Preview Changes: Round 12 v St Kilda

[Ramify]

Not looking for a rise at all I was there last night we got smashed physically, our midfield was the problem, whether we get better mids or tougher mids is the problem, Greenwood is green he might get more physical but he was pushed aside crouches aren't physical and sloAne tries hard but doesn't have the build to take them on

It's not hard but all I ever here is Mackay is our problem he is a problem but a very very small part of it


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Maybe you should go watch the replay of all of Greenwoods games so far.
The way he puts his head down,arse up and runs though packs with very little regard to his personal safety is very rare in our side. The way he tackles and actually sticks tackles which don't just stop a player but make the player feel it is very rare in our side. The way he doesn't give up a chase or submit to defeat hoping someone else will cover his arse is very unique in our side.

I think you are seeing a 3 game, 1.5year basketball convert who is learning how to balance on a footy field as part of his learning the game in general.
He will pick it up very quickly.

If he isn't hard he is soft and if you think he is soft then I don't know what to tell you.
But hey, you were convinced Dmac had a decent game last week.

 

[Thetrader15]

I'm sorry but the fairytale has to end. Otten has to go. He and Jenkins are just stepping on each other's toes and cramping each other's style. We can't expect to play slingshot footy with no runners to activate the slingshot forward. We NEED a structural change, ESPECIALLY against a good running side like Saints. Otten is no Gov. We simply just cannot play Otten and Jenkins in the same forward set up along with Tex. It. Doesn't. Work!

Otten out for Knight
Gallucci in for Mackay

I would still also do Cheney in for Kelly despite Cheney's poor showing today.

Cheney has a lot more speed and athleticism, better disposal and is just a better player, plain and simple. We look to slow and fumbly down there with Tals, Lever and Hartigan + Kelly.


Also, Talia and Hartigan form has been a real concern. Once upon a time I felt safe with teams bombing it long to these guys, but not anymore. I don't know what the **** has happened, but it ain't good.

Talia may possibly still be injured, but he has looked absolute shite since the PS. And without Talia's defensive presence down there Hartigan looks lost.

Maybe drop Hartigan and swing Otten back, and replace Hartigan with Knight?

We have 1 more game until the bye and hopefully they can reset and have a better 2nd half of the year. But ATS, their form is a pretty big concern.

You were doing so well until you said Cheney had speed and athleticism

 

[marty36]

Maybe you should go watch the replay of all of Greenwoods games so far.
The way he puts his head down,arse up and runs though packs with very little regard to his personal safety is very rare in our side. The way he tackles and actually sticks tackles which don't just stop a player but make the player feel it is very rare in our side. The way he doesn't give up a chase or submit to defeat hoping someone else will cover his arse is very unique in our side.

I think you are seeing a 3 game, 1.5year basketball convert who is learning how to balance on a footy field as part of his learning the game in general.
He will pick it up very quickly.

If he isn't hard he is soft and if you think he is soft then I don't know what to tell you.
But hey, you were convinced Dmac had a decent game last week.

Don't talk crap I haven't mentioned Dnac anywhere I'm not looking for excuses yes Greenwood is green and new I have said he shouldnt be dropped but I will be critical, no point in playing favourites like the board, although I do like Greenwood, and he is putting himself out there so he will be criticised if he fails in areas and his physical side isn't where we need it


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Ramify]

Don't talk crap I haven't mentioned Dnac anywhere I'm not looking for excuses yes Greenwood is green and new I have said he shouldnt be dropped but I will be critical, no point in playing favourites like the board, although I do like Greenwood, and he is putting himself out there so he will be criticised if he fails in areas and his physical side isn't where we need it


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Not playing favourites at all. The number 1 reason I like Greenwood is his hardness and that he is a competitive beast. I think these attributes far out weigh his football ability.
I'm glad you admit he is green but even still he was by far our best tackler last night and was about the same in physical presence. Name three blokes who put in harder?

I get it, you are expecting him to be up to Dangerfield or Selwood levels after 3 games, is that it?

As for Dmac go review your comments from last week. Don't talk crap yourself.

 

[huludicidal]

Don't talk crap I haven't mentioned Dnac anywhere I'm not looking for excuses yes Greenwood is green and new I have said he shouldnt be dropped but I will be critical, no point in playing favourites like the board, although I do like Greenwood, and he is putting himself out there so he will be criticised if he fails in areas and his physical side isn't where we need it


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Except his physical side is where we need it, and he led the team in tackles including a couple of absolute belters where he crunched blokes into the ground.

He is also far harder to bring to ground than the likes of B Crouch, Douglas and Mackay.

