Changes v Collingwood

[benno87]

I know the game is still 6 days away, and we may still bre reflecting on last weeks game, but I think now is the best time to look at who should come in, and who should be out of this weeks side;

Hale's injury forces him out, and against Collingwood i'm not against allowing Porter and Brown taking ruck duties, as I would like to see McKernan earn his spot back in the side.

For me the outs would include Hale, and Eddie Sansbury, who did a good job on Davey but I just don't see him being worthy ahead of players like Urch, Jezza, Watson and Firrito.

INS: Cal Urch, Jeremy Clayton
OUTS: David Hale, Eddie Sansbury

Your thoughts?

 

[benno87]

The named team for me this week;

Makepeace Watt Archer
Sinclair Brown Colbert
A.Stevens Harris Wells
Co.Jones Petrie Grant
B.Harvey Rocca Motlop
Porter Simpson Rawlings
I: Urch J.Clayton Harding King

 

[year of the roo]

Why drop Eddie? Thought he was pretty good despite not having a lot of game time.

In: McKernan Urch Watson
Out: Hale (inj.) Harding Sinclair

Don't think J.Clayton is an AFL player, his only decent games have been in the wet. We need a quicker, more polished side and bringing Urch and Watson in accomplishes that.

 

[Jess'#1Fan]

Originally posted by year of the roo
Why drop Eddie? Thought he was pretty good despite not having a lot of game time.

In: McKernan Urch Watson
Out: Hale (inj.) Harding Sinclair

Don't think J.Clayton is an AFL player, his only decent games have been in the wet. We need a quicker, more polished side and bringing Urch and Watson in accomplishes that.

Jess was s**t but they won't drop him.

I love Jess Sinclair #9

 

[benno87]

Originally posted by year of the roo
Why drop Eddie? Thought he was pretty good despite not having a lot of game time.

Look you're probably right, and after watching the game again I have to stand corrected, Sansbury was solid when on the ground.

Originally posted by year of the roo
Don't think J.Clayton is an AFL player, his only decent games have been in the wet. We need a quicker, more polished side and bringing Urch and Watson in accomplishes that.

I disagree, I sense his smarts and use of the football is something we have really missed going into forward 50. He may not be quick, but his kicking abiloity and intellegence makes up for it. I think he will come in, even for Leigh Harding to play that Forward Pocket role, giving proper entry to Rocca and Petrie when he works up the ground.

Originally posted by year of the roo
Out: Sinclair

Definatly not, he was excellent last week providing lots of run out of the backline, and I think he was simply restricted from his run against Melbourne, and credit to them. Though if Sinclair can find room like Makepeace did in the first quarter, he will damage Collingwood.

Originally posted by year of the roo
We need a quicker, more polished side and bringing Urch and Watson in accomplishes that.

Speed probabnly wasn't our number one probelm, we know we have a fats team. But it was simply our pressure on the Half Forward line.. And even though Petrie did work hard, Rivers contained him well, and now one else (Jones, Motlop, Grant etc.) really applied any pressure on players like Brown (37 disposals) which is where Melbourne's drive comes form. Much like us as Makepeace and Sinclair demonstrated last week.

Even thogh I say that, I agree with 2 of your 3 ins, Urch and Watson should come in, as I sense Watson's ball skills are something we are screaming out for on a wing, and i'm sure Petire and ROcca are too at training. And Cal Urch could become our next 'drive' player from half back flank. IMO HBF is the most important position on the field, this is where you must contain an opponent, while still providing your teams run forward, Makepeace does it beautifully, and Sinclair does when in form. If Urch was to come in, this could create a third drive player with from what I've seen at training, Urch has the best kick at the club.

So for me, a new and revised changes;

INS: Cal Urch, Ash Watson.
OUTS: David Hale, Leigh Harding

As I said, Porter ruck, and Leigh Brown second ruckman, following Fraser around the ground, mabe allowing Porter to drop back to cover the hole infront of Tarrant.

 

[tashibatts]

Agree with those changes, Hale & Harding out, Watson & Urch in..

Urch will provide mongrel, which is what we need.. and has a killer kick on him.. would go nicely on a wing or providing run off half back.. reckon he deserves his chance.. strong mark, good kick, mongrel.. sweet.

Watson- pace and skills.. can you imagine Harro getting the ball out of Watson or Wells? If he is given game time, Rocca would feel privileged I reckon.. getting the ball off the Ws.

Talking of Harro.. mans a bloody genius, some of his one handed pickups..

Go Roos

 

[Thewlis Dish]

Originally posted by benno87
Definatly not, he was excellent last week providing lots of run out of the backline, and I think he was simply restricted from his run against Melbourne, and credit to them. Though if Sinclair can find room like Makepeace did in the first quarter, he will damage Collingwood.

Gotta disagree with you.

I think we have enough guys that can damage a team if given space, but Sinkers was almost embarrassing against Melbourne. He shirked quite a few contests, in particular one where he chose to fire off a bad handball instead of absorbing a hit which cost us a goal, and that's not acceptable IMO. Your running players can't be damaging if they don't have guys feeding them the footy in the first place. Ask Craig Bradley how much he owes to Brett Ratten. I'm willing to bet Ash Watson could use the ball as well as Sinkers given the space, too.

