Prediction Changes v Hawthorn (Round 18)

[mightymouse75]

I like the fact no one is calling for Baners
and Jom to come out.
Even Wags played a solid game.
It's an all-round solid effort.
Maybe it's time to rotate the old sore and tired so everyone is fresh for the f word..

 

[mattis117]

He is still best 22. Therefore he will play.

It really isn't rocket science.

I don't have him in my best 22. He's about #24 for me.

 

[DocT]

I like the fact no one is calling for Baners
and Jom to come out.
Even Wags played a solid game.
It's an all-round solid effort.
Maybe it's time to rotate the old sore and tired so everyone is fresh for the f word..

I'm wary of rotating players simply for resting purposes. Top 4 is a real possibility for us but if we drop a game or two we could fall 2-3 places. We're currently 1.5 games from 10th spot! ATM we have to be going all out with the best available every week and I don't think we have a game left where we would be safe to think 95% of our best is enough to get the job done. That could change of course.

 

[arsesmart]

I like the fact no one is calling for Baners
and Jom to come out.
Even Wags played a solid game.
It's an all-round solid effort.
Maybe it's time to rotate the old sore and tired so everyone is fresh for the f word..

The level Banfield needs to bring week in and out, he almost requires a change up every so often...a game of two at a lower level or even as sub. Allowing him to reset his barometer and click into a refreshed clarity of mind.

Banfield's decision making over the past few games has been generally and frustratingly sub (sub) par. Left goals out there at crucial moments. Ones that could've finished both Sydney and the Tigers off much earlier in both games.

He seems ready for one of those breaks to me... of one sort of another.

 

[ubiquitous226]

The level Banfield needs to bring week in and out, he almost requires a change up every so often...a game of two at a lower level or even as sub. Allowing him to reset his barometer and click into a refreshed clarity of mind.

Banfield's decision making over the past few games has been generally and frustratingly sub (sub) par. Left goals out there at crucial moments. Ones that could've finished both Sydney and the Tigers off much earlier in both games.

He seems ready for one of those breaks to me... of one sort of another.

Banfield definitely had one of his poorest games for the year, but given how he's gone I would prefer they back him in.

If the poor game turned into a trend then his position would be in danger, but in the meantime he's been quite solid and very versatile.

 

[arsesmart]

Banfield definitely had one of his poorest games for the year, but given how he's gone I would prefer they back him in.

If the poor game turned into a trend then his position would be in danger, but in the meantime he's been quite solid and very versatile.

It's not so much "backing him in" or not. He's got credits in the bank for sure (even though it's been two or three weeks now).

It's more what's better for both Banfield's game and critically for maximising cylinders firing as we start the taxiing off the runway.

 

[doppo]

Is Voss definitely a no in terms of chop in ruckman? Or would we still use Treacy as 2nd ruck?

Crudely put - Can we do Jackson takes Darcy’s role, Voss takes Jackson’s role?

 

[FreoGirl]

I like the fact no one is calling for Baners
and Jom to come out.
Even Wags played a solid game.
It's an all-round solid effort.
Maybe it's time to rotate the old sore and tired so everyone is fresh for the f word..

I’ve seen some who have…

 

[Nodgey]

…I'm sure Reidy comes in if Darcy and Jackson are both out…

I’m just concerned that playing Jackson full time ruck increases the chances of this exact thing happening. Though I guess it is only for 1 game.

 

[Freoforever86]

I’ve seen some who have…

It’s almost like people are allowed differing opinions on players.

 

[Freoforever86]

Laughable take to drop Banfield. Previous years yes, this year he'd be contending for a top 10 finish in the B&F.

Top 5 - Young, Serong, Clark, Treacy, Pearce
Next lot - Ryan, Brayshaw, Jackson, Switta, Banfield/Sharp.

Didn’t say drop him this week.
I said if Voss comes in and plays well, and banfield has another poor game - and his last 3 have certainly been poor - then drop banfield.

If he finds the form again, happy to keep him in. But he’s not a player you keep in out of form. Some you let work through, he’s not one.

 

[malpaso]

Banfield is our one true utility in the side, he isn't coming out.

Walters is IMO the weak link unless he somehow magically starts beating opponents. Remember he came on against the bottom side in the comp.

I think the addition of resting midfielders has strengthened our forward line more so than Walters playing.