You are just flat out wrong about Greenwood's physicality. It's a major strength and was a highlight last night in a sea of mediocrity from his more experienced teammates.

 

[marty36]

Not playing favourites at all. The number 1 reason I like Greenwood is his hardness and that he is a competitive beast. I think these attributes far out weigh his football ability.
I'm glad you admit he is green but even still he was by far our best tackler last night and was about the same in physical presence. Name three blokes who put in harder?

I get it, you are expecting him to be up to Dangerfield or Selwood levels after 3 games, is that it?

As for Dmac go review your comments from last week. Don't talk crap yourself.

Hahaha I wanted Wigg in for Mackay all week and actually thought the selection panel would do it so I don't need to review anything go have a look in the changes thread and stop typing crap I know what I said

And yes Greenwood is green I like him but he needs to be told to use his presence no different to JJ he needs to be told aswell I would drop JJ before Greenwood aswell as Greenwood deserves some time but JJ has no presence and never has had


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Ramify]

Hahaha I wanted Wigg in for Mackay all week and actually thought the selection panel would do it so I don't need to review anything go have a look in the changes thread and stop typing crap I know what I said

And yes Greenwood is green I like him but he needs to be told to use his presence no different to JJ he needs to be told aswell I would drop JJ before Greenwood aswell as Greenwood deserves some time but JJ has no presence and never has had


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Whatever.

You need to either go watch the replay as I understand how easy it is to miss the little things watching live, stop trolling or take your meds as you are off your rocker.

 

[Pea Nut]

Hahaha I wanted Wigg in for Mackay all week and actually thought the selection panel would do it so I don't need to review anything go have a look in the changes thread and stop typing crap I know what I said

And yes Greenwood is green I like him but he needs to be told to use his presence no different to JJ he needs to be told aswell I would drop JJ before Greenwood aswell as Greenwood deserves some time but JJ has no presence and never has had


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Hugh Greenwood : 12 Kicks, 6 Handballs, 1 Mark, 11 tackles, 11 Contested possessions, 9 Clearances from 65% Time on Ground !!!

 

[Messiah]

Out: Hope
In: Reality

Time to get re-acquainted with this song perhaps?

 

[feenix67]

Don't talk crap I haven't mentioned Dnac anywhere I'm not looking for excuses yes Greenwood is green and new I have said he shouldnt be dropped but I will be critical, no point in playing favourites like the board, although I do like Greenwood, and he is putting himself out there so he will be criticised if he fails in areas and his physical side isn't where we need it


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

You can keep saying this but it won't make it true. Greenwood absolutely does not get pushed off the ball. He straight lines it and has very good core strength it seems. If you can highlight one time he got owned physically Friday night or even the previous week I'd be very surprised.

 

[feenix67]

Hugh Greenwood : 12 Kicks, 6 Handballs, 1 Mark, 11 tackles, 11 Contested possessions, 9 Clearances from 65% Time on Ground !!!

The end

 

[Big Gazoongas]

Like the majority of pure outside midfielders to ever play the game, he is a "front runner". It's part and parcel with the position.

There is a good reason for this, structurally you don't want these players going for the hard ball unless they are forced to go for it seeing these players are your outlet so you can retain the ball. Equally, with skills like pace and kicking, you need space to be able to maximize the damage that can be done with the ball. Structure dictates that because these players in space is what we are gambling on winning us games.

So here comes the crux of the issue, it's very likely these players are actually doing everything right in that they are getting in the right positions, offering a get out pass (which is one of the main jobs they have) should we win the ball but it is totally reliant on the first step. Second we're slaughtered on the inside, the players that are relying on the inside midfielders to receive the ball aren't going to be involved. Equally once we are getting slaughtered on the inside we seem to just panic which isn't helping.

I can just about guarantee you had we broke even in the midfield we wouldn't be having this conversation, unless he is genuinely having a mare.

Sorry but these are nothing but excuses for his weak as piss non existent efforts.
He lacked endeavor, he lacked intensity, he lacked the want to tackle, he lacked the need to pressure. He was pure and simply useless and being an outside mid doesn't excuse you from all this.

We will not win a flag in the next 100 years with this type of output.

We agree to disagree on Atkins.

 

[Golumless]

Sorry but these are nothing but excuses for his weak as piss non existent efforts.
He lacked endeavor, he lacked intensity, he lacked the want to tackle, he lacked the need to pressure. He was pure and simply useless and being an outside mid doesn't excuse you from all this.

We will not win a flag in the next 100 years with this type of output.

We agree to disagree on Atkins.

Nope, more I'm realistic on what to expect from an outside midfielder.

