Preview Changes V Gold Coast TIO Stadium SATURDAY NIGHT June 3rd

[WaynesWorld19]

Schoey averaging 24 disposals and a goal a game which is his best season in sanfl

Schoeys stats at SANFL level, are not reflective of his performance areas, that are keeping him down there

He's too good for SANFL .....however he needs to demonstrate a more aggressive approach to breaking tackles and on the man with the ball .....he comes across as very lackadaisical

 

[Jeffcrowe]

Schoeys stats at SANFL level, are not reflective of his performance areas, that are keeping him down there

He's too good for SANFL .....however he needs to demonstrate a more aggressive approach to breaking tackles and on the man with the ball .....he comes across as very lackadaisical

I reckon it’s his ball take that holds him back

Can get away with fumbling at sanfl level

He does alot right though

 

[WaynesWorld19]

I reckon it’s his ball take that holds him back

Can get away with fumbling at sanfl level

He does alot right though

That can be reflective of mindset as well Jeff ......my view is, Schoenberg is normally a 1 grab player

 

[GrommoT]

Absolutely zero chance of Doedee staying on his feet up in Darwin.
A drinking game for every time he slips over will have me slaughtered by half time.

Ok, I had a look at the Bris game where DD seems to fall over to try and see why.

It looks like a lot of the time, it's because he's launching himself at this opponent to effect a spoil. Other times it's because he's wrestling with his opponent and he gets thrown around. Sometimes, he's running and reaching forward and down for the ball and his opponent gives him a bit of a nudge on his back to send him sprawling forward.

So I don't think he's falling over because he's double left footed.

 

[crowsup]

You need to give an opinion to be able to be right or wrong Preferably it’s before the event so we know it’s yours ….

Very true! But you may have noticed that I don't give too many opinions here. Before of after. at least in regards to selections. I don't go to training sessions and don't see the quality or form of the players. So, if nothing else, at best it would be more like what I would like to see, rather than what I believe it should be. But, it appears to me, that some of the guys in here seem to present their opinions as very informed assessments, when in actual fact appear to be first thoughts without one iota of proper knowledge.
For example; some say that Worrell is not selected this week because he's not liked by Nicks. That to me sounds like it is a judgement without foundation nor proof. Now, it may very well be that, but would it not be more likely that he believes Worrell is not yet as good as Hinge or Smith? That Nicks could be wrong in his opinion may be correct, but that is not what it is claimed by the members that believe not selecting Worrell is wrong.
The other problem is that if we happen to lose this week, they all will be saying that they were right, when even in hindsight it would be wrong to believe that because they cannot prove that we would have won the game if Worrell had been included in the squad.
I guess that if we win against the suns, I would have the right to say that it was good that the selectors didn't select Worrell. Because if Worrell had played we may have lost.

 

[Hobbes]

Worrell out.

* the crows coaches and their stupid religious devotion to structure.

If we had Dunstall, Plugger and Ablett Senior on our list, our selectors would only play one of them because our structure is for only one full forward.

Remember when Blight left out Modra because the structure worked better without him?

 

[Hobbes]

Interesting - according to Champion data we have the 2nd easiest draw in the run home.

The run home​

Hardest to easiest draw*
MISSING: summary MISSING: current-rows.

		Team
1		Geelong	+6.9
2		West Coast	+3.6
3		Hawthorn	+3.6
4		Port Adelaide	+2.9
5		Sydney	+2.1
6		Brisbane Lions	+1.7
7		Carlton	+1.2
8		Collingwood	+1
9		Gold Coast	+0.5
10		Melbourne	+0.2
11		GWS	-0.5
12		Fremantle	-0.8
13		North Melbourne	-0.9
14		Richmond	-2.8
15		St Kilda	-2.9
16		Western Bulldogs	-4.0
17		Adelaide	-5.8
18		Essendon	-6.1

* As ranked by Champion Data formula.

I definitely have Essendon and the Bulldogs as the softest rides home. We're about 5th. Geelong is the toughest by far, followed by Sydney. I'm ignoring teams with no hope - West Coast inevitably have a tough draw because they don't get to play West Coast.

 

[Scorpus]

Where has this Worrell managed bullshit come from? Someone at the club?

