Preview St Kilda V North Melbourne Sunday 3:20 Etihad Stadium

[Cornish]

Personally I would give Lonie a brace of games at Sandy in the midfield so that he can develop and hone his game by beuing in traffic for most of the game.

As a very young player, playing as a small forward in the AFL is a hard gig, and is hard to develop your game.

Yep we all have our own ideas, but with Gresh having only 8 touches against the Dees, i am of the opinion, which is mine and probably mine alone, that he goes back to the 2's and Lonie is rewarded for effort 33 touches 3 goals and a BOG, after working through the midfield and up forward, thats sort of effort i believe should be rewarded with a recall.

Its all speculation, at the end of the day we can only go on what the selection committee think and do come Thursday.

 

[The Punter]

Round 23 2011 since we beat them.

Just in case you were wondering, this is what the team looked like that night:

Dempster Dawson Gilbert
Gram Fisher Goddard
Montagna Dal Santo Peake
Ray Riewoldt Polo
Milne Koschitzke Schneider
McEvoy Jones Steven
Armitage Ray R Clarke Sub: Geary

Bolded players still at the club - all played last week.

 

[Persevering Saint]

Lots of us want Lonie to come in, and to bring in somebody to play on one of North's tall forwards. But we can only find one player to come out, either Gresh or Minch... but people seem hesitant to drop both.

I can't believe none of you have figured out the obvious solution:

Bring in Lonie to play on one of North's tall forwards.

Kills two birds with one stone.

I know, I know... I'm a freakin' genius.

 

[FlyingSledghamer]

Out: Acres In: Lee.
We dont know what hes doing but the mans a freekin genius

 

[aussierulesrules]

Yep we all have our own ideas, but with Gresh having only 8 touches against the Dees, i am of the opinion, which is mine and probably mine alone, that he goes back to the 2's and Lonie is rewarded for effort 33 touches 3 goals and a BOG

You'd be far from Robinson Caruso on that one.

We need to remember that it's a whole new ball-game this year since the abolition of the sub-rule and the further reduction to 90 interchange rotations per game.

If Gresh joined us 12 months earlier we'd have been able to sub him in or out of games if he was struggling, or if he didn't have the tank to play a whole game (like we did a lot with Sinclair and Acres, for example), but this year it's all different, and as such it will be more of a bonus if he's able to play a chunk of games.

At this stage, he's just not getting enough of the pill and ideally not spending enough time on the ground to at least help counteract that fact and it's not all about him, so there's no reason we have to keep him in there at this stage. If he wasn't our first pick in the draft I reckon it would be unanimous that he go out this week. Especially when someone else that we also want to develop, who plays a similar role, but is more ready for senior footy, can take his place.

 

[aussierulesrules]

Lots of us want Lonie to come in, and to bring in somebody to play on one of North's tall forwards. But we can only find one player to come out, either Gresh or Minch... but people seem hesitant to drop both.

I guess the issue is that it makes us more top-heavy if we bring in Lonie and one of the "talls", for Gresh and Minch and removes one of our potential weapons, which is being able to beat them with our run and carry and pressure.

Will be really interesting to see which way we go, as you could make a strong case for bringing in any of Lonie, McCartin, Roberton, Lee, or Goddard, IMO.

 

[The New Sainter]

Can I ask what a 'meltdown' is, in the context it's being used here?

 

[aussierulesrules]

Can I ask what a 'meltdown' is, in the context it's being used here?

Not if we have to look at Dawson's face a whole lot more if we answer you!

 

[Cornish]

Can I ask what a 'meltdown' is, in the context it's being used here?

 

[RoundCubic]

Can I ask what a 'meltdown' is, in the context it's being used here?

Any of the posts from the round 2 saints vs dogs autopsy thread

 

[Cornish]

If Roberton is right he may come in, or may do a week in the 2's.

I would then look at
Out
Gresh, Meatball 8 and 11 touches respectively

In
Lonie, Roberton/Goddard not sure Lee did enough in the 2's after being dropped the week before.

 

[Persevering Saint]

Can I ask what a 'meltdown' is, in the context it's being used here?

Me most Thursday nights.

 

[Mowman]

Call me overly optimistic - but there's no reason why we can't get the W here.
We play Etihad generally really well, and North will surely have an off day at some point in the next month.
The onus lies on us to bring 4 quarters of pressure, and quality ball movement is a must.

We will struggle to contain the tall forwards that have been serving NM so well this year, but when we get our chances to rebound and go forward - if we take them and back it up with the same pressure from the weekend - we'll be right in this.

You're overly optimistic

 

[TheBalls]

I won't be happy to keep it under 5 goals unless North just play a blinder. I rate North and have for a couple of years, but they have one of the lowest percentages of all the top 8 sides because they haven't been smashing teams, so if we bring our game and don't fall away in the last quarter, then I don't see why we won't be in the game up to our necks.

Melbourne almost beat them a few weeks ago and last week we wiped the floor with them, two weeks earlier we almost beat Hawthorn in Launceston and last week the greatly weakened WB (without Johannisen, Murphy, Suckling and Boyd- who at a minimum gives their forward line structure, frees up Stringer and gives them a quality 2nd ruck option), didn't lose by much to North (16 points), despite the fact they apparently butchered the ball all game long and missed some sitter shots for goal, including late in the game. It sounds like they weren't a patch on the Bulldogs of earlier in the year (in particular badly missing the genuinely elite kicking of JJ, Murph and Suckling and the run of the former two) and as such, if it was us playing them, and we played like we did against Melbourne, I reckon we could have easily enough beaten them as well.

