a nice shot at goal.


Issues:
1. We need to work out what our best ruck setup looks like.
2. We need to address who plays as the third tall up forward. That’s a clear weak area for us. Love JSOS but I don’t think we are dangerous or dynamic enough up forward with him as the third tall. Would have loved Gunston for this reason.
3. Our small forwards are only young but we need greater defensive pressure out of them and more scoreboard impact.
4. Intrigued as to what we do with the wings. O’Brien showed some nice progression but we obviously look better with Acres out on one wing (more height and better aerially) and with Walsh on the other.
5. We need at least one of Kemp, Philp, Carroll to step up and become a best 22. Can see why the club is targeting a draft refresh this year as we need to keep the young talent up after failing with Setters, SPS, Stocker, and potentially Dow.

 

[gbatman]

5 on the bench solidifies Silvagni's spot in the side IMO. Silvagni played his best footy as a 4th tall forward who does not ruck and the footy he played was good enough to be in a good side. Silvagni as a key position or third tall as a forward has always been poor.

IMO this puts him in a position where the coach is not looking to replace him as a forward ruck with TDK, rather he is competing with someone like Owies or Honey and puts him in a far more favourable role in the side.

5 on the bench, I'm going like this.

Marchbank Weitering McGovern
Saad Young Docherty
Acres Cripps O'Brien
Fisher Curnow Martin
Silvagni McKay Durdin
Pittonet Walsh Cerra
Williams Kennedy Hewett Motlop DeKoning

5 on the bench suites us pretty well, we have two ruck and one who can be thrown forward however.

Teams are going to hate that we have two third tall types who play very tall and can run like small defenders, especially if we play a pressure game around the footy. I like Boyd and Newman in the team but where do you put them?

Bench is stacked with talent. Structure is good. Forward line has some competition for spots.

 

[JuddgementDay]

5 on the bench solidifies Silvagni's spot in the side IMO. Silvagni played his best footy as a 4th tall forward who does not ruck and the footy he played was good enough to be in a good side. Silvagni as a key position or third tall as a forward has always been poor.

IMO this puts him in a position where the coach is not looking to replace him as a forward ruck with TDK, rather he is competing with someone like Owies or Honey and puts him in a far more favourable role in the side.

5 on the bench, I'm going like this.

Marchbank Weitering McGovern
Saad Young Docherty
Acres Cripps O'Brien
Fisher Curnow Martin
Silvagni McKay Durdin
Pittonet Walsh Cerra
Williams Kennedy Hewett Motlop DeKoning

5 on the bench suites us pretty well, we have two ruck and one who can be thrown forward however.

Teams are going to hate that we have two third tall types who play very tall and can run like small defenders, especially if we play a pressure game around the footy. I like Boyd and Newman in the team but where do you put them?

Bench is stacked with talent. Structure is good. Forward line has some competition for spots.

Damn - that’s a good, balanced and likely 23…

But, I’m squeezing in Cunners, Boyd & Kemp in for whom?
Probably LOB, Durdin & Pitto

There’s a good argument for each inclusion.

Not as balanced as your team though!

 

[The Blue Weirdo]

5 on the bench solidifies Silvagni's spot in the side IMO. Silvagni played his best footy as a 4th tall forward who does not ruck and the footy he played was good enough to be in a good side. Silvagni as a key position or third tall as a forward has always been poor.

IMO this puts him in a position where the coach is not looking to replace him as a forward ruck with TDK, rather he is competing with someone like Owies or Honey and puts him in a far more favourable role in the side.

5 on the bench, I'm going like this.

Marchbank Weitering McGovern
Saad Young Docherty
Acres Cripps O'Brien
Fisher Curnow Martin
Silvagni McKay Durdin
Pittonet Walsh Cerra
Williams Kennedy Hewett Motlop DeKoning

5 on the bench suites us pretty well, we have two ruck and one who can be thrown forward however.

Teams are going to hate that we have two third tall types who play very tall and can run like small defenders, especially if we play a pressure game around the footy. I like Boyd and Newman in the team but where do you put them?

Bench is stacked with talent. Structure is good. Forward line has some competition for spots.

Looks too tall for me, I hope we don't play Gov, Marchy and JSOS together.

 

[gbatman]

Looks too tall for me, I hope we don't play Gov, Marchy and JSOS together.

No such thing as too tall. There is such thing as too immobile, slow and lacking running capacity however. This is where the illusion of too tall comes from in footy as taller players are often weaker in these areas than shorter players, when they are not then they aren't "too tall".

