Preview AFL 2nd Semi Final - Geelong v Fremantle, MCG, Friday 10 September 7:45PM

[Vdubs]

Getting a bit sick of the Blake bashing, Ottens has not done a lot better, but if Blake goes out, the ONLY logical replacement is ...DAWSON SIMPSON. He should follow Sandilands around like a siamese twin, he's the only guy tall enough to contest with him, and what better introduction for his future at Skilled than to be thrust into this situation. As Blake obviously has done nothing to keep his spot, and there's another thread saying Hawkins must go, then I am 100% serious.

INS: Pods, otherwise P.O. will be ballistic on this board, and because he's good
Dawson Simpson, for the reasons mentioned, what could we lose?
Lonergan, deserves another final and we need to release Scarlett

OUTS:Blake, because I give in
Stokes, because he's redundant
Corey, as he's finished being a useful contributor this year.

Chances of my wishes being granted??? Zilch.

 

[AM]

I think you'll find Dawson was pitted against Sandilands last outing and Sandilands took him to the cleaners. Dawson will be a handy player but he's a year or two away from that. And you're right about your other wishes concerning Corey and Stokes - both with play. I think Pods will reappear so it comes down to Tomahawk or Blake. Those who think sentiment will come into it are dreaming.

 

[Vdubs]

I think you'll find Dawson was pitted against Sandilands last outing and Sandilands took him to the cleaners. Dawson will be a handy player but he's a year or two away from that. And you're right about your other wishes concerning Corey and Stokes - both with play. I think Pods will reappear so it comes down to Tomahawk or Blake. Those who think sentiment will come into it are dreaming.

Of course you are right.
But, Pods comes in, Blake out, that leaves a lot of rucking to 2 guys with dodgy feet. We have to go with that, Pies are succeeding using nomadic Brown, who is a Tomahawk type player.
Stokes stays in for non sentimental reasons???Corey ditto????You must be dreaming

Sandilands takes everyone to the cleaners if fit, Ottens included.

 

[Rosso]

It's amazing. We lost controversially by less than a kick. The ump calls play on and we win.

But I have read 9 pages of how we can't keep up with the Saints & Pies. Massive changes are required, blokes should be traded / retired off and we should go into complete rebuild.

GET A GRIP PEOPLE

Replay the game next week and we win. The fact that they got it out to 33 points before it kicked in that a loss was on the cards won't happen again. To think that in only 45 mins in the rain we got past them but were disallowed would mean that the Saints would rather not play us again. As for the Pies they beat the Dogs easily. I recall we managed to knock them off by 101 points a few weeks ago so no massive fears there either. Don't get me wrong they deserve to be where they are but they have played in a few Prelims and despite their form comming in the result has been the same. Time will tell.

With the Dockers this week a lot depends on Sandi. If he is playing forward then the Dockers will bring in Bradley to play a mobile rucking role. If thats the case then Blake goes out for Pods and Hawk plays a back up role to Ottto. If Sandi can play the majority in the ruck then Blake (or at least another ruckman) plays however I don't think this will be the case. So no massive chages. If they see a spot for Lonners and Pods then that adds some spice at the selection table but Blake for Pods is what I think they'll do.

Hats off to Freo, they controlled the Hawks from start to finish however the cats coming off a loss is another equation. 5 losses in the H & A season were followed up with wins of 95, 108, 63, 35 & 101. That's an average of 80 points on the rebound. Going in against the Pies with a strong win and in good form will go a long way. That and the support of nearly every other non Collingwood supporter on the planet!!!

 

[Partridge]

It's amazing. We lost controversially by less than a kick. The ump calls play on and we win.

But I have read 9 pages of how we can't keep up with the Saints & Pies. Massive changes are required, blokes should be traded / retired off and we should go into complete rebuild.

GET A GRIP PEOPLE

Replay the game next week and we win. The fact that they got it out to 33 points before it kicked in that a loss was on the cards won't happen again.

Why do we win if it's played next week? It won't happen again? This has been confidently stated after every loss this year, and guess what - nothing has changed.

There's been some fantastic predictions this season from some fans. A few that come to mind:

1. Didak doesn't perform in big games (BOG against us in Round 19).
2. We haven't lost twice to one side in a season since 2006 (as of Friday night we have now).
3. We've got St.Kilda's measure and the first final we don't need to worry about (until we get defeated and outplayed for the second time this season by St.Kilda).

This is exactly the problem. Arrogance and complacency from supporters which I'm sure is now filtering through to the playing group.

Too many players are comfortable, aren't hungry or committed enough to work hard, and some are just not good enough. That's the reality. Not the bullshit, spin and propaganda the club and press feeds us. The sporting field has a wonderful clarify about it. You're either good enough or you're not. The fact that the last three times we've met St.Kilda and Collingwood we have lost indicates that just maybe our planning and preparation isn't quite as perfect as people think.