 

[Danger in Texas]

I reckon it’s his ball take that holds him back

Can get away with fumbling at sanfl level

He does alot right though

There’s a reason I call him Fumbleberg these days

 

[George Kramer]

Where has this Worrell managed bullshit come from? Someone at the club?

No, some on here trying to find an excuse

 

[George Kramer]

Very true! But you may have noticed that I don't give too many opinions here. Before of after. at least in regards to selections. I don't go to training sessions and don't see the quality or form of the players. So, if nothing else, at best it would be more like what I would like to see, rather than what I believe it should be. But, it appears to me, that some of the guys in here seem to present their opinions as very informed assessments, when in actual fact appear to be first thoughts without one iota of proper knowledge.
For example; some say that Worrell is not selected this week because he's not liked by Nicks. That to me sounds like it is a judgement without foundation nor proof. Now, it may very well be that, but would it not be more likely that he believes Worrell is not yet as good as Hinge or Smith? That Nicks could be wrong in his opinion may be correct, but that is not what it is claimed by the members that believe not selecting Worrell is wrong.
The other problem is that if we happen to lose this week, they all will be saying that they were right, when even in hindsight it would be wrong to believe that because they cannot prove that we would have won the game if Worrell had been included in the squad.
I guess that if we win against the suns, I would have the right to say that it was good that the selectors didn't select Worrell. Because if Worrell had played we may have lost.

I feel the Worrell example you have provided isn’t a good one.

The opinion that Nicks doesn’t like Worrell is held by very few and one I don’t agree with. We have a defensive unit that’s performing very well and it’s a hard one to break into and his early season injuries haven’t helped. He came into the side due to injury and despite performing well is losing his place because of injured Hinge coming back. That’s it. What I’ve railed against is this fantasy that he’s missing because of conditioning, some have clutched to this theory because they can’t come to terms that he could be dropped.

If we lose it’s not because Worrell didn’t play, it will be due to our midfield, kicking poorly for goal or if we don’t play well, I don’t think anyone will refer to Worrell missing as to the reason why, so as I said Worrells non-selection isn’t a good example. Having said that I’m concerned about Sloanes diminishing input in the midfield and would have rested him, moved Hinge to the wing, Soligo in the middle and Worrell stayed.

Some decisions are easy to identify in advance and easy to give an opinion on, you shouldn’t be shy to just because you don’t work at the club. This is a football forum and we give our opinions and you need to be able to defend them.

I’ll give some easy examples and you tell me if you needed to be at the club to work out these were wrong:

Crouch replacing McAdam against Hawks at Marvel. A slow plodding mid replaced a forward, he ends up on the wing and we lose.
Going in short against a tall Richmond forward line, who end up kicking 8 and we lose.
Crouch as the sub against Geelong, produces negative metres gained. Now I’m not saying he was the reason we lost but he sure didn’t help us win.
None of us knew that Nicks planned on burning Soligo out and subbing him. But had we known that Soligo would be subbed despite playing well some of us would have given an opinion that it was bad move. It’s just commonsense, you don’t sub a mid playing well! We lost with 10 secs to go and that move was costly. The irony is Nicks admits to a mistake and some still don’t accept it, they can’t bring themselves to accepting Nicks makes errors, because he works at the club.

These errors were obvious and despite all the inner knowledge and experience, our coaches made them. So I don’t buy into this we can’t give an opinion because they must know better, football is a judgement game and sometimes despite all the knowledge, judgement sucks. Otherwise no coaches would be sacked because they all display great judgement as they have all the knowledge that we don’t.

Now I’ve been on my high horse all preseason about Dawson being wasted in defence. Sure I said he should be played wing, not midfield, but midfield or wing, we utilise his strengths, his kicking into our forward line, not manning up a forward and being pushed into defence. This is a football opinion based on watching him play, not train. Nicks had him in defence until Dawson asked to move and the rest is history. Our midfield has improved and our defence managed without him, in fact, I think it’s flourished. IMO if Dawson was in the middle round 1 we beat both GWS and Richmond.

Long post but ultimately unless you’re prepared to give an opinion, it’s rather weak to criticise others when they do and especially when they have shown their opinions are sometimes correct.

 

[1970crow]

IMO the most significant change this week is in the emergencies - Strachan replacing Himmelberg.

having a ruck listed there is fairly normal from memory. Hasn't Strachan just been coming back from injury, so not a viable replacement until now?