The way I see it, McGovern is one of the fastest at the club, has proven to be extremely efficient at running both ways and is fine at ground level.

Marchbank is not far off in terms of McGovern's pace and when at full fitness has the ability to play a fair bit on the wing so he's an elite two way runner, he's also decent at ground level.

Having two tallish, 191cm 193cm players who can do everything your average back pocket or half back can do is going to be a hell of an advantage with their ability to impact in the air and in that team defensive structure.

Both these guys smash Stocker in these departments and he played as a small defender last year, they both match Newman as well who also plays as a smaller defender.

Don't let height fool you, it's about run.

 

[gbatman]

Damn - that’s a good, balanced and likely 23…

But, I’m squeezing in Cunners, Boyd & Kemp in for whom?
Probably LOB, Durdin & Pitto

There’s a good argument for each inclusion.

Not as balanced as your team though!

It's tough as the team has genuine depth.

Kemp you would think would be in the too good for VFL category. But I have him having a big development year as an inside mid who goes forward, IMO that is what he should be developed as.

Carroll I expect will be pushing extremely hard for a spot in the AFL side next season. Mids who are so good with ball in hand, can find it and have an inside and outside game are too good to leave in reserve. In and out of the team for a bit or perhaps he takes the other wing.

Newman and Boyd are both very good defenders with very good kicks but can't squeeze them in. Unless a defender pushes up to the midfield, Williams to wing, Docherty on the ball etc.

Owies in the first half of the season was a lock but I have him missing. Durdin a bit better, Motlop going past everyone, Fisher and Martin probably locks. Competing with Silvagni for that smaller forward / 4th marking forward position.

Dow will kill the VFL next year but will he get a look in at AFL level. Hoping his 30 possession VFL games become 40 possession ones.

Cuningham on talent I thought at one stage fits into our team but he's going to have to earn it, but gee he could. However has to come back better than what he was and may take a bit of time to get fit and settle back in, shame he didn't finish playing.

Cottrell was solid last year but I don't have him there.

Honey has a lot of talent, but the forward line is getting tight for spots.

Philp could come one, like a player who has pace and plays hard effort footy.

O'Brien was our best wingman last year and I think he gets the other wing. A bit of competition will come his way thought. His ability to kick to forwards is more than handy.

The list is looking like it should.

Making top 4 next year is a pass. Making bottom 4 of finals next year is a soft pass. That list should be making finals and being a serious contender. If it doesn't the fingers will be pointed at our coaching and tactics.

 

[katmanblue]

No such thing as too tall. There is such thing as too immobile, slow and lacking running capacity however. This is where the illusion of too tall comes from in footy as taller players are often weaker in these areas than shorter players, when they are not then they aren't "too tall".

The way I see it, McGovern is one of the fastest at the club, has proven to be extremely efficient at running both ways and is fine at ground level.

Marchbank is not far off in terms of McGovern's pace and when at full fitness has the ability to play a fair bit on the wing so he's an elite two way runner, he's also decent at ground level.

Having two tallish, 191cm 193cm players who can do everything your average back pocket or half back can do is going to be a hell of an advantage with their ability to impact in the air and in that team defensive structure.

Both these guys smash Stocker in these departments and he played as a small defender last year, they both match Newman as well who also plays as a smaller defender.

Don't let height fool you, it's about run.

The difference between Marchbank and McGovern he is speed of decision-making. Marchbank is a ball stopper.

On SM-F926B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[The Blue Weirdo]

The difference between Marchbank and McGovern he is speed of decision-making. Marchbank is a ball stopper.

On SM-F926B using BigFooty.com mobile app

I love Gov in defence, he's got great defensive running and tackling, but your description of Marchy is also how I see it. He might be fast on the training track but doesn't look it with acceleration and decisions on match day. JSOS looks just as dynamic as Marchy but is much more tenacious and desperate, but Kemp might be better than both this year.

 

[thylacine60]

It's tough as the team has genuine depth.

poty

 

[thylacine60]

The difference between Marchbank and McGovern he is speed of decision-making. Marchbank is a ball stopper.

On SM-F926B using BigFooty.com mobile app

gov has a laser boot..........

 

[katmanblue]

gov has a laser boot..........

Marchy ain't bad either, just take forever to decide what to do with it. meaning many options get closed down.

On SM-F926B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[thylacine60]

spot on like a spotted quoll eating crumpets with hundreds and thousands...........

