Unofficial Preview Changes v The Dogs, round 4 in Ballarat.

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'll use the opportunity of our first win and the endorphins available to remind everyone that there's still plenty of previews that we need posters for this year!

 
On paper.

Remember when we bat deep with Beams,
Rocklifff, Redden, Rich, Robinson and Christensen?

The dogs are good, but they're overrated. They may well beat us, but they're not as good as the media likes to say they are.
They've got a look of frontrunners about them.

Be interested to see how they look if we apply real pressure .
 
On paper.

Remember when we bat deep with Beams,
Rocklifff, Redden, Rich, Robinson and Christensen?

The dogs are good, but they're overrated. They may well beat us, but they're not as good as the media likes to say they are.

Would argue their current group were better then the one you listed.

I think top 4 for them.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Pendlebury
Sidebottom
Treloar
Adams
Phillips
Crisp

vs

Bontempelli
Macrae
Dunkley
Bailey Smith
Treloar
Liberatore

You won't find too many people picking option A...

Generally over the course of their careers, I would rank those midfielders in this order:

1. Pendlebury
2. Bontempelli
3. Sidebottom
4. Macrae
5. Treloar
6. Adams
7. Liberatore
8. Smith
9. Crisp
10. Phillips

So generally, I think that Collingwood midfield does look better on paper (or at least did when they were at the peak of their powers 2/3 years ago).

Perhaps more noteworthy though is how rarely the team with what is considered to be the best on-paper midfield seems to win the premiership. People haven't often raved about Richmond's midfield as generational, nor West Coast's. Hawthorn were revered with Hodge, Mitchell & Lewis especially, but at the time I would've said that Sydney's midfield was better (and stats would have backed that up). Even in the year the Bulldogs won the flag, their midfield was just alright.

The Dogs are a good team, but so far they are only a great team on paper. It is entirely possible they do what Hawthorn did and go on to an era of dominance now a few years after their 'too early' flag, but it's far from a given that they are a great team yet. Outside of today's match, they've beaten Collingwood (only just - like we did), and narrowly beaten West Coast who it's too early to have much of a gauge on yet.

Wouldn't mind too much if the Dogs did become a dynasty though if it couldn't be us. They're exciting to watch and when you've been so unsuccessful as a club for so long, a period of time dominating the competition feels fair enough. I just am not convinced by them yet as a great team.
 
I'm just about to watch the last quarter again but a thought popped up in my mind. Has Darcy Gardiner ever played forward? He's kicked 5 goals including 2 in his first year.

I was racking my memory for his early games but nothing came up. I do remember Andrews going forward in the last quarter when we played the Doggies at Ballarat. Darcy is my number one for under rated players in the AFL. Opposition supporters have never heard of him.

I like flexibility. Adams was touted as a forward/backman when he was recruited. I think Hippy played juniors mainly down back.

Now Daniher has taken the key forward/back spot the key forward/back spots are scarce.
 
With our squad being split - 28 in Melbourne and the rest in Brisbane, how are those left in Brisbane getting any match practice and training, especially with the coaches in Melbourne?
 
Desperately need O back to meet the Dogs. Grundy mauled Fullarton and Ballenden on his own, and Grundy struggled (generally does) against Stef (who will also have English). We got the win even with Grundy putting it down the throats of his on ballers for almost the entire game, the Dogs on ballers are a far superior outfit. Granted Grundy is a better tap ruckman than either Stef or English, but if they do half as well as Grundy did the Dogs on ballers are going to have a field day getting it to their forwards.
 
On paper.

Remember when we bat deep with Beams,
Rocklifff, Redden, Rich, Robinson and Christensen?

The dogs are good, but they're overrated. They may well beat us, but they're not as good as the media likes to say they are.
The way you beat the Doggies is the way you beat any side, fierce unrelenting pressure, they like to handball so it leaves them open to turnovers under pressure, can't drop off though as they can score a run of goals quickly.
 
