Preview Semi Final - Collingwood vs WCE - Team post 352

Remove this Banner Ad

Anyone know why Sinclair was dropped in favor of Elliot?

He was going to be my pick for a role on Hurn.
 
Anyone know why Sinclair was dropped in favor of Elliot?

He was going to be my pick for a role on Hurn.
A quote from wikipedia: 'Hurn has a mature body for his age and was drafted at 187 cm and 93 kg. Following bulking up in the preseason, he is estimated to now weigh in at 100 kg, making him one of the bulkiest rookies to have ever entered the AFL.'

Little Sinclair is hardly the player best equipped to take on Hurn. Others have suggested Goldsack as most likely to play on Hurn.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Anyone know why Sinclair was dropped in favor of Elliot?

He was going to be my pick for a role on Hurn.

I think because offensively we back Elliot over Sinclair.

Sinkers was great last week but Hurn is a big unit and would have too much of a strength advantage. Goldsack will go to Hurn i recon.

Edit - What MMD said.
 
A quote from wikipedia: 'Hurn has a mature body for his age and was drafted at 187 cm and 93 kg. Following bulking up in the preseason, he is estimated to now weigh in at 100 kg, making him one of the bulkiest rookies to have ever entered the AFL.'

Little Sinclair is hardly the player best equipped to take on Hurn. Others have suggested Goldsack as most likely to play on Hurn.

Fair point about the match up, but why was he dropped over Elliot.

Not sure if i get that one.
 
Sinclair has not been in great form since his injury, and although he kept Birchall to 11 possessions last week, he only got 7 possessions including a goal. As to why Elliott is prefered this week, maybe the selectors feel he is a more complete player than Sinclair and has more to offer than him in a final. There was a specific role for Sinclair last week which is not the case tomorrow.
 
Hmm, yeah, i suppose so.

Not a massive deal, just thought he played well enough and did a job to earn his spot.
 
Sinclair was dropped because we need didak to play the whole game... Therefore we need a sub between Elliot and Sinclair. Sure Sinclair is a tad quicker, but Elliot is the better mark, tackle and disposal so it is a no brainer. He will fire us up when subbed on.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

You know, once upon a time, I used to think we needed a tagger.

But then I realised something. If your midfielders are winning the ball out of the middle, why would you need to tag? I don't think anyone tagged any of our mids last week, yet you didn't see us racking up clearances? Actually, Blair WAS tagging Mitchell, and it had zero effect.

Our midfield issue has nothing to do with not tagging the opposition. It has to do with our midfielders just flat out, plain and simple, not getting first hands on the ball. Is it because they're not as good as we thought they were? Is it because they're just down on confidence? Is it because Jolly isn't hitting it to advantage?

Who knows.
 
You know, once upon a time, I used to think we needed a tagger.

But then I realised something. If your midfielders are winning the ball out of the middle, why would you need to tag? I don't think anyone tagged any of our mids last week, yet you didn't see us racking up clearances? Actually, Blair WAS tagging Mitchell, and it had zero effect.

Our midfield issue has nothing to do with not tagging the opposition. It has to do with our midfielders just flat out, plain and simple, not getting first hands on the ball. Is it because they're not as good as we thought they were? Is it because they're just down on confidence? Is it because Jolly isn't hitting it to advantage?

Who knows.

Jolly is definitely not the problem.
The amount of times he put it down Pendles' throat last week was amazing.
Unfortunately, due to what I think is confidence, Pendles is not one grabbing everything like he used to and this is severely impacting his game.
Think about it..... What is Pendles' best attribute? The fact he can slow down time? The reason he seems to do this is because he's usually a 'one-touch' player. As soon as he fumbles, his lack of pace shines through and it leads to a turnover.

I'm also worried about Beamsy's decision to always kick around his body out of the middle. Most of the time it's required due to lack of space/time but as shown last week when Ellis caused the turnover by a nice smother, it leaves our backs on the back foot and severely opens us up.

I'd hope Harvey has looked at implementing some more defensive set ups this week.
Pendles' mentioned earlier in the year that he values attack more than defense.... Makes me a little worried that that is how our midfield operates as a unit. It certainly looks like it.
 
Having someone tag is a no brainer. Our biggest strength is probably that we bat so deep in the midfield. Most quality opposition sides have to 2-3 a grade midfielders to rely on. So the risk/reward of sacrificing one of our midfielders to take out or at least limit the effect of someone like Kerr is really good. I'd go as far to so say that if we try a tagger on Kerr and actually keep him under 10 possessions then we win the game given his importance to their side. Same goes for Mitchell, if we can curb his influence in the middle of the ground with a tagger then it goes a long way to us being competitive with them. Who else is going to win it int he midfield if Mitchell has a bad one? Sewell? Given our midfield depth we lose nothing from at least trying to stop the oppositions best mid.
 
Having someone tag is a no brainer. Our biggest strength is probably that we bat so deep in the midfield. Most quality opposition sides have to 2-3 a grade midfielders to rely on. So the risk/reward of sacrificing one of our midfielders to take out or at least limit the effect of someone like Kerr is really good. I'd go as far to so say that if we try a tagger on Kerr and actually keep him under 10 possessions then we win the game given his importance to their side.
10 possessions is a bit of wishful thinking. :D

Herald Sun reporting Beams has some sort of leg injury. Ben Hart says he and Thomas are right to go though.
 
A quote from wikipedia: 'Hurn has a mature body for his age and was drafted at 187 cm and 93 kg. Following bulking up in the preseason, he is estimated to now weigh in at 100 kg, making him one of the bulkiest rookies to have ever entered the AFL.'

Little Sinclair is hardly the player best equipped to take on Hurn. Others have suggested Goldsack as most likely to play on Hurn.

You should know better than referencing Wikipedia Dawsey. ;)
 
10 possessions is a bit of wishful thinking. :D

Herald Sun reporting Beams has some sort of leg injury. Ben Hart says he and Thomas are right to go though.

"Herald Sun reporting" is an oxymoron.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Preview Semi Final - Collingwood vs WCE - Team post 352

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top