Preview Round 1 team

[PatrickBateman]

Patrick Bateman, you can't just make judgement calls about someones intelligence just becausr they disagree with you. It's the first sign of a poorly constructed argument. Watching football on TV is often the best way if seeing how guys are going IMO

When an opinion is based on what was spoken by a commentator, I probably didn't have to say anything but hey... I disagree with you point regarding the TV too. You get such a better perspective of the game as a whole when you go to it... the camera only follows the ball.

I agree with you though that he may come across as arrogant and indifferent and I have heard this before.. But what does this have to do with being 'soft'? Yes it could equate to him being lazy but that again doesn't equate to 'soft'.

Mackie being both soft and arrogant have nothing to do with each other, I never said they did. And I find it highly amusing that someone on here suggests I have a chip on my shoulder for saying the guy looks like a idiot strutting around town in tight t-shirts with his licorice frame? Mackie was quoted by a Police Officer years back as saying "do you want a shot at the title?", when instructed by the Officer. Douche. Simple.

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

I agree to this point, but the problem is if you get no injury, your sub provides no extra run because you replace a tall for a tall in the third quater when your opposition is replacing a tall or a medium with a small,so they get extra run and run you off your feet which is why almost all clubs will go small with the sub.

I think you'll find what will happen (I noted Primus speaking on this yesterday) is that tall players in the side who have injury concerns won't play (i.e. Ottens is a good example) where they previously would have played if it was a marginal call, because it's now loaded with too much risk.

Your probably right PO and it will definately be interesting to see how the sub is used over the year, regarding all teams.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

And the other side to the coin is this PO.
If you play West (for example) and have Menzel as a sub you lose the potency, ball winning ability of Menzel whilst West is on the ground. So what is that for ? Maybe 75% of the game?

However, I agree they have to go to a smaller sub for safety.
There are far more running players than talls in a game of footy. So the odds are a running player is going to get injured first.

The second part of your post is the answer to the first part of your post.

It would be great to have Menzel on the whole time, but for risk management's sake, the sub needs to be a small.

In reality if a Menzel improves he'll be in the starting side anyway rather than the sub...I think the sub will essentially just be the 22nd player picked (although they'll rotate it around so the same guy doesn't have to do it all the time) but it'll be a small rather than a tall.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Your probably right PO and it will definately be interesting to see how the sub is used over the year, regarding all teams.

Agree. I reckon a few teams will take risks early, get burnt by those risks backfiring, and by halfway through the year everyone will take the safe option of a young running player. That's my prediction anyway.

 

[Cataholic]

The second part of your post is the answer to the first part of your post.

It would be great to have Menzel on the whole time, but for risk management's sake, the sub needs to be a small.

In reality if a Menzel improves he'll be in the starting side anyway rather than the sub...I think the sub will essentially just be the 22nd player picked (although they'll rotate it around so the same guy doesn't have to do it all the time) but it'll be a small rather than a tall.

Menzel hasn't done much wrong so far, but nor has Simpkin it seems.

He did ok against the Saints and has been nominated in media reports this morning as 'the pick of the bunch' against a reasonably strong Port side last night.

A chance maybe?

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Menzel hasn't done much wrong so far, but nor has Simpkin it seems.

He did ok against the Saints and has been nominated in media reports this morning as 'the pick of the bunch' against a reasonably strong Port side last night.

A chance maybe?

The problem is Simpkin can't be elevated unless they put someone on the LTI and then that person can't play for 8 weeks. I can't think of anyone we can do that with, unless Drum is behind schedule again.

If Simpkin could be elevated, I reckon he'd be in the round 1 side

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

The problem is Simpkin can't be elevated unless they put someone on the LTI and then that person can't play for 8 weeks. I can't think of anyone we can do that with, unless Drum is behind schedule again.

If Simpkin could be elevated, I reckon he'd be in the round 1 side

Have they still got the nominated rookie rule that allows a rookie to play without a player going on the LTIL.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Have they still got the nominated rookie rule that allows a rookie to play without a player going on the LTIL.

Yes but only clubs with less than 2 players on the veterans list may use it.

We could upgrade him permanently from round 12 (separate rule), but not before unless someone goes LTI.

 

[Turbocat]

The problem is Simpkin can't be elevated unless they put someone on the LTI and then that person can't play for 8 weeks. I can't think of anyone we can do that with, unless Drum is behind schedule again.