 

[gbatman]

The difference between Marchbank and McGovern he is speed of decision-making. Marchbank is a ball stopper.

On SM-F926B using BigFooty.com mobile app

The difficulty is do we go with height and athleticism and that sheer ability to win the ball back in so many ways that Marchbank has or do we go with kicking and that little extra run in Boyd or good kicking and footy smarts in Newman. Marchbank's only knock is how he uses it, IMO with continuity in a good side it should improve but guys like Boyd and even Newman give us that bit extra with the footy.

McGovern is a great user of the ball, he really doesn't have a weakness in his game, super talented player apart from the injuries.

 

[gbatman]

I can see next year there being debate on who makes up our midfield and our defensive group.

Docherty, Weitering, McGovern, Williams, Saad and Young are locks. Marchbank, Newman and Boyd make up the 7th defender unless we push one into the midfield.

I think there will be a bit of competition for the onball group. I get the feeling Carroll will come on and create debate there.

Same for the wing spot. Acres is a lock for one side. O'Brien is the front runner for the other wing but Williams, Docherty, Cottrell, Cuningham and Carroll could push a strong case as well.

The forwardline is coming into the same issues as well. Motlop, Durdin, Fisher, Curnow and McKay are locks there. Martin is probably a lock. The remaining spots come out of Silvagni, Owies, Martin, and TDK if there's still 4 on the bench. Kemp, Cuningham and Honey could come on there as well.

I don't think you can get it wrong when picking a best 22/23. There is enough quality there.


Going forward, what I would like to see is that the other wing is cemented by someone. It would be good to see Kemp developed into a midfielder who can go forward and Carroll come on and for those two to put a really strong challenge to Hewett and Kennedy, our two slower midfielders. Our midfield is strong but if it lacks anything it's that midfielder who can go forward and pace.

It would also be good to see that forward/ruck position cemented which means DeKoning takes a step forward.

There is nothing really wrong with the backline unless McGovern and Marchbank can't remain fit and if Young fails to continue his development. I think we need to keep our eyes firmly on the third tall defender role and CHB position as positions we may need to fill with our recruiting going forward if things don't go to plan for us.

 

[Red Bull]

Boyd Young McGovern
Docherty Weitering Saad
Walsh Cripps Acres
Martin McKay Durdin
Motlop Curnow Kemp

Pittonet Hewett Cerra

Williams Kennedy Fisher TDK ???

Think it’s time to pull the trigger with Kemp.
He needs opportunity and we need to find out …
Cuningham and Honey need to be right on Martin’s hammer.
One of these 3 needs to break the cycle and become a permanent, dangerous member of the team.
Would like some more midfield run to support Walsh.
The final place in the team remains open …
Maybe O’Brien or Cottrell take their game to the next level ??
Maybe Dow or Carroll or Philp smash pre season and deliver on expectations ??
Or maybe Hollands is drafted and becomes the final piece of the puzzle ??
The team looks set to go.
Arguably, Andrew Russell is the most important man at Carlton this year …

 

[JuddgementDay]

I can see next year there being debate on who makes up our midfield and our defensive group.

Docherty, Weitering, McGovern, Williams, Saad and Young are locks. Marchbank, Newman and Boyd make up the 7th defender unless we push one into the midfield.

I think there will be a bit of competition for the onball group. I get the feeling Carroll will come on and create debate there.

Same for the wing spot. Acres is a lock for one side. O'Brien is the front runner for the other wing but Williams, Docherty, Cottrell, Cuningham and Carroll could push a strong case as well.

The forwardline is coming into the same issues as well. Motlop, Durdin, Fisher, Curnow and McKay are locks there. Martin is probably a lock. The remaining spots come out of Silvagni, Owies, Martin, and TDK if there's still 4 on the bench. Kemp, Cuningham and Honey could come on there as well.

I don't think you can get it wrong when picking a best 22/23. There is enough quality there.


Going forward, what I would like to see is that the other wing is cemented by someone. It would be good to see Kemp developed into a midfielder who can go forward and Carroll come on and for those two to put a really strong challenge to Hewett and Kennedy, our two slower midfielders. Our midfield is strong but if it lacks anything it's that midfielder who can go forward and pace.

It would also be good to see that forward/ruck position cemented which means DeKoning takes a step forward.

There is nothing really wrong with the backline unless McGovern and Marchbank can't remain fit and if Young fails to continue his development. I think we need to keep our eyes firmly on the third tall defender role and CHB position as positions we may need to fill with our recruiting going forward if things don't go to plan for us.

