Unofficial Preview Changes vs GWS

[Kane McGoodwin]

Or where he plays this week. Looks like he's been named in a forward pocket

If Sauce can kick 5 resting up forward, so can Hugh... in the 1st half, then rest up in the 2nd half.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

I think McHenry is too good for us to pigeon hole him early into a forward pressure role. He's certainly a better overall player than Murphy, but the role they have there is pretty much perfect for Murphy at the moment. Like with Jones, i'm not convinced that they'd have more success in a limited role than who we already have in.

It's a good role to blood McHenry in the AFL though... & we can use him in a few midfield rotations.

 

[huludicidal]

Hasn't been good for 2 weeks.

Greenwood was in our best 4 players against West Coast. Was the best player on the ground at half time in fact.

He was also instrumental in the 4th quarter comeback against Melbourne and comfortably outperformed the likes of Atkins for the entire game.

He had a stinker against Brisbane 3 weeks ago, but had absolutely atoned for this over the last fortnight.

Combine that with him being arguably our best tackler and best contested mark.

It is a ludicrous decision to drop him any way you spin it.

I understand the team requires balance, but we played all 3 of M Crouch, Greenwood and CEY in our 4 consecutive wins from Rounds 5-8 so there goes that theory. When all 3 of them play, we’re better at winning. Proof, pudding, all that.

We were also complete shit in Rounds 1-4 prior to Greenwood entering the side.

Essentially he’s been dumped for the all-conquering Richard Douglas, who hasn’t played a half decent game as a mid at AFL level for over 12 months and has instead been hidden in utility roles where he racks up 14 touches and has zero impact while jogging.

Mackay making way for Hartigan was absolutely a correct move. It was ridiculous that we made the late change last week. We structure up so much better with Hartigan in a KPD role and Keath playing looser.

The remaining changes were always going to involve M Crouch coming in. He’s a full time inside mid, so realistically, Gibbs was always a chance to make way. I wouldn’t have gone down that path, but I get that it isn’t exactly a terrible option.

For me, Atkins has been a compete liability in recent weeks. I would have dropped him for Crouch, and shifted Gibbs out of the centre to a wing or attacking half back role.

Then, I would’ve dropped Murphy, and replaced him with McHenry. McHenry could then alternate between a pressure forward role and a wing himself.

A combination of Seedsman, Gibbs, Milera and McHenry handling wing duties more than covers the absence of Atkins.

Then, if Sloane doesn’t get up, Douglas could’ve been the one on standby for him, I could deal with that. Preferably Jones, but whatever.


But hey, let’s drop Greenwood who is the only player on our list with a combination of height, stoppage ability, tackling ability and contested marking ability. I don’t get it personally.

Realistically I don’t think we win this week with or without Greenwood, but I just like picking teams that give us the best possible chance, and I don’t believe we’ve done that.

 

[ABAB]

Yep, it's baffling. If Douglas is coming in to play mainly as a forward as Hart says he is, then why not just play Greenwood there instead?

Douglas can run......Greenwood might be like Himmelberg after playing in Darwin.

 

[MRB37]

It's a good role to blood McHenry in the AFL though... & we can use him in a few midfield rotations.

I think he's good enough to put on the wing straight away to be honest. I'll give it another month, but if we go like 1-3 or worse then i'd be like to see some thought for next year with Jones and McHenry to get roles through the wing/midfield and get McAdam, Davis and Stengle some experience in the forward line.

 

[huludicidal]

He is not able to play three games in 12 days. A rest or restricted minutes in the Twos make sense.

In the last two weeks we have played two games in draining conditions in Queensland and NTwith a tough slog against the Eagles in the middle.

Player management is critical prior to the bye, we must win at least one of these matches.

If Greenwood was being managed, I believe the club would’ve been very careful to slot “(managed)” next to his name rather than “(omitted)”.

I don’t think he’s a walk up start for the Tigers game at all.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Greenwood was in our best 4 players against West Coast. Was the best player on the ground at half time in fact.

He was also instrumental in the 4th quarter comeback against Melbourne and comfortably outperformed the likes of Atkins for the entire game.

He had a stinker against Brisbane 3 weeks ago, but had absolutely atoned for this over the last fortnight.

Combine that with him being arguably our best tackler and best contested mark.

It is a ludicrous decision to drop him any way you spin it.

I understand the team requires balance, but we played all 3 of M Crouch, Greenwood and CEY in our 4 consecutive wins from Rounds 5-8 so there goes that theory. When all 3 of them play, we’re better at winning. Proof, pudding, all that.

We were also complete **** in Rounds 1-4 prior to Greenwood entering the side.

Essentially he’s been dumped for the all-conquering Richard Douglas, who hasn’t played a half decent game as a mid at AFL level for over 12 months and has instead been hidden in utility roles where he racks up 14 touches and has zero impact while jogging.

Mackay making way for Hartigan was absolutely a correct move. It was ridiculous that we made the late change last week. We structure up so much better with Hartigan in a KPD role and Keath playing looser.

The remaining changes were always going to involve M Crouch coming in. He’s a full time inside mid, so realistically, Gibbs was always a chance to make way. I wouldn’t have gone down that path, but I get that it isn’t exactly a terrible option.

For me, Atkins has been a compete liability in recent weeks. I would have dropped him for Crouch, and shifted Gibbs out of the centre to a wing or attacking half back role.

Then, I would’ve dropped Murphy, and replaced him with McHenry. McHenry could then alternate between a pressure forward role and a wing himself.

A combination of Seedsman, Gibbs, Milera and McHenry handling wing duties more than covers the absence of Atkins.