 

[Ricketts]

Chances of my wishes being granted??? Zilch.

And thankfully so too, i might add.

 

[Tuggacat]

Did anyone notice Ottens taking himself to the interchange bench late in the game? Just before that he appeared to come to a grinding halt. I would not be surprised to see Ottens out, particularly if Sandilands is restricted. I know we have to beat Freo but I wonder if Ottens is capable of running a game out right now: if not he needs a rest because we would need him for Collingwood. So I would drop Ottens for Pods.

 

[OldStyle2007]

Why do we win if it's played next week? It won't happen again? This has been confidently stated after every loss this year, and guess what - nothing has changed.

There's been some fantastic predictions this season from some fans. A few that come to mind:

1. Didak doesn't perform in big games (BOG against us in Round 19).
2. We haven't lost twice to one side in a season since 2006 (as of Friday night we have now).
3. We've got St.Kilda's measure and the first final we don't need to worry about (until we get defeated and outplayed for the second time this season by St.Kilda).

This is exactly the problem. Arrogance and complacency from supporters which I'm sure is now filtering through to the playing group.

Too many players are comfortable, aren't hungry or committed enough to work hard, and some are just not good enough. That's the reality. Not the bullshit, spin and propaganda the club and press feeds us. The sporting field has a wonderful clarify about it. You're either good enough or you're not. The fact that the last three times we've met St.Kilda and Collingwood we have lost indicates that just maybe our planning and preparation isn't quite as perfect as people think.

Yep, Yes, YES!

Too many people think things are fine the way they are. Things are totally not fine.

It's pretty obvious to me that the teams who are winning are outrunning their opponents and outnumbering them at the marking contests and the packs. The current holding the ball interpretation means the player on the ground has to bash it out and often the team with the most blokes at the contest can tackle, get the ball and move it out to the support players on the outer ring of the pack. Collingwood's built their whole season on this one team rule!

I'm thinking that Bomber sent the wrong message to the Geelong group with his "We've never been in a better position" statement.

But more than that I am seriously worried the coaching panel have misjudged 2010 football and our team balance.

If you watch the 2007 games you'll see Geelong are the ones outnumbering the opposition at the fall of the ball. Not so anymore

Somehow we have to get numbers back into the contest and our zone set up has to work more effectively. Our current zone just gifts the opponents an easy kick every possession. The Magpies and St Kilda zones make sure teams have to kick long out of defence. We have to press up a little higher on the point kick outs at the very least.

People talk about Riewoldt doing well in the first half. Sure. But that's only because their midfield and backline was winning decisively. Once we regained ascendancy in the second half the scoreboard came back our way and Riewoldt and Kosi went out of the game

For mine, if you win the midfield you'll win the scoreboard. So it's less important to get someone like Lonergan back in than it is to get some more pace on the ground to chase, tackle, commit to the contest and win the midfield battle

We can surely beat every other team but we have to get the balance right

It's glaringly obvious to me that we are suffering because we just aren't covering enough ground defensively or offensively. An attitude change will help but a personnel change is vital

 

[AM]

Of course you are right.
But, Pods comes in, Blake out, that leaves a lot of rucking to 2 guys with dodgy feet. We have to go with that, Pies are succeeding using nomadic Brown, who is a Tomahawk type player.
Stokes stays in for non sentimental reasons???Corey ditto????You must be dreaming

Sandilands takes everyone to the cleaners if fit, Ottens included.

With due respect you really didn't grasp my post.

1. I said it would be a choice between Blake and Hawkins. They each bring to the table different skill sets. It'll be interesting to see how the selectors structure up. BTW Hawk and Otto have been back for a few weeks now with no signs of a foot problems so that's pretty much a red herring.

2. My comment about sentiment bore no reference to Corey and Stokes. It followed a remark about Pods, Blake and Hawk and related to the comment often made here that Hawkins would get preference because Bomber likes him. The stakes are too high for that to be a consideration.

3. Corey and Stokes have built up enough merit points to warrant holding their positions. Nothing to do with sentiment.

4. Sandilands is clearly the best ruckman going around and as a result does the job on most opponents. But there are degrees. Dawson was way out of his depth and to suggest after that caning and having not played since the selectors would bring him in is fanciful.

 

[costanza23]

If Freo do use Sandilands at full forward, then they might go with the mobile rucks in Johnson and Silvagni pinch-hitting, as they did against the Hawks. If that's the case, Blake may be dropped ahead of Hawkins for the greater presence around the ground.