Atkins had 4 tackles, and 2 1% for the night so they aren't bad numbers for a player with a supposed lack of want to tackle and pressure (as a note, eq. 10th for both stats, but it's worth noting it's not a totally fair comparison between positions). Unfortunately the true stats for pressure aren't available, but that's about par for an outside midfielder, of course that's not to say there wasn't one or two moments he could have done more; you could say that about every player for both sides.

The biggest complaint for his game is his lack of offensive production, however, even that is apart of a much bigger problem that this club faces. One I doubt we'll fix during our window unless we get gun midfielders in.

We can also do the agree to disagree thing. In some cases, I hope your right and all our problems stem to 1-2 players seeing my thoughts on this situation is much harder to fix.

 

[arsene wenger1]

Our team is soft we have players like JJ, Mackay Atkins that seriously need to eat some concrete and I'm not convinced either crouch is hard and I didn't think Greenwood was hard either

These basketballers don't like the physical stuff like a real footballer

The game day thread talks about how soft we are being so pick some players with a bit of mongrel please


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Greenwood is already our best tackler and the only one that even looked like he was able to win the contested ball, you've got that one wrong

 

[BrissyCrow]

Don't talk crap I haven't mentioned Dnac anywhere I'm not looking for excuses yes Greenwood is green and new I have said he shouldnt be dropped but I will be critical, no point in playing favourites like the board, although I do like Greenwood, and he is putting himself out there so he will be criticised if he fails in areas and his physical side isn't where we need it


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

I think already his physicality is exactly what we need. Sure he still needs further development but he at least is bringing something to the team that no one else seems to be able to bring. We actually need more like him even if we lose a little with skills he will bring pressure to bear on the opposition. Players like Atkins and Milera all look pretty with their skill set but they don't bring the physicality. Hopefully we will find others. I have never seen Beech is he one that can also bring some physical effort???

 

[Captain Furious]

The game in which he had 18 touches he was arguably the worst player on the ground - he burnt it at every opportunity and honestly played even worse than he did against the Cats last night. The other final resulted in him being dropped for the following final. The one where he performed well was a "final" against a North Melbourne team that had lost 10 of its last 12 games heading in. Perfect night to get the skis out. They were dead in the water before the opening bounce.

No scapegoats. Just reality. He's not the only one, but he and Smith are the most glaring. Let's review this after the Bulldogs game, the Cats game at AO and the finals series this year rather than going around in circles now.

The final in which he had 18 touches he went at almost 70% disposal efficiency and had only 2 clangers. And the final he was in the best was against Sydney not North, when he one of a very small few to hold their own against a rampant Sydney midfield. But hey, let's not let facts get in the way of your witch hunt.

 

[Captain Furious]

I'm sure you have. Our 'state of origin' team was pioneering the use of supplements.

I've honestly never heard that. It's not like we had a bunch of muscled up dudes a la Barich, Lamb, Evans, Worsfold etc.

 

[huludicidal]

The final in which he had 18 touches he went at almost 70% disposal efficiency and had only 2 clangers. And the final he was in the best was against Sydney not North, when he one of a very small few to hold their own against a rampant Sydney midfield. But hey, let's not let facts get in the way of your witch hunt.

Mate, against Sydney Atkins was awful. It's a plain and simple fact and if you're looking at some ridiculous "best players" list concocted by afl.com.au morons then I can't really help you. Anyone who watched and remembers the game knows that he was really bad. If you believe otherwise, you are perfectly entitled to your incorrect opinion.

Just for you, I checked the B&F votes because maybe, just maybe my biased and twisted mind had warped Atkins' game against the Swans into something it wasn't. 13 players were given 2 votes or more (2-3 votes is arguably a pass mark although I'd argue that 5 votes should really be the benchmark because that's an average of 1 from every coach) by the coaches in that game, including midfielders such as Sloane, M Crouch, Douglas, Mackay and Thommo. Atkins was not among them. Are they on a witch hunt too?

I also noted that he wasn't rated in the best 16 players by the coaches against the Cats in the corresponding game in Geelong last season. I don't like his chances of being rated in the best 16 from Friday night either just quietly. He was also given a 1 vote fail against West Coast in Round 23 last year and was undoubtedly the worst player on the field in the 2015 Elimination Final victory (leading to him being dropped), but hey, let's not get facts get in the way of whatever it is that you're doing.

There's no witch hunt here. I like Atkins and genuinely want him to succeed in these important fixtures against quality opposition when we are challenged. What I don't like is his "big game" form so far, and I felt it needed to be discussed. Wish it would change. Maybe it will. Maybe it won't. We'll know more after the conclusion of this year's finals series. Maybe he turns it on and gets BOG in a prelim or something. I'd love nothing more than that to happen.

