Preview Roasting Demons Sunday, 3.20

[Grand Uncle Horace]

Is the Big Pricks on this weekend?

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Gawn absence a factor in Sydney's selection squeeze - Gawn absence a factor in Sydney's selection squeeze

Anyone read the "extra tall" comment, given we usually go with a ruck and 3 KPFs, as bringing Buddy in and keeping the existing talls? Logan would have to play on a wing a fair bit for that surely. It read as Buddy in, if he gets through training, then a decision between a tall or small to go out.

If Gawn out is a factor, then you just go Ladhams with Amartey backup. Buddy for McLean.

The second shot of Joel in that article is wonderfully weird. Not even sure how I could make my face do that. (Guess that's why we pay them the big bucks.)

 

[Millky95]

Interesting to see Mclean attended 19 ruck contests compared to Amartey 3. I assume this was due to managing Amartey body, reducing likelihood of re-injury. If that's the case again, does Mclean remain in the team as backup for Ladhams?

For me, yes.

 

[Kiama Chris]

For me, yes.

Yep. Amartey not fit enough yet to run out the full game against a top side. Hopefully he'll get there soon.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Fox back in full training

Hopefully next week

wouldn't put him straight in, give him a mini pre season in the VFL, especially if we win this week

 

[Millky95]

 

[Bloods86]

Have to love a debut against us. He'll somehow end up with 10 defensive intercepts, 15 marks, 600m gained, 3 goals.

 

[Bloods86]

Also now really want Sheldrick to be sub, run him down, monster him in a tackle, and snap a goal, just to give me some extra solace for missing out on JVR (was the next pick).

 

[rustycrate]

I don't wanna jinx it, not at all discounting what Melbourne are capable of even missing key players. I know they could beat us. I'm just not sure how they would beat us.

Last year we beat them when Clayton Oliver went absolute beast mode in the midfield in that final.

We beat them when Steven May was BOG in one of the most dominant games by a defender in years.

We beat them when Max Gawn had one of the greatest performances ever by a big man.

They brought their best against us and even led for large portions of both games, but we just had their measure each time. It makes me wonder, if we play to that same level again this week, what are Melbourne going to be able to throw at us that they haven't already?

I loved that game. I watched it again and again.

 

[Seattle Mariners]

Is Ladhams fit and healthy?

 

[Millky95]

Is Ladhams fit and healthy?

Seems to be. Was subbed off in Round 1 possibly as a precaution but played out last week

 

[kelpie_X]

I've stated several times that I acknowledge we've put in good performances without him. They count, as part of a limited sample size, and are alongside big wins against poor opposition, or good wins where the KPFs didn't do a lot.

To get to a grand final, you have to make finals, often make Top 4. It's a poor argument in my view, that having a substandard finals series means you didn't play a huge role in getting us there. Plus, if we're arguing how forward lines can work together, putting aside individual performances, as you like to do (it's a valid view), then it's a bit strange to abandon that for Buddy's sake. He takes the best KPD, creates space and opportunities for others.

Buddy kicked 5 goals from late in the 2nd quarter against the Tigers, he played a big role, regardless of what our midfield did. If you're going to argue "we win most games these key forwards play in, even though they contributed less goals", then we shouldn't discount the possibility that maybe those key forwards had little to do with it, maybe it was the midfields, small pressure forwards etc. See what I'm getting at? I think there's some switching of reasoning to support particular views going on. And I rate your analysis more than most.

I have officially forgotten what thread we are on. 'Tis a sad, sad, day.

 

[Bloods86]

I have officially forgotten what thread we are on. 'Tis a sad, sad, day.

People were saying outright or making the case, that we would be or could be better off without Buddy against the Dees and beyond.

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

Looking forward to May v Bud battle.

Guess Level or Petty goes Logan.

 

[rustycrate]

Looking forward to May v Bud battle.

Guess Level or Petty goes Logan.

Could be May vs Amartey!! Bud might be further away from goal...........

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Could be May vs Amartey!! Bud might be further away from goal...........

That would make sense but they haven't done that yet

 

[caesar88]

If Petty plays like he did last week whoever plays on him could kick 10

 

[sthmelb_dimmies]

No way Logan gets May if Bud is on the pitch

 

[mattpolo8]

May v bud will be a fizzer. Sit in a pocket and pretend it's a contest for all I care.

Focus on our other tall forwards

 

[Bloods86]

May v bud will be a fizzer. Sit in a pocket and pretend it's a contest for all I care.

Focus on our other tall forwards

Buddy just needs to be instructed to take him out of the game. Then once May cottons on that Buddy is a decoy, he might roll off onto someone else. We need to be on the ball, so at that point, look for Buddy with the next couple of opportunities, so May has to stick to him.

 

[caesar88]

It might be a generational thing but I've always found the full forward vs full back match-ups the commentators love to rave about to be the least-exciting part of a footy game. In fact I'm certain it's a generational thing, because my granddad and parents still lose their minds when forwards take big grabs or kick bags of goals, and I'm just like "But did you see that midfielder's vision in traffic there!!!"

 

[Bloods86]

It might be a generational thing but I've always found the full forward vs full back match-ups the commentators love to rave about to be the least-exciting part of a footy game. In fact I'm certain it's a generational thing, because my granddad and parents still lose their minds when forwards take big grabs or kick bags of goals, and I'm just like "But did you see that midfielder's vision in traffic there!!!"

You don't need vision in traffic if you can just elbow the opposition in the face and keep going yourself.

 

[SM]

Goals win games at the end of the day so getting excited about forwards kicking big bags isn't that unusual.

 

[Swan4Life]

I have hope for our forward line post-Buddy, although we have no KPF depth outside of our 22 next year and beyond (unless we do something in the off-season). I think there's legitimate claims that they can work well together, there's some evidence to support that from a limited number of games, and some individual performances at VFL/AFL level.

Where I take issue, is that this is then used to say that we're better off without Buddy (some posters are more adamant than others). I don't think there's any reasonable way you can make that argument, maybe if he falls in a hole this year, you can say that. But not yet.

People are excited by new things, start to lose some faith in the old. It's common. Some want the future to arrive now, and based on a few games, believe we'll be just as good, if not better. Granted experimenting with a new forward line bodes better for the future, maybe not for winning the flag this year though, which should be the priority.

This is the insanity that I touched on earlier.

It's as if Buddy went from being the number 1 key forward in the game to number 17 in the space of 12 months. Granted he may have dropped to say the 8th best - and if that were true, he would at worst be our number 2, and probably still be our number 1. Yet you've got some people saying he might not be best 22 any more.

It's crazy talk.

 

[caesar88]

Goals win games at the end of the day so getting excited about forwards kicking big bags isn't that unusual.

I believe the point I was making was that I must be the unusual one for not being as excited by that part of the game as so many others