If Simpkin could be elevated, I reckon he'd be in the round 1 side

What's the odds , after 4 rounds someone will have gone down. Corey,Chappy,Ling etc have done nothing yet so who really knows what they will be like when they come back and whether its a sustainable return. I think he has a good chance of a game by R5 or R6

 

[Vdubs]

What's the odds , after 4 rounds someone will have gone down. Corey,Chappy,Ling etc have done nothing yet so who really knows what they will be like when they come back and whether its a sustainable return. I think he has a good chance of a game by R5 or R6

Agree, and you haven't mentioned Ottens, always good for sponsoring a LTI elevation.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

What's the odds , after 4 rounds someone will have gone down. Corey,Chappy,Ling etc have done nothing yet so who really knows what they will be like when they come back and whether its a sustainable return. I think he has a good chance of a game by R5 or R6

True. Last year podsy benefited first from Mitch Brown going LTI and then Motlop the same, so it does happen. Simpkin just has to be in good form if that chance comes. Doesn't look like he'll be able to play round 1, but as you say by round 5 the landscape may have changed.

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

Yes but only clubs with less than 2 players on the veterans list may use it.

We could upgrade him permanently from round 12 (separate rule), but not before unless someone goes LTI.

Thats right, i forgot about the veterens list.

 

[browncow]

Really like the look of Mitch Duncan this season. What do you think the chances of him getting a crack in round 1?

 

[you pick one]

Really like the look of Mitch Duncan this season. What do you think the chances of him getting a crack in round 1?

He will be there

 

[Partridge]

Really like the look of Mitch Duncan this season. What do you think the chances of him getting a crack in round 1?

Absolute certainty.

 

[Selective Retention]

Yeah. Put him in SC and fingers crossed he doesn't end up as the sub - should be safe first few rounds with so many underdone.

 

[vinum coupe]

Right I've made my mind up.
No more correspondence will be entered into.
This will be the team


B: J Hunt Scarlett Enright
HB: Menzel Taylor T.Hunt
C: Wojcinski Corey Kelly
HF: Chapman Bartel Johnson
F: Varcoe Hawkins Stokes

R: Ottens Selwood Duncan

INT: Lonergan, Byrnes, West (really don't think west is good enough for this role)
SUB: Mackie
Injured or left out on purpose. Ling, Pods, Mooney, Milburn, Blake, Simpson,

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Really like the look of Mitch Duncan this season. What do you think the chances of him getting a crack in round 1?

If he isn't, then Chris Scott has even worse selection policies than Mark Thompson did.

It's a near certainty he'll be there, and Mitch has earnt it on form.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Right I've made my mind up.
No more correspondence will be entered into.
This will be the team


B: J Hunt Scarlett Enright
HB: Menzel Taylor T.Hunt
C: Wojcinski Corey Kelly
HF: Chapman Bartel Johnson
F: Varcoe Hawkins Stokes

R: Ottens Selwood Duncan

INT: Lonergan, Byrnes, West (really don't think west is good enough for this role)
SUB: Mackie
Injured or left out on purpose. Ling, Pods, Mooney, Milburn, Blake, Simpson,

Not a bad side.

Mackie doesn't deserve to make it based on poor form, but he is versatile enough to be a good fit for sub.

West's form deserves to play, let's give him some games before we say whether we think he's good enough or not, he's never been given a proper shot.

Don't think we need Lonergan given the unavailable St Kilda talls. I'd put Milburn in instead or if not him then whichever kid is the most promising after Duncan Menzel etc.

 

[vinum coupe]

I had Milburn in originally. I admit I just wanted to get Menzel in.


I think Lonergan has to play for some versatility. The only tall in the forward half is Hawkins.

Lonergan does provide the flexibility to allow you to put him at either end.
I.e. in the backline to rest Taylor or up forward to rest Hawkins.

You may have seen in the comp thread that I listed Lonergan as getting the most improved this year.
He may (may) end up being a significant piece to the jigsaw puzzle with the implications of the sub rule and the current love affair for mobile KKP's.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

I had Milburn in originally. I admit I just wanted to get Menzel in.


I think Lonergan has to play for some versatility. The only tall in the forward half is Hawkins.

Lonergan does provide the flexibility to allow you to put him at either end.
I.e. in the backline to rest Taylor or up forward to rest Hawkins.

You may have seen in the comp thread that I listed Lonergan as getting the most improved this year.
He may (may) end up being a significant piece to the jigsaw puzzle with the implications of the sub rule and the current love affair for mobile KKP's.