But then that brings the question as to whether or not we bring in Lonergan for Sandilands? Laurie's 211cm, and at the moment, our tallest defender is Taylor: 193cm. Lonergan 197cm. Will the height difference make a selection issue there too?

I think it should just be Pods in, Blake out. But I'm still not sold on Corey's fitness either. I don't want us carrying injured players like a couple of years ago. Taylor Hunt's speed would be handy against a young team like Freo.

 

[OldStyle2007]

3. Corey and Stokes have built up enough merit points to warrant holding their positions. Nothing to do with sentiment.

Merit points?

Really??

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Looking forward to this game.

Freo won't give us much of a bruising encounter, the way the Hawks would have, but they'll try to run us off our feet. They have some very fast players - I love watching Hill play.

McPharlin and Grover are good key defenders but I can't pick out whether they have a third quality tall - Pods will be a welcome addition and if Moons can keep up his strong marking from Friday we'll be looking good up forward.

Anybody have an idea who Ling will tag? Teams have tagged Hill in recent weeks but there's no way Lingy could keep up with him. Mundy was excellent yesterday - so maybe him?

McPhee has tagged Judd and Hodge out of games this year, and almost crossed the line a la Baker with his 'unsociable' tactics, so our midfield should be prepared to work hard to support whoever McPhee is on. I can't imagine him containing Ablett, but could imagine him going to Selwood.

Sandilands will surely be hampered by that knee injury but I hope he doesn't spend too much time forward, as I can't see who we have to stop him.
The fact Freo doesn't have a specialist second ruckman makes me think a straight swap of Podsiadly for Blake is on the cards. Both Hawkins for us and Johnson for them can drift forward and take a mark, so Ottens has a big job to do his best in the centre square and at the very least, run Sandilands into the ground and test out that knee.

Mundy is critical for Freo, as he and Pav (and Sandi) are their contested ball kings and have the strong bodies to get the ball and feed it out to some of their outside kids. So definitely Mundy.

It has been shown this year that while Hill is good, he can be tagged out of a game, but I don't think we have anyone with the pace to do it, except for Wojo, but he never does such roles.

I would say Crowley will go to Ablett as he has done in the past, and McPhee will get either Selwood or Chapman.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Getting a bit sick of the Blake bashing, Ottens has not done a lot better, but if Blake goes out, the ONLY logical replacement is ...DAWSON SIMPSON. He should follow Sandilands around like a siamese twin, he's the only guy tall enough to contest with him, and what better introduction for his future at Skilled than to be thrust into this situation. As Blake obviously has done nothing to keep his spot, and there's another thread saying Hawkins must go, then I am 100% serious.

INS: Pods, otherwise P.O. will be ballistic on this board, and because he's good
Dawson Simpson, for the reasons mentioned, what could we lose?
Lonergan, deserves another final and we need to release Scarlett

OUTS:Blake, because I give in
Stokes, because he's redundant
Corey, as he's finished being a useful contributor this year.

Chances of my wishes being granted??? Zilch.

Dawson? LOL.

Yeah nah. Next year. But not now.

As for the bolded, you bet. If MC doesn't select him, I'll probably be receiving my first ever card on BF

Although it's more because he is good. Darn good.

As for the changes, they have merit, but Corey won't go. Neither will Stokes, so comes down to Pods for one of Blake or Hawkins. Will be interesting to see who Bomber is prepared to drop (probably Byrnes) to get Lonergan back in.

P.S. don't say 'release Scarlett', Partridge will not be happy.

 

[Mayneman]

Mcphee will go straight to Ablett.

Interesting little stat from the weekend. Stephen Hill lead our contested ball count.

Might be skinny and quick, but he and Mora both like getting their hands dirty.

No doubt Mundy was pivotal.

 

[vinum coupe]

I'd just like to say that this is the type of game we usually lose.





.
Need to be damn careful that the boys don't turn up expecting to win.

 

[silverscope]

Either way the result goes, most likely a Geelong win, I'm excited at the fact that our team get's to play the reigning premiers on the big stage. Friday night football in september.

Good luck and I hope it's a close one

 

[Belisarius]

I'd just like to say that this is the type of game we usually lose.

.
Need to be damn careful that the boys don't turn up expecting to win.

I am confident the boys will turn up ready to go. We used to lose these games quite a few years ago - but not over the past 4 years. Have confidence VC.

I think that Sandilands maybe playing more forward a this will make the selection of Lonergan more likely - as we will need height. But that means a tall has to go out IMO. So Blake will probably go and that will bring Hawkins into the second ruck position.

I think people are right when they say Corey will stay in but I would prefer THunt. Corey used to be a tackling machine but of late this has dropped off and his possessions are down.

Pods comes back for sure - but then who goes out ? Byrnes ? A tall for a small - and Freo have pace. So it will be a very tricky selectors meeting this week - assuming all are fit.