The way you beat the Doggies is the way you beat any side, fierce unrelenting pressure, they like to handball so it leaves them open to turnovers under pressure, can't drop off though as they can score a run of goals quickly.
You are correct with fierce relentless pressure. Robbo's tackling pressure is the way to beat them.Hitting them with fierce pressure and hardness will unsettle them causing turnovers but we will have to be hard at it for 4 quarters. No slow starts and scoreboard pressure will cause them to faulted. If we don't apply that pressure, they will score quickly.
 
I think they're a good side that is beatable by us if we play well and apply constant pressure.

So they don't worry me unduly. What I don't like is playing them at Ballarat
 
We have been playing a bit more 1v1 all over the ground the last 2 weeks so if we do this again they will not be able to control the ball anywhere near as much as they have.
Only after slow starts though.
It's like we go in with our preseason game plan and if but usually when that doesn't work we change
Too late in game 2 and nearly too late in game 3
A fair bit of 1 on 1 but a tightening up of zone defense as the game unfolded
Everyone knew Grundy would dominate the ruck but took us 1+ quarters to adjust
Eventually we ended up winning the center clearances but started off terribly.
Another season defining game against a good side that had a training drill win against North
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Out Ballenden, Ah Chee
In Berry Oscar
AH Chee to become medical sub

Assuming Diz needs another week. If not it’s Froggy who makes way for mine.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
Would argue their current group were better then the one you listed.

I think top 4 for them.

Agreed. The dogs have an insane midfield. Their starting 3 mids in Bont, Macrae and Dunkley are from the top shelf. Elite. Then throw in Libba, Treloar, Baz Smith and Hunter. They will be hard to stop.

A class below Voss, Black, Lappin, Aker, Power, Headland, but a lot stronger than Beams, Rocky, Redden, Rich etc.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
Out Ballenden, Ah Chee
In Berry Oscar
AH Chee to become medical sub

Assuming Diz needs another week. If not it’s Froggy who makes way for mine.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

I’d go the same changes mate, but would bring in Diz at the expense of Payne, rather than Frog. Hoping that the coaches keep the faith with Bez Jr and Dev. Both deserve to hold their spots after their efforts on Thursday night.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
Bringing Berry in for Neale seems a good decision. Lachie looks like he needed a break to address his back injury.
 
Assuming they’re fit I’d go with

In: McInerney, Gardiner, Berry
Out: Ballenden, Lester, Ah Chee (sub)

Dogs actually have a pretty tall forward line with Bruce, Naughton, English and the Bont so would like to Andrews, Payne, Adams and Gardiner down there. Lester has been serviceable but Gardiner is an upgrade.

Tough on Ah Chee but someone has to make way to bring Berry in to the midfield rotations and probably the only other option was Robertson
Lester not going anywhere. Payne to be the unlucky one.
 
Generally over the course of their careers, I would rank those midfielders in this order:

1. Pendlebury
2. Bontempelli
3. Sidebottom
4. Macrae
5. Treloar
6. Adams
7. Liberatore
8. Smith
9. Crisp
10. Phillips

So generally, I think that Collingwood midfield does look better on paper (or at least did when they were at the peak of their powers 2/3 years ago).

Perhaps more noteworthy though is how rarely the team with what is considered to be the best on-paper midfield seems to win the premiership. People haven't often raved about Richmond's midfield as generational, nor West Coast's. Hawthorn were revered with Hodge, Mitchell & Lewis especially, but at the time I would've said that Sydney's midfield was better (and stats would have backed that up). Even in the year the Bulldogs won the flag, their midfield was just alright.

The Dogs are a good team, but so far they are only a great team on paper. It is entirely possible they do what Hawthorn did and go on to an era of dominance now a few years after their 'too early' flag, but it's far from a given that they are a great team yet. Outside of today's match, they've beaten Collingwood (only just - like we did), and narrowly beaten West Coast who it's too early to have much of a gauge on yet.

Wouldn't mind too much if the Dogs did become a dynasty though if it couldn't be us. They're exciting to watch and when you've been so unsuccessful as a club for so long, a period of time dominating the competition feels fair enough. I just am not convinced by them yet as a great team.
I hate the doggies. Never moved on from Libber & co Never will. (& they are chuckers)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top