I see your point, and it is a fair one.

I just consider Lonners as as defender only and not a forward option only. If I saw him as both, like you, I would have him in round 1 given the likely absence of Mooney and Pods.

 

[vinum coupe]

Look, he has been far more beneficial for the team down back.
Not an attacking backman what so ever. And to be truthful I am not that happy to see him getting the ball in traffic. But he is reliable.

And he is a serviceable forward. He can take a grab, and for some strange reason he looks a lot better amongst traffic at that end of the ground.

If he was out and Milburn was in that would probably mean West has to go forward. I don't think that will work if he is one out down there.

Running into the forward line to provide an additional target. Yes. But not as a sole target.

We'll find out pretty soon I guess !!

I should also add that when I was structuring the Round 1 team I was actually trying to build a team that could stick together for most of the year.

Oh crap I just realised I don't have Hogan in.
And god knows who I'd drop to put Ling and Pods in.

 

[maxy87]

Right I've made my mind up.
No more correspondence will be entered into.
This will be the team


B: J Hunt Scarlett Enright
HB: Menzel Taylor T.Hunt
C: Wojcinski Corey Kelly
HF: Chapman Bartel Johnson
F: Varcoe Hawkins Stokes

R: Ottens Selwood Duncan

INT: Lonergan, Byrnes, West (really don't think west is good enough for this role)
SUB: Mackie
Injured or left out on purpose. Ling, Pods, Mooney, Milburn, Blake, Simpson,

That's a very young and raw half back flank duo. Maybe one or the other for me

 

[catempire]

My latest thinking on the likely line-up is this:

B: J Hunt Scarlett Enright
HB: Mackie Taylor Milburn
C: Kelly Bartel Wojcinski
HF: S Johnson Mooney Chapman
F: Stokes Hawkins Byrnes
R: Ottens Ling Selwood
Int: Lonergan Duncan Corey
Sub: T.Hunt

Won’t make it through injury or lack of match conditioning: Podsiadly, Varcoe
Left out but pressing for selection: Hogan, Menzel, Motlop
Left out because of sub rule: Blake

Inclusions pending injuries:

- West for Mooney
- Menzel for Chapman
- Motlop for Byrnes
- Hogan for Corey

To respond to the likely criticisms:

“The backline is too slow” – the possible change here is Taylor Hunt instead of Josh or Mackie. But in general I don’t agree with the notion that a quick player in the backline makes a world of difference. I think the Geelong backline is able to move the ball quickly which more than makes up for the 2 or 3 opportunities a game a quick player has to break the lines. I wouldn’t be unhappy with Taylor Hunt back there but I don’t think it’s likely.
*
“Who is going to help Ottens ruck?” – Hawkins. It’s not ideal but it’s the best option under the new bench rules. West would take up the position of a running player and running power is at a premium with effectively one less player on the bench. Ottens will need to rest in the forward line and we may need pinch hitting forward stints from the likes of Milburn, Taylor, Mackie and even Lonergan.
*
“Not enough young players” – I won’t go into this argument in depth again, but my understanding of the club’s view of season 2011 is that the aim is to win the flag with minor changes to personnel and gameplan. If the first third of the season goes poorly, I expect to see more younger players in the team more often. At the moment, on form, I think only Duncan has locked himself a round 1 spot. Taylor Hunt has been OK and is gets the nod as sub ahead of the others due to pace. Menzel has been OK but misses out because he is a similar type to so many other players. Hogan is solid but will need to wait for a midfield injury (Corey may provide such an opportunity). Motlop will need to prove he is more worthy of selection than the other small forwards.
*
“Ling should play as defensive forward” – he may well do on occasion. But I think he has still shown he is most useful as a tagger in the vast majority of games and can still match it with all but the best 2 or 3 mids in the game.
*

 

[vinum coupe]

Round 2 side


B: Kelly Scarlett Enright
HB: Menzel Taylor T.Hunt
C: Wojcinski Corey Bartel
HF: Ling Pods Johnson
F: Varcoe Hawkins Motlop

R: Blake Selwood Duncan

INT: Hogan, Byrnes, Lonergan (really don't think west is good enough for this role)
SUB: Mackie


IN: Ling, Pods, Hogan, Motlop, Blake
OUT: Ottens (injured) Chapman (calf strain) J Hunt, West, Stokes (omitted)

I don't think those IN's will slow the team down.