Game plan, development & better luck with injuries will determine how far we go in 2023.

I’m looking forward to selection debates each week

Not just best 22, but best 22 for a given opposition!

 

[gandaal]

B Marchbank, Weitering, McGovern
HB Saad, Young, Williams
C O'Brien, Cripps, Acres
HF Martin, McKay, Fisher
F Motlop, Curnow, Durdin
R Pitto, Walsh, Cerra
INT Docherty, Hewett, Kennedy, Silvagni
Eng: TDK, Boyd, Owies, Kemp

 

[manang magoos]

spot on like a spotted quoll eating crumpets with hundreds and thousands...........

Crumpets and hundreds and thousands surely not Thy

 

[thylacine60]

Crumpets and hundreds and thousands surely not Thy

what was I thinking........

 

[gbatman]

Game plan, development & better luck with injuries will determine how far we go in 2023.

I’m looking forward to selection debates each week

Not just best 22, but best 22 for a given opposition!

100% it now comes down to our tactics and injuries. Maturity is a factor as well, some of our prime movers need to progress there.

 

[4flagsin5yrs]

100% it now comes down to our tactics and injuries. Maturity is a factor as well, some of our prime movers need to progress there.

The last few losses of the H & A season will steel the leaders at the Club enormously.

Let's be frank - it was a huge anomaly that we missed finals this year.

Put it down to injury - I do.

Missing Hewett and Kennedy (and Walsh in Rd 23 too).

Then reality is that both Pitto and Weiters were sub (their respective) pars coming back from injury. Possibly brought back too soon?

Owies too in that camp. Was considerably off his best.

And Williams, Martin, Marchy and Guv whilst serviceable, weren't battle hardened either.

 

[gbatman]

The last few losses of the H & A season will steel the leaders at the Club enormously.

Let's be frank - it was a huge anomaly that we missed finals this year.

Put it down to injury - I do.

Missing Hewett and Kennedy (and Walsh in Rd 23 too).

Then reality is that both Pitto and Weiters were sub (their respective) pars coming back from injury. Possibly brought back too soon?

Owies too in that camp. Was considerably off his best.

And Williams, Martin, Marchy and Guv whilst serviceable, weren't battle hardened either.

Injury was only part of why we missed finals and not as big a part as many believe. We shouldn't need a best 22 side or near best 22 to just make finals.

We didn't not only miss finals due to not enough wins it was also due to percentage.

There were lots of losses and opportunities to build percentage that were not taken and not injury related.

There are two common modes of play in AFL footy and we can only play one of them it appears.

Plan 1 is about having a lose man at stoppages and it's all about ball winning, both teams attacking, a shootout for possession in the midfield. Ball comes out of stoppages with direction, run and handball due to loose players at stoppages. Defenders have to play tight, forwards do as they please. This is our one and only game mode.

Plan 2 is the one I call the Collingwood one although Hawthorn pretty much invented it and all ex-Clarkson coaches go to it. It's the game plant that has troubled us for years. Collingwood don't have a team as good as ours but they were better coached, they had a pressure game plan, apply heat, attack from behind the contest. Basically mids hunt the ball but stay close enough to their man where they can close quickly to force a pressured kick. Stops the ball going forward with direction/run/handball. Ball gets kicked blindly forward from the contest going either way. Defenders play to this, they zone, play lose and intercept. As we saw in round 23, Collingwood forced us to kick blindly forward, they play this brand of footy where defenders play loose and cut us up with intercept possessions from half back. Maynard took an obscene amount of marks etc. Again an example of our poor game plan. In this style not only do defenders play lose and look to intercept and run and gun but forwards have to cover the lose man, can't just do what they want they have to sacrifice their game and go to the man, again we failed to do this all through the season.

Not only did we fail to use this style of play to our advantage, we failed to cope with it. Teams can easily force you to play this style and when they did we failed because we didn't setup properly either side of the contest and didn't focus on applying pressure back to the opposition.

It's easy to go with plan 1 which is our only plan but when you start to dominate teams they will go to plan 2 and force you to play that way. Our team failed to identify when that was happening and to adjust to that. Our forwards in particular. This is either from lack of leadership on the field, particularly up forward or poor coaching.

Round 3 Hawthorn, should have belted then, we let them have a huge comeback and a lot of it was to do with our game plan having no good defensive structures. Hawthorn cut us up through the middle as we failed to protect the corridor and they switched to the second game plan mentioned above which brings us undone.