 

[Captain Furious]

Mate, against Sydney Atkins was awful. It's a plain and simple fact and if you're looking at some ridiculous "best players" list concocted by afl.com.au morons then I can't really help you. Anyone who watched and remembers the game knows that he was really bad. If you believe otherwise, you are perfectly entitled to your incorrect opinion.

Just for you, I checked the B&F votes because maybe, just maybe my biased and twisted mind had warped Atkins' game against the Swans into something it wasn't. 13 players were given 2 votes or more (2-3 votes is arguably a pass mark although I'd argue that 5 votes should really be the benchmark because that's an average of 1 from every coach) by the coaches in that game, including midfielders such as Sloane, M Crouch, Douglas, Mackay and Thommo. Atkins was not among them. Are they on a witch hunt too?

I also noted that he wasn't rated in the best 16 players by the coaches against the Cats in the corresponding game in Geelong last season. I don't like his chances of being rated in the best 16 from Friday night either just quietly. He was also given a 1 vote fail against West Coast in Round 23 last year and was undoubtedly the worst player on the field in the 2015 Elimination Final victory (leading to him being dropped), but hey, let's not get facts get in the way of whatever it is that you're doing.

There's no witch hunt here. I like Atkins and genuinely want him to succeed in these important fixtures against quality opposition when we are challenged. What I don't like is his "big game" form so far, and I felt it needed to be discussed. Wish it would change. Maybe it will. Maybe it won't. We'll know more after the conclusion of this year's finals series. Maybe he turns it on and gets BOG in a prelim or something. I'd love nothing more than that to happen.

You really are pathetic. Highlighted area shows why you should probably give up having any kind of rational discussion with someone. Not to mention you constantly getting things wrong then going back and trying to cover it up with more crap. So Atkins had a bad final in his 8th game as a 20 year old (in a win) and was duly dropped Then despite being a solid contributor in his only two other finals (including a good performance in a loss) you now label a kid with 42 games experience as a downhill skier who can't perform in big games. Honestly mate, maybe take some time out to think about what you bring as a supporter. It's pretty sad.

 

[huludicidal]

You really are pathetic. Highlighted area shows why you should probably give up having any kind of rational discussion with someone. Not to mention you constantly getting things wrong then going back and trying to cover it up with more crap. So Atkins had a bad final in his 8th game as a 20 year old (in a win) and was duly dropped Then despite being a solid contributor in his only two other finals (including a good performance in a loss) you now label a kid with 42 games experience as a downhill skier who can't perform in big games. Honestly mate, maybe take some time out to think about what you bring as a supporter. It's pretty sad.

"A good performance in a loss" according to you. Not according to me, or the B&F votes, or anyone else I've ever discussed that game with to be honest. How is presenting B&F votes that prove what I'm saying to be kinda valid "covering things up"? I would never have even looked at them if you hadn't challenged me on it. I didn't need to because I remember the game vividly.

As for what I bring as a supporter, not sure what on earth you'd know about that - weird comment. You've turned this into something it wasn't ever intended to be. I was providing an opinion on a player, with evidence of poor performances in key games, only because you challenged me on it. Evidence supported by the blokes who pick the team. If their opinion on how he's gone isn't valid, I'm not really sure who's is?

As I've stated numerous times now, I genuinely want Atkins to do well in the finals-like pressure. I think he has ample opportunity to improve this as his career progresses. You seem to be implying that there isn't a trend yet. Sure, he's only played 42 games and it's early days so maybe there isn't, I'll acknowledge that. My opinion is that there perhaps already is a pattern emerging, but I don't have a problem with you feeling like the sample size is too small.

My comment about your "incorrect opinion" on the Sydney game was intended as a light-hearted direct response to you saying that I shouldn't let facts get in the way of my "witch hunt". Probably should have included a wink emoji or something I guess. Anyone familiar with my posting would probably be aware that there is no witch hunt, that I regularly praise Atkins, and that I've tried to use facts to simply point out "hang on, this guy and Smith are not performing in these types of games, I'm now worried". It's not like I started a separate thread on this or anything. To accuse me of a witch hunt against Atkins is no different than someone accusing you of a witch hunt against Tex because you have raised the issue that he isn't performing at a high enough level right now, which I wouldn't do, because that's just silly. We're on a forum because we are passionate fans of the same club. We're going to have different opinions on certain players at times. Shit happens.