With that in mind, here are my changes vs Collingwood:

IN: Robbins/Firrito, Watson, Urch
OUT: Sinclair, Hale (Inj.), Harding

I named Benny Robbins because I think we just need another guy in the middle who can get under packs and get it out to the runners, like Harro does. Spud is another option here.

Normally I'd bring in McKernan, but Collingwood are very low on their rucking stocks as well at the moment, with Guy Richards doing the majority of the work. Leroy, Sav and Dish can all back up Porter and I don't think we'll be left short.

 

[benno87]

Originally posted by tashibatts
Talking of Harro.. mans a bloody genius, some of his one handed pickups..

This is something I've noticed over the last few weeks, his ability to scoop up the ball one handed while using his other arm to break free is awesome.

 

[tashibatts]

Awesome is a good word for it.. and when he has the ball, he weaves his way out of the pack and gets rid of it.. good stuff... pity that half the blokes who then get the ball just bomb it long.. which is why, having Watson & Wells sitting on the outside waiting to get the ball and then run forward is so appealing..

Go Roos

 

[Moti]

IN: Urch, Watto, Spud / Clayton x 2

OUT: Sinclair, Hale (inj), Harding

Easy for outs. Sinclair and Harding have been shirking contests, fumbling and generally poor. And Jess playing well against Port, my mum could have done as well. Like Makepeace today, it is easy to get kicks when you have no opponent. Makey only had 10 possies in the remaining 3 quarters while Jess was slaughtered today, enough said.

Ins, Urch for some aggression, we need it. Watto for some polish, and I think Harro may be picketing Dean to have this. One of the Claytons. Not a fan of Shane but in light of the 2 outs, would much rather his effort.

 

[Blaze Away]

Definitely Sinclair is out of form and confidence!
i would be bringing in LeCras in his place,who is a mature player( nearly 23) and recruited to play this year.

The ruck is the real problem!
I think its time to try McIntosh in the Team either at CHF , ruck or on the bench.Obviously he would replace Hale.

 

[benno87]

Can people please stop doing this: Firrito/Robbins etc. Why bother making changes if you're saying this guy or another? Sorry it's just annoying.

 

[Moti]

This is what AFL coaching panels do at the start of the week. They have guys they are certain of and others they probably aren't sold on. Having not seen the VFL or training for the coming week, very hard to be pinpoint of selections.

For mine, Harding and Jess must go and Hale is injured. That leaves 3 ins, Urch and Watto definites while the 3rd could be a a bit of a toss up. Depends on the opposition too. If Fraser plays, Corey may come in, if not, add another smaller player.

 

[Thewlis Dish]

Originally posted by benno87
Can people please stop doing this: Firrito/Robbins etc. Why bother making changes if you're saying this guy or another? Sorry it's just annoying.

Well on that note, why bother making changes on a Sunday?

If you can make your changes now with the certainty that it won't change as the next week unfolds, I'd be very surprised.

In regards to the 'Robbins/Firrito' comment, I said that because both can play the same role I was pushing for. In the end it comes down to match-ups, where Spud probably has the edge.

 

[Darky]

Dean's obviously not sold on Sav, but I'd say Sav has done more in his two games than Corey did in seven. If Corey is fit, I can't see Dean leaving him out, although I'd prefer to see him return via Port Melbourne. Maybe Hale's injury does provide an opening, but if the straight swap was made we look top heavy with the three dinosaurs plus Brown and Drewy. Could force Porter or Sav out unfortunately - more likely Porter.

 

[hurricane]

Meh!

I think it is time people realised that Harding and J.Clayton aren't interchangable.

Yes, they both play in the forward line, but when Harding is in the team, Dean isolates him in the forward line, trying to use his pace to either lead or run onto the ball. Clayton just doesn't have the pace to do this!

For what it's worth, I didn't think Harding had a particularly bad game. No, his stats weren't particularly good. But he spent all his time leading out hard from Full Forward then running hard back towards goal. In other words, playing to instruction. It's hard to win heaps of the ball up the ground or tackle players in the middle when you're doing that! And for what it's worth, he netted two goals!

Now if he was given free reign, then yes, I'd agree his stats were a worry. But to me, it looked like he was following instructions/plan to the letter. If Dean drops him it will because he wants to change his options/game plan, not because Harding hasn't followed it.

The thing is, right or wrong, Clayton isn't capable of playing this game.

OK, rant over, it's my birthday and I've just come home fairly ****ed from the pub and wanted to vent my spleen before trying to front up to work tomorrow!

 

[Moti]

With Boomer and Grant being relatively poor in the midfield, surely they could provide the forward spark, along with Motlop and Jones and allow the promotion of a midfielder like Watson for Harding. I don't think we necessarily need a goal sneek at the minute, particuarly when the options are so limited in performance.