Round 4 Gold Coast Suns we lost to them comfortable. Again it was due to game plan, having no defensive structures and no proper setup to cope when opposition go defensive in the middle (plan 2). Went game plan 2 mentioned above from the start, applied to us and we had no answer. Not only should we have won but this should have been an easy win for a strong side. Totally out coached and caught without answers.

Round 5 Port. Belting a side and let them back in for a narrow win. Round 3 repeated. Cut up by their change of game plan and not defending the corridor/switch at all. Inability to change game plan to slow game down and maintain pressure.

Round 6 Smashed by freo, we don't travel, should not have been smashed. This is an example of where we need to be the team to instigate game plan 2 and get the game back on our terms.

Round 11 Collingwood. Completely outcoached by a team who is decent but plays a really strong game plan. One we are vulnerable too. despite losing Weitering we should have structured up better, another team that just went game plan 2 from the start as Collingwood did all year.

Round 13 Essendon. An easy win against a weak team we should have won by more though.

Round 14 Richmond. Played a terrible brand of footy in the wet. Again trying to hard to play game plan 1 I mentioned above where the second game plan was the game for this wet night, apply pressure, get it forward, make a contest. No doubt our style of play cost us this one trying to play a clean over possession low pressure game.

Round 16 St Kilda we lost to a side who at the time couldn't beat anyone. Poor kicking, poor team defence and poor intensity around the contest costing us.

Round 19 GWS definitely should have won by more. This was a poor performance.

Round 20 Adelaide A loss to a bottom side, we don't travel and don't handle a defensive contest. This is a game where we should have instigated game plan 2 very early if we had that up our sleeve as most sides do but we don't.

Round 21 Brisbane Should have put up a better contest than this, lost the shootout in our shootout style. Again another game where we needed to quickly fall back on a more pressure orientated game plan (game plan 2).

Round 22 Melbourne Did everything right, failed to apply a strong defence in the dying minutes of the game. Corridor open, backline open. Both sides went game plan 1 all night, both backing their teams ability to attack.

Round 23 Collingwood. Again their style, game plan 2 mentioned above applied to us and they were allowed to intercept and rebound freely. Our forwards failed to react to the game situation. Again it was game plan.

Injuries actually only played a small part in us not making finals. Game plan, maturity etc was the major reason. Injuries improve next season we improve too but the game plan and when to instigate changes in it need to improve. We need to be good at playing both these styles of footy and our team needs to get better at playing as and implementing things as a whole. I felt it was our forward who let us down the most in our game plan but also question just how good we are at implementing the second style of footy I mentioned in this. Considering we have a physically strong midfield, tall forwards and a really good intercepting/rebounding defence game plan 2 should be our go to game, but it's not, we don't even appear to use it so why?

Looking back at these games which I see as ones which cost us a finals berth, I can't say injury played a big part. There are far too many games where poor game plan comes into play IMO. Those let down games I mentioned above, there's plenty of them which weren't overly affected with injury. Fact is we missed out, there were 8 teams above us, some don't have as good a list as we do or as good a 22 as we had. Our team has a lot more to improve than just getting everyone on the park.

We would have not just made finals but probably finished around 4-5th if our game plan was on point. We can't keep making up excuses. Collingwood finished 4th with a new coach, new game plan and a team that wasn't better than ours in terms of personnel. Bulldog's and Richmond's team's were also not better than ours but finished above us. We under achieved, our game plan was very poor and underdeveloped. That's what cost us finals.

 

[4flagsin5yrs]

Injury was only part of why we missed finals and not as bit a part as many believe. We shouldn't need a best 22 side or near best 22 to just make finals.

We didn't not only miss finals due to not enough wins it was also due to percentage.

There were lots of losses and opportunities to build percentage that were not injury related.

There are two common modes of play in AFL footy and we can only play one of them.

Plan 1 is about having a lose man at stoppages and it's all about ball winning, both teams attacking, a shootout for possession in the midfield. Ball comes out of stoppages with direction, run and handball due to lose players at stoppages. Defenders have to play tight, forwards do as they please. This is our one and only game mode.