 

[linga_is_no1]

"The type of game we usually lose" threads were the greatest tradition this board has ever produced.

 

[Citizen Erazed]

Please don't go easy on Fremantle. Put them in their place with a big 10 goal + drubbing.

I really enjoy watching Geelong play and hope that they go all the way again this year. Good luck

Please get Jimmy in the guts more often, that is where he should always play and he showed that on Friday night.

 

[winty]

And the fact is he's paid to kick those goals. We're not talking about a 50m shot from the boundary line, we're talking about an absolutely regulation set shot from 25m out, that once more he failed to convert.

Bit harsh. True, it was a gettable shot, and he should have nailed it, but Stokes has been our most accurate shot at goal from set shots this year.

As for the Blake/Hawkins/Pods thing, I'd be happy to see both Blake and Hawkins get dropped this week for Pods and West. Otto is one of the best defensive ruckmen in the league. You often see him on his hands and knees getting the ball over the bottom of the pack. When was the last time you saw Blake or Hawkins do that? West can provide some of that too.

I don't know if Hawkins is still weary about re-injuring his foot, or if he's afraid he's going to cripple someone, but it's ridiculous how often a 197cm, 100kg player tries his hardest to avoid physical contact. In the increased intensity of finals footy, we can't afford to carry someone like that.

 

[g-thing]

Out:Byrnes, Blake
In: Pods, Hunt

Would be a disaster to drop Byrnes!!!! Had 13 possessions in the second half and one of the cats best without a doubt. And before you say, "Well what about the first half ?", I think two things must be kept in mind - 1. that was when Saints were dominating and 2. how little time on ground Byrnes had in the first half. I think it's undeniable, when he's on the park the Cats play better.

 

[rizzo]

Would be a disaster to drop Byrnes!!!! Had 13 possessions in the second half and one of the cats best without a doubt. And before you say, "Well what about the first half ?", I think two things must be kept in mind - 1. that was when Saints were dominating and 2. how little time on ground Byrnes had in the first half. I think it's undeniable, when he's on the park the Cats play better.

Needs an opposite foot. Until then he will be nothing more then player 20-22 in the team.

 

[g-thing]

.

As for the Blake/Hawkins/Pods thing, I'd be happy to see both Blake and Hawkins get dropped this week for Pods and West. Otto is one of the best defensive ruckmen in the league. You often see him on his hands and knees getting the ball over the bottom of the pack. When was the last time you saw Blake or Hawkins do that? West can provide some of that too.

I must admit I find this whole issue of the "big men" hard to come to grips with and I'm glad I'm not a selector.

As forwards Pods, Mooney and Hawkins play much the same way - leading forwards. They are all great marks. On kicking Pods might be the best, although Mooney and Hawkins can both bomb a long one. Pods has a beautiful snap shot too and might be better than Mooney or Hawkins in that respect. Moons inaccuracy on shorter shots could even mean he is the least efficient of the three but then he's not going to get dropped - I think because he is seen as an inspirational figure/leader within the team.

Then Hawkins as a ruck v Blakey? Obviously Blake is the better tap ruckman and we need the ball dropping into the hands of Gaz and co. Not sure how good Hawkins is in the ruck but I suspect he is at least competitive. Ottens has the legend status behind him and does have great close in skills too. Can kick goals obviously too.

So who's in out of that bunch is the question in my mind. If they're all in then we risk losing out by dropping our much needed smaller forwards.

Purely objectively I'd say the least compelling argument to stay in the side is Mooney but I suspect one of Blake, Pods or Hawkins might be unlucky.

 

[winty]

Then Hawkins as a ruck v Blakey? Obviously Blake is the better tap ruckman and we need the ball dropping into the hands of Gaz and co. Not sure how good Hawkins is in the ruck but I suspect he is at least competitive. Ottens has the legend status behind him and does have great close in skills too. Can kick goals obviously too.

I think we got the answer to that after the Round 19 game when Darren Jolly admitted that his eyes lit up whenever he looked across at the centre bounce and saw Hawkins standing there.

The thing I can't understand is we have 5 ruckmen on our list (Ottens, Blake, West, Simpson and Vardy), so why do we feel the need to have one of our key forwards pinch hit there?

 

[g-thing]

Needs an opposite foot. Until then he will be nothing more then player 20-22 in the team.

Happy with 20-22.

Nevertheless, I dispute your assessment of Byrnes's importance/status in the team and I'd suggest being in the range 20 to 22 in the Cats side is an achievement not to be sniffed at and is something to be proud of anyway.

Also plenty of players have preferred sides. Byrnes's left sided preference used to get him into a bit of strife but I think he has developed his game to the level where it is no longer an issue.