- Nov 23, 2015
- 13,163
- 20,416
- AFL Club
- GWS
- Moderator
- #1
After the euphoria of the dramatic last-minute comeback win against Swans, time to sit down and take stock of the good and bad for the next game, against the hated Bulldogs in Canberra. While it was great to salute, and noteworthy for the comeback nature of the win, it is nevertheless clear that there is still a long way for coach Adam Kingsley to go in rejuvenating the Giants team. While he was upbeat in the press conference when asked where the team could go, it is still a week-by-week proposition, and the team needs to keep improving. GWS record in Manuka is now a liability for a home ground, and it's difficult to see us stopping that trend next weekend.
In reality, the win was against the odds. The midfield was beaten in the contest (-23 in CP), and especially in centre clearances (9-22), which is a worrying stat for our first-string midfield line-up. They did hold their own in stoppages around the ground (28-24) despite losing the hitouts (34-50). Arguably, the midfield did stay strong and broke even with the Swans midfield in the last portion of that final quarter, enabling enough I50s to kick the needed goals. Flynn is a solid toiler - in fact, before the start of this round 4th in hitouts - but I do wonder if ruck partner would suit him. Notwithstanding, Tim English is his opponent next week, and he's just behind Flynn in the hitouts count, so I doubt any changes to the ruck set-up. Harry Himmelberg is proving to be a solid back-up option - doesn't necessarily win the hitouts, but often grabs a clearance in the battle due to his mobility (which was the case leading to Greene's winning goal against Swans). Over the season to date, we're 5th last for contested possession, which we definitely need to improve.
We were also -15 for inside 50s against Swans, but the good news was the conversion rate of I50s to score, and even more so conversion to goals. With 3 rushed behinds, we were particularly accurate yesterday, whereas Swans were more a "normal" accuracy, allowing us to sneak past them. But we certainly cannot rely on that every week. With the loss of Sam Taylor, the backline did a great job to hold up - especially Jack Buckley (just a 23-gamer!) on Buddy, who Swans kept kicking to (no doubt, will be highlighted in their review). The question is whether that line-up - which is undersized with 188cm Callum Brown replacing Taylor - can match against the Bulldogs forward line including Lobb/English (each at 207 cm), Naughton and JUH? Dogs also have the dangerous small forward in Cody Weightman to content with as well. For me, the first question for the coaching staff is how they manage the defence. While Callum Brown deserves to keep his spot, and is potentially a match-up on Weightman, do we need another tall?
Notwithstanding the figures quoted above in relation to the midfield battle, we had our first-string midfield out there (except perhaps Wehr vice Angwin), so there won't be any changes. Rowston was a good tactical sub, and seems to play well for one quarter, so is good in that role - provided he's only needed in the last quarter. I'm still not convinced on Angwin, but he's showed some positive signs. I'd still like to see Fahey debut, but concede this week is unlikely.
Up forward, Bedford's inclusion was positive, and he'll be better for the run and getting used again to AFL-level tempo and pressure. With Ward coming back from a week's suspension, I assume that he'll come straight back into the team. You would have to assume that James Peatling would be most at risk. He'd be a little unlucky on this week's performance - 16 touches, 6 tackles and 7 intercepts - so he's done his job except for not kicking goals. I saw someone suggest that Cadman could drop back to VFL for being a touch quiet in his games to date. While he has been that, I'd like to see him get an extended run and the good thing that he's done IMHO that we complained Riccardi didn't has been (a) contest the ball and (b) pressure.
Bulldogs are not exactly tearing it up this year. They've had one good win against Lions, beaten weaker teams in Hawks, Freo and Richmond, and lost to top 8 teams in Port and Saints. So, it's a bit hard to characterise exactly where they sit this year, although it is comfortably better than GWS. They have a good midfield, that has Bontempelli on fire this year, a solid forward line that sometimes gels and sometimes doesn't, and a defence line that is serviceable.
So, team changes. Ward and Lloyd presumably the only guys newly available. Guys like Derksen, Fleeton and Fahey have been playing well in VFL (still have to look at today's game), and there's some questions over what's happening with Briggs, Keeffe and Stone who've been missing from both game sheets and injury lists. Aleer and Davis are still 1 to 2 weeks away. AK likely to prefer less changes after a win, but are some changes need to combat the Bulldogs (who are much taller than Swans, which should be taken into account).
I believe we need an extra KPD due to the Dogs' KPF line - Idun and Brown are too short as second tall, and Haynes doesn't like the 1-on1 aspects: he gets outpointed too often as 3rd tall (but we live with due to his intercepting prowess), but that doesn't work for the team as second tall. Keeffe is a possibility (if available), but I think he's not flexible enough to go with Naughton, JUH and Lobb. I would put HH down there, or even try Derksen - but concede that AK is unlikely to. In that case, I'd probably push Whitfield up to the wing and omit Angwin, in order to keep Brown, with he and Idun mainly in negating roles. Ash and Cumming would be the runners out of defence. As I said, I doubt AK does that, but interesting to see what decisions he makes under the circumstances.