 

[1970crow]

This article explicitly says they were omitted, and Nicks straight up says it's because the ins were playing great footy previously so the squad is too strong for the outs to fit in. I think it's 100% clear at this stage that they don't see Worrell as fitting into our current best 22.

Tough selection calls a product of strong squad: Nicks

it's astounding anyone ever formed a view that they did.

 

[1970crow]

I

I don't think the team got the job done the week before against the dogs. Hinge didn't play as he got injured in the first quarter. Maybe he was getting confused with the St Kilda game.

And Smith has been poor for a number of games and the wrong age bracket. This is the perfect example of where there's minimal difference between the output of the 2 players so you look to the future. Smith can be the guy that waits for injuries to come in and help the group out.

 

[Jeffcrowe]

That can be reflective of mindset as well Jeff ......my view is, Schoenberg is normally a 1 grab player

I have no doubt he plays in an anxious state which has influence on his ball take and decision making

 

[1970crow]

I think Worrell is going to comfortably be in our best 22 in 2024-onwards. Glad he has signed an extension.

2023 Backline Auto Selections: Murray, Butts, Smithers, Michalanney & Milera (plus capt Dawson sliding back from midfield)
Competing for spots: Doedee, Hinge, Worrell (without any injury openings, they're competing with Butts & Michalanney).

Worrell was good last week vs Brisbane, but it was clear he was cramping in the game. Hinge & Smithers are fully fit and now the team is flying to Darwin for a must-win match against GCS and so I think it was easy to avoid taking a big risk on Worrell cramping half way through the game in Darwin. It takes nothing away from Worrell at all. He probably needs a 3-4 game stretch to get his nose in front of one of Butts/Hinge/Doedee at the selection table.
Only need an injury to 1 backline player and Worrell gets a multi-game stretch to prove himself.
I also think Worrell is our ready-to-go right-size replacement for the loss of Doedee late this year. Feels like Doedee will go home.

Moving on from the Backline... to the midfield.
Who plays on Rowell & Anderson? Laird & Keays?
This match is going to be an absolute belter. Go Crows.

Won't he be better in 2024 when we are wanting to win finals with an extra half a season of development in the AFL? What value the games we're ploughing into Smith be then? If there was a reasonable difference in output or Worrell just not yet ready, then sure, let's go with 'selection integrity', but choosing Smith over Worrell is the same contending selection philosophy that has seen us mired in averageness for the last 2 decades.

 

[Jeffcrowe]

And Smith has been poor for a number of games and the wrong age bracket. This is the perfect example of where there's minimal difference between the output of the 2 players so you look to the future. Smith can be the guy that waits for injuries to come in and help the group out.

Smith as in Brodie Smith ?

He’s having a very strong season from about round 2 onwards

A quiet game against dogs like the whole team then injured

Coaches votes and close to BOG the week before that

 

[1970crow]

What would you have done this week ?

Out of interest

Worrell stays, Smith misses. Sloane to sub or full rest, Ned full game.

 

[1970crow]

Smith as in Brodie Smith ?

He’s having a very strong season from about round 2 onwards

A quiet game against dogs like the whole team then injured

Coaches votes and close to BOG the week before that

Smith has feasted when opponents fail to bring any intensity, he's been largely invisible in the games we've had to grind away in. Reality is that there's a kid who has played very well, despite limited opportunity, who isn't far enough behind him to warrant him holding his spot. Smith and Sloane are both in this category. Sloane can mount an argument in terms of having made a difference in the back half of games that were on the line. Smith can't.

 

[Jeffcrowe]

Worrell stays, Smith misses. Sloane to sub or full rest, Ned full game.

Out of those I would have been most happy with sloane one

Smith must have been close to playing last week and has been good this season so play

Mchenry I struggle with but concede he’s good in sub role

 

[Jeffcrowe]

Smith has feasted when opponents fail to bring any intensity, he's been largely invisible in the games we've had to grind away in. Reality is that there's a kid who has played very well, despite limited opportunity, who isn't far enough behind him to warrant him holding his spot. Smith and Sloane are both in this category. Sloane can mount an argument in terms of having made a difference in the back half of games that were on the line. Smith can't.