 

[Woodson]

Front n' Square Crumbers urgently required

Originally posted by Moti
I don't think we necessarily need a goal sneek at the minute, particuarly when the options are so limited in performance.

Then would 10 goals be enough to win a game ??
Don't agree Moti. Goal sneaks add 2-3 goals that can relatively tip the scale in our favour. If JYD continues to bench Sav and Petrie is playing the decoy of dragging his opponent out of the action then who can be relied on to kick some goals??..surely Browny needs to return to CHF to give us stability / a geniune target otherwise we'll continually struggle. Our front n' square crumbers have been the BIG DISSAPPOINTMENT aspect to getting the scoreboard clicking (take away the PA & Crow games).

 

[Moti]

Shouldn't Boomer, Grant, Motlop and Jones be enough in the forward line as goal sneaks? Throw in Sansbury as a permanant forward and we have plenty of options. Our major problem is in the middle at the moment and that is where I would be focusing the attention. And Harding is not actually a very good crumber at all.

 

[Tas]

The only change that makes any sense is Hale coming out of the side, and that is because he broke his hand.

What has been our major weakness over the last two months? Two things, one is the attack on the ball and the other is the use of the ball when we have it.

Our disposals inside 50 are just plain woeful at the moment. Do any of the changes anyone has suggested address the two main problems?

No.

Reality is the kids who are going to come in are not going to be any better than the people we have in the side. The only thing that will be achieved is giving them experience at the cost of reducing the chance we have of winning the game.

I dont care if we play 22 kids in the seniors, if we are writing off the rest of the year and just giving experience and seeing who is going to make it then thats fine with me.

Is Clayton going to make the 10 goal difference to the side? No. Are the combined changes going to? No.

The way the ball is going forward unless we are going to throw in Lockett, Ablett and Carey at their prime into the side then nobody else is going to make a difference. Those are the only type of players that can turn extremely poor inside 50s into opportunities.

The ball is bouncing out of our forwad line like we are trying to kick over the great wall of china. It is coming in very ugly and we do not have the forward line capable of taking constant spectacular contested marks.

We are using the ball very poorly up the ground and none of the changes suggested are going to fix any of that.

Thus, I do not really care who comes in or out because that alone is not going to make a spit of difference.

The only way we will beat Collingwood is to use the ball alot better and I think the main culprits of the poor disposal are not ever highlighted as the main problem of our team.

If Sinclair got 50 touches and could not hit the side of a barn with any of them would you be happy with that effort? Its not important how much of the ball they get, what is more important is what they do when they have the ball.

People constantly gloss over some players because they get alot of the ball, they chip it sideways but whenever it goes forward its a clanger or not to our advantage, but you look at the stats and say, he got 30 touches so he was okay.

So watch the replay again and look at all our midfielders and half backers play and move the ball forward and tell me what you think about the delivery forward, because that is our weakest part of our game.

We had more inside 50s than Melbourne but really never looked like kicking goals comfortably. That is the number one priority to address, whoever is playing.

We have some guys like Ash and Trotter who are pretty good kicks but they have no experience. It is unlikely that they are going to come into the side and be overnight stars. Someone like Sinclair or Harding or one of the other senior players is more likely of rolling up next week and having a good game than a kid who hasn't seen many if any senior games.

So if you are looking for changes to actually win the game you are barking up the wrong tree.

 

[Dingster]

Originally posted by Tas
We have some guys like Ash and Trotter who are pretty good kicks but they have no experience. It is unlikely that they are going to come into the side and be overnight stars.

No, but we have to get some games and experience into the guys that are going to be a part of our perceived long term goals. Watson has done enough to deserve a game here and there ala Jezza to demonstrate where he's at and what he needs working on.

I'm not advocating playing the youngsters for the sake of it. There has to be balance and purpose along the way. This could be done by dropping Harding for a few weeks to let him get some confidence back and work on deficiencies playing with Port. I don't think that we'd lose a lot by doing it and the senior players would be on notice that they shouldn't think that they will get an automatic game.

I totally agree with your points re delivery inside 50 and quality of possessions. Once again, the training I went to when in Melbourne had a drill where the midfielders were encouraged to kick of one or two steps. The kicks were sprayed all over the place and the boys were being encouraged. It's no wonder we are inconsistent come the weekend.

 

[roobear]

I thought the glaring problem against Melbourne was that there was never a man in space between wing and our 50.

In: S. Clayton

I'll also add my vote to the push to see Watson back in the seniors....

 

[Angus1]

I don't think changes will make much differnce at all but i would like to see J.Clayton play as a forward pocket crumbing Big Sav.

 

[FrangaRoo]

HARDING OUT!

He is NOT a key forward, he cannot play one on one.
He is a crumber, a goal sneak, not tall or strong enough to be playing in the goal square while SAV is on the bench.

 

[Moti]

Last year Watson showed his disposal was very good in the seniors, missing I think 1 target for his 4 games.

He will make a huge difference. Just 3 or 4 direct kicks will give us an extra 3 or 4 shots on goal. THAT can make a difference.