Then, if Sloane doesn’t get up, Douglas could’ve been the one on standby for him, I could deal with that. Preferably Jones, but whatever.


But hey, let’s drop Greenwood who is the only player on our list with a combination of height, stoppage ability, tackling ability and contested marking ability. I don’t get it personally.

Realistically I don’t think we win this week with or without Greenwood, but I just like picking teams that give us the best possible chance, and I don’t believe we’ve done that.

Testify!

 

[MRB37]

Greenwood was in our best 4 players against West Coast. Was the best player on the ground at half time in fact.

He was also instrumental in the 4th quarter comeback against Melbourne and comfortably outperformed the likes of Atkins for the entire game.

He had a stinker against Brisbane 3 weeks ago, but had absolutely atoned for this over the last fortnight.

Combine that with him being arguably our best tackler and best contested mark.

It is a ludicrous decision to drop him any way you spin it.

I understand the team requires balance, but we played all 3 of M Crouch, Greenwood and CEY in our 4 consecutive wins from Rounds 5-8 so there goes that theory. When all 3 of them play, we’re better at winning. Proof, pudding, all that.

We were also complete **** in Rounds 1-4 prior to Greenwood entering the side.

The correct team balance will change against different sides though. Port, Saints, Gold Coast and Freo don't have the combination of midfielders like GWS who are both good in the contests and fast outside of it as well. Port is full of slow, inside mids, GC are young and underdeveloped in the midfield and the Saints are mostly B graders.

The truth is our midfield has been beaten up quite a bit since the Port game. We haven't put in a consistent 4 quarter effort in that part of the field, Greenwood and Gibbs might be harshly dealt with being the ones to come out, but something had to change in that area.

 

[Cleric]

There it is. Just proves you haven’t seen him. He is not slow at all

Ive seen him heaps. He is slow on the field.

 

[Moonwatcher]

Have only lost 2 wickets in 30 overs.

EDIT: Well, it's true.

 

[Go the Guts]

If you think Gibbs is being dropped on form then you need to listen more.

I haven't been on this board at all much lately....but I'll just offer this. I heard from a fairly reliable source 2 weeks back that Gibbs has had a few off field indiscretions the club isn't taking kindly to. Is this along the lines of what you are talking about?

 

[crowholder]

If Greenwood was being managed, I believe the club would’ve been very careful to slot “(managed)” next to his name rather than “(omitted)”.

I don’t think he’s a walk up start for the Tigers game at all.

I suspect that Sloane will not play and either Hugh or Gibbs will be back in.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Who are the emergencies?

 

[GROTTO]

Brouch I reckon given Mrouch is returning from injury & Sloane is under a cloud.

That cloud is all over him.

The fact that he has to still do a fitness test tomorrow to test his hamstring is just a lock that he wont play.

He was interviewed this evening and said he was worried that if he came back on that he would really damage his hamstring. At training he said he did not run hard either. Why would they risk him against a midfield that not only is elite, bats deep and is fast. Glory be.

I will be stunned after the fiasco of 2018 that they would risk him especially with the Tigers just 5 days later. A fresh Sloane, is an asset.

 

[GROTTO]

Who are the emergencies?

Greenwood
Mackay
Jacobs
Gibbs

 

[lunacy]

Greenwood dropped for talking contracts with media?

What did he say?

 

[SaltnPepperSam]

How is Atkins holding his spot - personally I would prefer Gibbs, not too sure what he has done to become the unclean?

Multiple posts in here regarding his stats being good for an outside link up/offensive option

And Gibbs does 0 defensive running, which is important in team defence

 

[MRB37]

What did he say?

He wants to stay, but hasn't talked to the club since January about an extension and he's waiting for them to come to him with an offer.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Greenwood
Mackay
Jacobs
Gibbs

D Mac... so there will be at least one late out

 

[skam85]

Dmac alone being omitted would've been massive.
Adding Gibbs and Greenwood to this is a massive statement.

The statement being ‘we have no idea what we’re doing’

 

[GROTTO]

D Mac... so there will be at least one late out

 

[petieboy]

Jones has played more than he hasn't.

Weren't people complaining that we were going to run players into the ground? Greenwood was clearly tiring, it was a hot and exhausting game against the Demons and he's not the fittest bloke on the list, we have a 5 day break coming up, if he's back in next week then there's a clear reason for it.

How dare you share such a sensible logical unassuming nonreactive post on this board. Shame on you!

 

[headache1]

Douglas can run......Greenwood might be like Himmelberg after playing in Darwin.

Douglas isn't any quicker than Greenwood these days, and Greenwood is possibly our best tackler. Add to that what he offers aerially which the rest of our forward line is severely lacking and it's a baffling decision.

I was in Darwin for the game, once the sun went down it was perfect football conditions.

 

[Scorpus]

D Mac... so there will be at least one late out

Imagine if Sloane is a late out and of that bunch they choose Mackay as the replacement

 

[Deaneus!]

Maybe I wouldn't have brought Douglas in but I don't know if you watched the SANFL game or not....Douglas was absolutely dominant on the weekend.

He's played 238 AFL games, he *better* look good at SANFL level

No. Its all about contested marks. Goals are irrelevant. We probably would still have Modra at current age in this team.

Based on form, yes

I don't care that Greenwood has been dropped; I care that we've brought Douglas in his place.

It's a weak, ******** selection.

Reckon we might see some vintage Richie Douglas this Saturday. He is playing for his career after all.

If I see him jog to a contest in front of where i sit like i've seen him do a couple of times, i will go *******.