Nah can’t agree re smith , he’s bounced back to have a very solid season after a poor round 1

Better season that last year , averaging 23 possessions a game since then and some of his best football , we aren’t playing in a development league as a feeder club for someone else so he should be playing to help us win and make finals

Still think Redman is important target to take his role going forward as he doesn’t have long left , maybe 12-18 months

Re Sloane - coaches have used him v wisely this year with building his game time in second halfs and providing a chop out for some of our mids that aren’t full time yet , still would have been a decent week to rest him or play him sub IMO , think it should be his last season and think he’s playing a nice role

 

[CrowBloke]

Where has this Worrell managed bullshit come from? Someone at the club?

Last week, Hinge OUT (inj), Worrell IN.
Hinge has recovered, so
Worrell OUT, Hinge IN.
It's that uncomplicated, isn't it?

(Btw, is there a Game Day thread, please?)

 

[1970crow]

Nah can’t agree re smith , he’s bounced back to have a very solid season after a poor round 1

Better season that last year , averaging 23 possessions a game since then and some of his best football , we aren’t playing in a development league as a feeder club for someone else so he should be playing to help us win and make finals

Still think Redman is important target to take his role going forward as he doesn’t have long left , maybe 12-18 months

Re Sloane - coaches have used him v wisely this year with building his game time in second halfs and providing a chop out for some of our mids that aren’t full time yet , still would have been a decent week to rest him or play him sub IMO , think it should be his last season and think he’s playing a nice role

I don't think Worrell ahead of him has much impeding factor against our performance. And this is the mistake we always make, we overvalue what players do when we have good wins and ignore what they do as aberrations when opponents bring the heat. At his age and how he performs in tight contests or when we lose and the fact Worrell performs at a solid level is why Smith should make way.

Sloane playing early effectively has us playing 17 v 18. He's about 50% TOG in the first half and barely touches it. It's terrible management of him and the team because the game time is totally wasted and others have to cover the minutes he can't handle. Ladt week it was the first 3 quarters, so it's deteriorating, as you'd expect. And he's another who's total game output is no different, most likely less, than what next man up would bring.

 

[Jeffcrowe]

Won't he be better in 2024 when we are wanting to win finals with an extra half a season of development in the AFL? What value the games we're ploughing into Smith be then? If there was a reasonable difference in output or Worrell just not yet ready, then sure, let's go with 'selection integrity', but choosing Smith over Worrell is the same contending selection philosophy that has seen us mired in averageness for the last 2 decades.

I don’t think they’re fighting for same spot

Worrell more vs Butts Doedee than Hinge or Smith

I really think Worrell can end up our 2nd KPD eventually … if Trent McKenzie can do it well Worrell can do it even better

The value of ploughing games into smith is it’s a live season and we are playing in a professional football competition

Why do you want to kick the can down the road further and further ? I don’t think your smith season analysis is correct , he was weaker last season

I don't think Worrell ahead of him has much impeding factor against our performance. And this is the mistake we always make, we overvalue what players do when we have good wins and ignore what they do as aberrations when opponents bring the heat. At his age and how he performs in tight contests or when we lose and the fact Worrell performs at a solid level is why Smith should make way.

Sloane playing early effectively has us playing 17 v 18. He's about 50% TOG in the first half and barely touches it. It's terrible management of him and the team because the game time is totally wasted and others have to cover the minutes he can't handle. Ladt week it was the first 3 quarters, so it's deteriorating, as you'd expect. And he's another who's total game output is no different, most likely less, than what next man up would bring.

For all this terrible management stuff , can’t wait until we get it right as we should win the next 5 flags in a row

 

[MsTopG]

Worrell stays, Smith misses. Sloane to sub or full rest, Ned full game.

Worrell should have stayed but the only factor for dropping him is that with the heat in Darwin he might cramp in the heat seeing as though he cramped last week. Must play next week. We need to fix our ground ball defence 10-15m out from goal. Too often we have 4 players competing who can't get the ball over the line for a point and we end up with the ball pinballing around off legs and players falling over (mostly Doedee or sometimes Butts). The other mistske is the short 2 metre bad handball that gets sweated on for a goal. We must clean that up as we consistently give up 2-3 goals a week from it. That goal where Charlie Cameron somehow got the ball and ran around the goal side of our players to kick the goal was not good enough.