Player Watch #6 Logan McDonald

[The King!]

Nick Riewoldt like

 

[SeanM]

I think chemistry with the other forwards helps. He has played a few seasons with Papley, Heeney and Hayward who are mobile and can find space. So they know where each other will lead to and how they want the ball delivered.

 

[Kapers]

McDonald as 2 massive assets:

1. He gets goals from all different avenues, he marks and goals, tackles, goals from out 50 on the run, crumbs, and kicks them in the contest.

2. His field kicking is the best in the side, he has the ability to kick it 60 and immediately get past the defenders. Against Richmond 70% of his disposals turned into goals.

 

[Dan87]

He's the exact definition of general key forward imo

Does a bit of everything and I think that combination of assets is ultimately his strength.

He's versatile, as he puts on more muscle he'll offer more contested marking.

Coaches will be loving it

 

[Deccas]

Stunned that his buddy out of the team goal scoring came back to the mean a bit!

That's a bit of a dig but in all seriousness you can see him emerging this season. Looks like he's consistently able to be a big part of why we win games. By the end of the year he might actually be our best key forward!

 

[The King!]

should have played the granny

 

[SM]

should have played the granny

No he shouldn't.

 

[Jewelsbon]

No he shouldn't.

Yes he should have.
Wouldn't have made the slightest bit of difference, but he still should have played.

 

[SM]

Yes he should have.
Wouldn't have made the slightest bit of difference, but he still should have played.

He was in horrible form and said he wasn't surprised he was dropped. People need to take hindsight out of it.

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

Building nicely

 

[Jewelsbon]

He was in horrible form and said he wasn't surprised he was dropped. People need to take hindsight out of it.

Not taking hindsight into it and I was the one who sat next to his grandfather at the GF and reported on here that he wasn't surprised, I still believe he should have played.

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

He was in horrible form and said he wasn't surprised he was dropped. People need to take hindsight out of it.

Yer but imagine picking a bloke that is so hampered he cant make a contest.

 

[SM]

Yer but imagine picking a bloke that is so hampered he cant make a contest.

That's entirely separate. If Reid was passed fit then he was passed fit. If he wasn't passed fit but still played then that's an entirely different story.

 

[bedford]

Horse backed Reid in and it was a F up , the same as picking injured players like Macca and Mills in 16

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

That's entirely separate. If Reid was passed fit then he was passed fit. If he wasn't passed fit but still played then that's an entirely different story.

SM! how do you think he was deemed fit?

 

[SM]

SM! how do you think he was deemed fit?

What do you think my post was saying?

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

What do you think my post was saying?

I always value your insights mate just thought you would help me understand the process.

 

[SM]

I always value your insights mate just thought you would help me understand the process.

I'm a bit lost at what you're actually saying here as I thought my post was quite clear. If match committee deemed Reid fit and he broke down in the game then that's tough luck and not something helped other than through hindsight. If he wasn't deemed fit and he was selected anyway then that's a bigger issue than whether or not Logan played.

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

I'm a bit lost at what you're actually saying here as I thought my post was quite clear. If match committee deemed Reid fit and he broke down in the game then that's tough luck and not something helped other than through hindsight. If he wasn't deemed fit and he was selected anyway then that's a bigger issue than whether or not Logan played.

Sorry i didnt clarify what i intended i meant in the state Reid was how could be deemed fit?

He would of presumably failed to train right? as evidenced he was subbed out.

 

[SM]

Sorry i didnt clarify what i intended i meant in the state Reid was how could be deemed fit?

He would of presumably failed to train right? as evidenced he was subbed out.

I guess you'd have to ask match committee?

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

I guess you'd have to ask match committee?

Fair enough mate i guess we will never know just hope we learn from it if we are fortunate to get there again.

 

[momentbymoment]

Yes he should have.
Wouldn't have made the slightest bit of difference, but he still should have played.

Considering how well he has come back this year, it could be argued that missing that game was the best thing for him. No scars ….

 

[melbournehammer]

Feels a bit off topic but…

the issue was playing McLean instead of amartey and Reid instead of McDonald. Having immobile McLean and clearly Limited Reid was brainless. Once Reid couldn’t ruck it was either amartey or McLean - and amartey is the better second ruck. Once you’ve got amartey the choice was McLean or McDonald and that’s a no brained it had to be McDonald.

no difference I agree. But having two immobile talls once they knew Reid’s obvious and already announced limitations was simple.

 

[The King!]

No he shouldn't.

Yep, you are right, the guy who hadn't played seniors for 4 months and the forward who was unable to run were much better choices, worked well.

 

[The King!]

Yes he should have.
Wouldn't have made the slightest bit of difference, but he still should have played.

mclean hadn't played for 4 months , picking him was dumber than injured Reid