I'm far more pissed off with a guy like Smith's inability to perform in big games than Atkins' to be honest, and it's really not even close. You don't seem interested in talking about Smith though so here we are discussing Atkins. I've said elsewhere that I would drop Smith this week, and not Atkins. I really like Atkins as a player and feel like he's a genuine key to our potential success in this current window we're in, which is the only reason why I'm so concerned with the poor output thus far in these big games compared to the general output he provides in your average comfortable win. That's all.

And look, maybe a big part of it is symptomatic of others not performing in the games in question. Atkins is an outside player, and as such relies on the inside mids and half backs to get it to him a lot of the time. They tend to get smashed in these games I'm referring to (hello again Brodie), so perhaps it feeds down from there. I'll acknowledge that too.

 

[Elite Crow]

You really are pathetic. Highlighted area shows why you should probably give up having any kind of rational discussion with someone. Not to mention you constantly getting things wrong then going back and trying to cover it up with more crap. So Atkins had a bad final in his 8th game as a 20 year old (in a win) and was duly dropped Then despite being a solid contributor in his only two other finals (including a good performance in a loss) you now label a kid with 42 games experience as a downhill skier who can't perform in big games. Honestly mate, maybe take some time out to think about what you bring as a supporter. It's pretty sad.

Your way off and he's right.

 

[marty36]

Greenwood is already our best tackler and the only one that even looked like he was able to win the contested ball, you've got that one wrong

First I don't want Greenwood dropped I am looking at our midfield and we either don't have enough talent our we don't have enough strong players

But we knew this going into the year

Sloane is a gun does a truck load of gut busting runs but definetly isn't a strong player crouches get a lot of the ball but again aren't strong players we need a strong enforcer to come into that mid Greenwood at the moment isn't doing that for the fifth time I wouldn't drop him he can play on the wing but is he what we need in the mid. It's obvious we need someone who isn't hestitant and prepared to through his weight around if Tex was three years younger I would put him in there maybe they will put gov in when he is ready or even lynch but both of them seem to nice.

The team is missing a Roo type player in the mid

The most physical thing I saw on Friday was when otten took out Selwood that was good, he was committed and needed to do it but apart from that we didn't fight back one little bit, including Greenwood

Our team recruitment clearly looks like we have missed this type of player

We relied too much on Thommo to be the muscle and now he is at the end of his career there was no recruiting three years ago to replace him


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[1970crow]

Thommo with 5 kicks and 18 handballs, presumably from 95% TOG in the middle and best player according to that SANFL stats sheet. Sadly, if Pyke has changed our selection culture in any way, it's more geared to experience over output, so it's a safe bet that Thommo will return for the Saints obliteration. He's obviously moving ok though, having broken free to rack up 5 kicks.

This is my prediction of what our ideas barren group will do, assuming Lever is fine;

Out - Greenwood
In - Thommo

Greenwood's had a good taster, now knows what he needs to work on and Thommo in to provide some much needed experience. Back the rest of the crew in to respond against the mighty Saints and we'll also see if our tall structure works when we're not getting beaten at the contest again. I've got a suspicion that it might.

 

[1970crow]

Out

- Douglas and DMac, two senior players that have been carried for to long now

- Otten, structurally we are going in to tall

- Kelly, battles hard however we need more poise down back

In

- Beech, Knight, Wigg and Cheney

You know what's hilarious about that first line? There'll be a bit of panic set in, so we know they'll be reaching for experience above all else. As Pyke said last year, "you back guys in that have done good things for your club over a long period of time." Sorry, Neil, I mean Don, can you repeat that, my recorder wasn't on.

 

[1970crow]

I want to expand a little on this and change things up. I was as disappointed and surprised as everyone else when Mackay was selected through this farce.

But I want to make a suggestion based on this idea of tokenism. Now Mackay is one player definitely in the gun this week, was non-threatening and non-effective. So his removal from the side wouldn't cause me any issue.

But

What message does that send to those who clearly need a rocket? I don't think anyone truly expects 7 changes, nor 5 , so if 3 changes is going to be your minimum then there are far different players to drop who would send shudders through the side. I think Otten is tired and should go. And my message players are Smith and Atkins. I don't care if both got 30 touches last week, its when the heat was on they wilted.

If Mackay gets dropped then others coast, which has been the issue all along.

Out: Otten, Smith, Atkins (Lever assess injury)


Out: Mackay, Otten, Lever (inj) is what will happen

So you're suggesting keeping Mackay in the side and dropping players who are up and down, instead of just down, will send a good message? Mackay remaining is potentially sapping the get up and go from both sides. The A's look at him and think, shit, still here and the B's give up trying to get in, what's the point if he's still getting selected with his form?