 

[Docker82]

I’m just concerned that playing Jackson full time ruck increases the chances of this exact thing happening. Though I guess it is only for 1 game.

It's happened how many times this season and Jackson hasn't missed yet?

Ultimately every time a player steps onto the field there's a risk of injury. But you still play your best players because it's about winning not avoiding injuries.

Jackson doesn't play anything like Darcy. He uses his athleticism and Darcy is playing more physical because that's his strength - it does lead to more things like what happened on Saturday though.

 

[FreoGirl]

Didn’t say drop him this week.
I said if Voss comes in and plays well, and banfield has another poor game - and his last 3 have certainly been poor - then drop banfield.

If he finds the form again, happy to keep him in. But he’s not a player you keep in out of form. Some you let work through, he’s not one.

Banfield is being used to 'fill gaps' each week, so he is much needed - he even had a spell down back when Draper went off. So much experience as a sub has made him versatile.

After our win against The Bulldogs (April 28)

"Coach Justin Longmuir was full of praise for his out-of-contract forward who has become somewhat of a Mr Fix-It for Fremantle."

 

[ubiquitous226]

Banfield is being used to 'fill gaps' each week, so he is much needed - he even had a spell down back when Draper went off. So much experience as a sub has made him versatile.

Even earlier in his career it's what meant he's gotten games, versatility is an asset.

It won't be enough forever, but hopefully we can see him get back to good form, and take his opportunities in front of goal.

 

[Footskill]

Banfield is being used to 'fill gaps' each week, so he is much needed - he even had a spell down back when Draper went off. So much experience as a sub has made him versatile.

Yeh. His role is different ATM to how it was at the start of the season. The luxury of having a utility to plug holes is good to have.

Whereas I didn't think it was his best game on the weekend, and made few errors, I wouldn't agree as some claim, worst on ground or subpar. Two direct score involvements

Mainly the kick to young could of been better, and not sure why he is kicking at goal on the ground unless it's a directive under the conditions. He did burn sharpy a bit but sharpy does the same thing as he generally looks to kick long. Not sure about the Young kick whether it was misjudged like Sonny's or the wind.

Anyway Laidley gave banners a 6 so yeh..

Thing was he was involved unlike some who were invisible...you can see him run up and down the ground trying to provide an option but not always used


what grinds me is that the errors others make not even mentioned or harped upon

 

[FreoGirl]

Even earlier in his career it's what meant he's gotten games, versatility is an asset.

It won't be enough forever, but hopefully we can see him get back to good form, and take his opportunities in front of goal.

I feel like we lost a couple of our matches because we had early injuries and the team began to panic because our whole tight structure collapsed (mentally) so it's good to have someone experienced who can play many roles.

I was impressed how the team coped without Darcy and Draper going down - we seem to have a better emergency plan for these situations, even though it was against the bottom side (who always wants to beat us)

 

[ubiquitous226]

Yeh. His role is different ATM to how it was at the start of the season. The luxury of having a utility to plug holes is good to have.

Whereas I didn't think it was his best game on the weekend, and made few errors, I wouldn't agree as some claim, worst on ground or subpar.

Mainly the kick to young could of been better, and not sure why he is kicking at goal on the ground unless it's a directive under the conditions

Anyway Laidley gave banners a 6 so yeh..

Thing was he was involved unlike some who were invisible...what grinds me is that the errors others make not even mentioned or harped upon

For me compared to Banfield's previous performances it wasn't great, but I didn't think he was terrible.

Some of the past criticisms of him were again evident - some quite average decision making and a couple examples of poor execution (shot at goal, intercepted handball).

I think in the past a game like that would lead to him out of the team, but I hope it doesn't now as I think his average level is higher and he helps balance the team.

 

[FreoGirl]

Yeh. His role is different ATM to how it was at the start of the season. The luxury of having a utility to plug holes is good to have.

Whereas I didn't think it was his best game on the weekend, and made few errors, I wouldn't agree as some claim, worst on ground or subpar. Two direct score involvements

Mainly the kick to young could of been better, and not sure why he is kicking at goal on the ground unless it's a directive under the conditions. He did burn sharpy a bit but sharpy does the same thing as he generally looks to kick long

Anyway Laidley gave banners a 6 so yeh..

Thing was he was involved unlike some who were invisible...what grinds me is that the errors others make not even mentioned or harped upon

Clark and Sharp are my absolute favourites, so I probably watched them the most. Clark had a few clangers, but he gets so many possessions he is able to be forgiven. That weather made it difficult for everyone out there.