What are your thoughts - what changes would you make (or not make) for this game?
In reality, the win was against the odds. The midfield was beaten in the contest (-23 in CP), and especially in centre clearances (9-22), which is a worrying stat for our first-string midfield line-up. They did hold their own in stoppages around the ground (28-24) despite losing the hitouts (34-50). Arguably, the midfield did stay strong and broke even with the Swans midfield in the last portion of that final quarter, enabling enough I50s to kick the needed goals. Flynn is a solid toiler - in fact, before the start of this round 4th in hitouts - but I do wonder if ruck partner would suit him. Notwithstanding, Tim English is his opponent next week, and he's just behind Flynn in the hitouts count, so I doubt any changes to the ruck set-up. Harry Himmelberg is proving to be a solid back-up option - doesn't necessarily win the hitouts, but often grabs a clearance in the battle due to his mobility (which was the case leading to Greene's winning goal against Swans). Over the season to date, we're 5th last for contested possession, which we definitely need to improve.
We were also -15 for inside 50s against Swans, but the good news was the conversion rate of I50s to score, and even more so conversion to goals. With 3 rushed behinds, we were particularly accurate yesterday, whereas Swans were more a "normal" accuracy, allowing us to sneak past them. But we certainly cannot rely on that every week. With the loss of Sam Taylor, the backline did a great job to hold up - especially Jack Buckley (just a 23-gamer!) on Buddy, who Swans kept kicking to (no doubt, will be highlighted in their review). The question is whether that line-up - which is undersized with 188cm Callum Brown replacing Taylor - can match against the Bulldogs forward line including Lobb/English (each at 207 cm), Naughton and JUH? Dogs also have the dangerous small forward in Cody Weightman to content with as well. For me, the first question for the coaching staff is how they manage the defence. While Callum Brown deserves to keep his spot, and is potentially a match-up on Weightman, do we need another tall?
Notwithstanding the figures quoted above in relation to the midfield battle, we had our first-string midfield out there (except perhaps Wehr vice Angwin), so there won't be any changes. Rowston was a good tactical sub, and seems to play well for one quarter, so is good in that role - provided he's only needed in the last quarter. I'm still not convinced on Angwin, but he's showed some positive signs. I'd still like to see Fahey debut, but concede this week is unlikely.
Up forward, Bedford's inclusion was positive, and he'll be better for the run and getting used again to AFL-level tempo and pressure. With Ward coming back from a week's suspension, I assume that he'll come straight back into the team. You would have to assume that James Peatling would be most at risk. He'd be a little unlucky on this week's performance - 16 touches, 6 tackles and 7 intercepts - so he's done his job except for not kicking goals. I saw someone suggest that Cadman could drop back to VFL for being a touch quiet in his games to date. While he has been that, I'd like to see him get an extended run and the good thing that he's done IMHO that we complained Riccardi didn't has been (a) contest the ball and (b) pressure.
Bulldogs are not exactly tearing it up this year. They've had one good win against Lions, beaten weaker teams in Hawks, Freo and Richmond, and lost to top 8 teams in Port and Saints. So, it's a bit hard to characterise exactly where they sit this year, although it is comfortably better than GWS. They have a good midfield, that has Bontempelli on fire this year, a solid forward line that sometimes gels and sometimes doesn't, and a defence line that is serviceable.
So, team changes. Ward and Lloyd presumably the only guys newly available. Guys like Derksen, Fleeton and Fahey have been playing well in VFL (still have to look at today's game), and there's some questions over what's happening with Briggs, Keeffe and Stone who've been missing from both game sheets and injury lists. Aleer and Davis are still 1 to 2 weeks away. AK likely to prefer less changes after a win, but are some changes need to combat the Bulldogs (who are much taller than Swans, which should be taken into account).
I believe we need an extra KPD due to the Dogs' KPF line - Idun and Brown are too short as second tall, and Haynes doesn't like the 1-on1 aspects: he gets outpointed too often as 3rd tall (but we live with due to his intercepting prowess), but that doesn't work for the team as second tall. Keeffe is a possibility (if available), but I think he's not flexible enough to go with Naughton, JUH and Lobb. I would put HH down there, or even try Derksen - but concede that AK is unlikely to. In that case, I'd probably push Whitfield up to the wing and omit Angwin, in order to keep Brown, with he and Idun mainly in negating roles. Ash and Cumming would be the runners out of defence. As I said, I doubt AK does that, but interesting to see what decisions he makes under the circumstances.
What are your thoughts - what changes would you make (or not make) for this game?