Plan 2 is the one I call the Collingwood one although Hawthorn pretty much invented it and all ex-Clarkson coaches go to it. Collingwood don't have a team as good as ours but they were better coached, they had a pressure game plan, apply heat, attach from behind the contest. Basically mids hunt the ball but stay close enough to their man where they can close quickly. Stops the ball going forward with direction/run/handball. Ball get kicked blindly forward from the contest going either way. Defenders play to this, they zone, play lose and intercept. As we saw in round 23, Collingwood forced us to kick blindly forward, they played lose and cut us up with intercept possessions from half back. Maynard took an obscene amount of marks. Again an example of our poor game plan. In this style not only do defenders play lose and look to intercept and run and gun but forwards have to cover the lose man, can't just do what they want they have to sacrifice their game and go to the man, again we failed to do this all through the season. Not only did we fail to use this style of play to our advantage, we failed to cope with it. Teams can easily force you to play this style and when they did we failed because we don't setup either side of the contest well enough and don't fall back to applying the pressure back well enough.

Round 3 Hawthorn, should have belted then, we let them have a huge comeback and a lot of it was to do with our game plan having no good defensive structures. Hawthorn cut us up through the middle as we failed to protect the corridor and they switched to the second game plan mentioned above.

Round 4 Gold Coast Suns we lost to them comfortable. Again it was due to game plan, having no defensive structures and no proper setup to cope when opposition go defensive in the middle, something I have harped on about a lot on here. Game plan 2 mentioned above, applied to us and we had no answer. Not only should we have won but this should have been an easy win for a strong side.

Round 5 Port. Belting a side and let them back in for a narrow win. Round 3 repeated. Cut up by their change of game plan and not defending the corridor/switch at all.

Round 6 Smashed by freo, we don't travel, should not have been smashed.

Round 11 Collingwood. Completely outcoached by a team who is decent but plays a really strong game plan. One we are vulnerable too.

Round 13 Essendon. An easy win against a weak team we should have won by more.

Round 14 Richmond. Played a terrible brand of footy in the wet. Again trying to hard to play the game plan 1 I mentioned above where the second game plan was the game for this wet night, apply pressure, get it forward, make a contest. No doubt our style of play cost us this one.

Round 19 GWS definitely should have won by more.

Round 20 Adelaide A loss to a bottom side, we don't travel and don't handle a defensive contest.

Round 21 Brisbane Should have put up a better contest than this, lost the shootout in our shootout style.

Round 22 Melbourne Did everything right, failed to apply a strong defence in the dying minutes of the game. Corridor open, backline open.

Round 23 Collingwood. Again their style, game plan 2 mentioned above applied to us and they were allowed to intercept and rebound freely. Our forwards failed to react to the game situation. Again it was game plan.

Injuries actually only played a small part in us not making finals. Game plan, maturity etc was the major reason.

Sure, we had bad days - which team didn't.

New coach, new game plan....lots of young, inexperienced players.

And yes, losing games like vs St Kilda and Adelaide were uber costly.

But we had a wretched run with injury - that remains the overriding common theme to the season just gone!

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

FB- Weitering, Young, Plowman
HB- Doch, Marchbank, Saad
C - Acres, Walsh, LOB
HF- Owies, Curnow, Cunningham
FF - Motlop, McKay, JSOS
C - TDK, Cripps, Hewett
Int - Cerra, Kennedy, Fisher, Mcgovern.
Em - Durdin, Cotterel, Martin, Pittonet

• TDK is #1 and happy with JSOS as the relief
• Jack Martin i dont think is best 22, made of teflon and too unreliable with both performance and injury and prefer to give Cunners a crack in the HF role..
• Would like JW to move to a less accountable role and be that intercepting defender (Moore, Stewart, Scarlett type) floating across packs but not directly responsible for an opponent.
• Owies on every measurable stat outperformed Durdin so needs to be given first crack, but Durds will put pressure on both Motlop and Owies to perform.

 

[CJMB]

FB- Weitering, Young, Plowman
HB- Doch, Marchbank, Saad
C - Acres, Walsh, LOB
HF- Owies, Curnow, Cunningham
FF - Motlop, McKay, JSOS
C - TDK, Cripps, Hewett
Int - Cerra, Kennedy, Fisher, Mcgovern.
Em - Durdin, Cotterel, Martin, Pittonet

• TDK is #1 and happy with JSOS as the relief
• Jack Martin i dont think is best 22, made of teflon and too unreliable with both performance and injury and prefer to give Cunners a crack in the HF role..
• Would like JW to move to a less accountable role and be that intercepting defender (Moore, Stewart, Scarlett type) floating across packs but not directly responsible for an opponent.
• Owies on every measurable stat outperformed Durdin so needs to be given first crack, but Durds will put pressure on both Motlop and Owies to perform.

Is this the first Plow inclusion?…