 

[Taylor]

It's quite a luxury to be able to lose your number one ruck and be talking about replacing him with a key forward who kicked six in the WAFL.

We absolutely lose a weapon missing Darcy, but it's not two fold at the moment as Jackson has been alright but not a star for us for a while - he might need a change of role into more ruck to bring him back to the game a bit.

He is a big lad so if we expect to lose the tap but with enough bodywork that tap won't be targeted, then Luke plans to put himself between Meek and ball, or the opponent of Serong/Young etc and his team mates then we can not lose too much in way of clearance.

I would like for Voss to kick four or five, but I'd like for him to take some huge marks even more. Getting on the end of other's work for a handful of goals isn't as good as making those chances for others. Same number of goals team wise.

 

[Freoforever86]

Banfield is being used to 'fill gaps' each week, so he is much needed - he even had a spell down back when Draper went off. So much experience as a sub has made him versatile.

After our win against The Bulldogs (April 28)

"Coach Justin Longmuir was full of praise for his out-of-contract forward who has become somewhat of a Mr Fix-It for Fremantle."

Cool. He had a good game in April.
It’s July tho.

As I mentioned, if he plays well, happy to keep him in.
If his poor form continues, drop him.
I want Freo to win, I couldn’t care less who’s playing well for us to do so.

If it makes you feel any better, there’s only a handful of players I’d say to keep in, in poor form.

 

[Freoforever86]

Yeh. His role is different ATM to how it was at the start of the season. The luxury of having a utility to plug holes is good to have.

Whereas I didn't think it was his best game on the weekend, and made few errors, I wouldn't agree as some claim, worst on ground or subpar. Two direct score involvements

Mainly the kick to young could of been better, and not sure why he is kicking at goal on the ground unless it's a directive under the conditions. He did burn sharpy a bit but sharpy does the same thing as he generally looks to kick long. Not sure about the Young kick whether it was misjudged like Sonny's or the wind.

Anyway Laidley gave banners a 6 so yeh..

Thing was he was involved unlike some who were invisible...you can see him run up and down the ground trying to provide an option but not always used


what grinds me is that the errors others make not even mentioned or harped upon

He kicked along the ground cause he has no right foot.

 

[Footskill]

He kicked along the ground cause he has no right foot.

Pretty sure he snapped the goal against lions on the right foot.. anyway that far out don't think that was the reason

Also this goal at peel on the right

Pity his snaps on goal have deserted him, used to snap then and couldn't miss

 

[anchor man]

The level Banfield needs to bring week in and out, he almost requires a change up every so often...a game of two at a lower level or even as sub. Allowing him to reset his barometer and click into a refreshed clarity of mind.

Banfield's decision making over the past few games has been generally and frustratingly sub (sub) par. Left goals out there at crucial moments. Ones that could've finished both Sydney and the Tigers off much earlier in both games.

He seems ready for one of those breaks to me... of one sort of another.

Banners does not go out of the team.As has been sdaid before by Longmuir, he has a role to play. Every week it is different. He is probably the most versatlie player in the team and squad.He plays forward, he plays wing, he plays down back, he tags, he runs through the mid field.
I never cease to be amazed that supporters want players rested simply because they ahve played a certain number ogf games in a season. They have trained all summer for thst.Someone suggested earlier that Johnson should be rested.. why? he is in the best form of his short career and his body is hardened to play at the level required.
Teams don't spell players like race horses. There would not be a player in the squad that would want a REST at this stage of the season. They have just had their REST with the bye.

 

[anchor man]

Meek will destroy Jackson in the wrestle.

Rotation last night seemed to be Jackson in ruck/Treacy forward, then Jackson goes to bench while Treacy rucks, then Jackson comes back on and Treacy goes to the bench, then Jackson in the ruck/Treacy forward.

Jackson was there at least twice as long as Treacy, I'd also argue that Treacy is a better mark at the moment than Jackson - and one of our best field kicks.

What we lose forward I think will balance.

Jackson will not try to body Meek. He will do what he did against Nankervis, jump early and into the body.
Jacko's classic was at the start of the third quarter I think it was.Jumped into Nank, took control of the abll, landed and like a gazelle he was outa ther delivering a lightening pass forward. Two kicks a goal.