Good point on the less than 5 goals, I shouldn't have put a number on it, guess I was just saying I want us to be competitive.

RE your analysis based on the other teams....this has been one of the hardest seasons to figure out where our list is at (when using performances / results against opposition as a barometer) so I've decided to stop trying.

Rd1: Port Adelaide – at the time, thought that we were doing great to dominate them for most of the game and that the 4 quarter effort would come – we are up against a team that should be doing better than us…..then a few weeks in and they are not as good as I thought so maybe not, possibly should have won that (interrupted preseason possibly impacted).

Rd2: Dogs – at the time felt like we weren’t as good as I thought we were, that far behind them and so badly out played. It did look like they were on top 4 form before injuries but still disappointing to feel so far behind them at the time. Roll forward a few weeks and they look genuinely decent, should easily make finals and possibly get near the 4.

Rd 3: Pies – massive win to beat them for the first time in a few years, we looked better than them right across the field, but they aren’t expected to be threatening the 8 so all we could really gauge from it is that we should be ahead of them this year.

Rd4: Hawks. Should have won this, we just matched the premiers and felt we were done out of 4 points by the umpires. Definitely on the rise now. Maybe we are better than I feared after the dogs game. Or are the Hawks on the way down after 3 close games with us, dogs and crows and a smashing from GWS?

Rd5: GWS – back down to earth with a bang. ****! We seem quite a bit behind GWS, didn’t feel we competed at all with them and they may threaten the top 4 this year but who knows – we should be closer than this? Then after they destroyed the Hawks game realise we maybe didn’t do that badly after all and they have possibly just opened their premiership window.

Rd6: Melbourne – much better, but didn’t see them put in (seemingly) as much effort against us as they did to just lose the North game. Was a really difficult one to gauge. We were excellent but how bad were they?

Rd7: North? NFI - expect us to be relatively close.

When I look at our team on paper I am confident that we can compete with most teams, I think that’s why it’s so disappointing when we get whacked!

 

[Elvis Winmar]

Can we just bring in Delany to knee him in the balls in the first quater. Cause thats about the only chance to stop Waite.

Although I love the sentiment, there is another way.

Simply get our defenders to whisper in his ear, "Remember what you were like when you played for Carlton?" at every opportunity.

He'll be back to the pre 2014 Jarrod Waite we all knew and loved in no time.

 

[Persevering Saint]

More specifically:

Me Every Late Thursday During Our Wailing about New Selections.

 

[Persevering Saint]

This is a game that we SHOULDN'T win, but that we COULD win.

These are pretty much my favourites.

 

[aussierulesrules]

Good point on the less than 5 goals, I shouldn't have put a number on it, guess I was just saying I want us to be competitive.

RE your analysis based on the other teams....this has been one of the hardest seasons to figure out where our list is at (when using performances / results against opposition as a barometer) so I've decided to stop trying.

Rd1: Port Adelaide – at the time, thought that we were doing great to dominate them for most of the game and that the 4 quarter effort would come – we are up against a team that should be doing better than us…..then a few weeks in and they are not as good as I thought so maybe not, possibly should have won that (interrupted preseason possibly impacted).

Rd2: Dogs – at the time felt like we weren’t as good as I thought we were, that far behind them and so badly out played. It did look like they were on top 4 form before injuries but still disappointing to feel so far behind them at the time. Roll forward a few weeks and they look genuinely decent, should easily make finals and possibly get near the 4.

Rd 3: Pies – massive win to beat them for the first time in a few years, we looked better than them right across the field, but they aren’t expected to be threatening the 8 so all we could really gauge from it is that we should be ahead of them this year.

Rd4: Hawks. Should have won this, we just matched the premiers and felt we were done out of 4 points by the umpires. Definitely on the rise now. Maybe we are better than I feared after the dogs game. Or are the Hawks on the way down after 3 close games with us, dogs and crows and a smashing from GWS?

Rd5: GWS – back down to earth with a bang. ****! We seem quite a bit behind GWS, didn’t feel we competed at all with them and they may threaten the top 4 this year but who knows – we should be closer than this? Then after they destroyed the Hawks game realise we maybe didn’t do that badly after all and they have possibly just opened their premiership window.

Rd6: Melbourne – much better, but didn’t see them put in (seemingly) as much effort against us as they did to just lose the North game. Was a really difficult one to gauge. We were excellent but how bad were they?

Rd7: North? NFI - expect us to be relatively close.

When I look at our team on paper I am confident that we can compete with most teams, I think that’s why it’s so disappointing when we get whacked!

I think it's pretty easy to see why we were so disappointing in the last quarter against a basically full-strength Port (which they haven't been at any stage since), at a ground where they have a big home-ground advantage, then 6 days later against the white-hot and full-strength Bulldogs and against the rapidly improving GWS (who just got Jeremy Cameron back).

We went into round 1 off the back of just one game of football in the previous 36 days and with 7 or 8 of our team having had just the one hit-out since last year (when clubs prefer them to have had at least two and most of Port's team presumably did), so I reckon it would have taken a miracle for us to have not hit the wall about 3/4 into that game. We evidently did and I imagine they would have been knackered by the end of the game and were also apparently really flat at having let a great opportunity slip, and then we had to back up just 6 days later, to take on a white-hot team and we just didn't really fire a shot and played terribly. I always thought once we missed that NAB Challenge game that we wouldn't start to really hit our straps until probably round 3 (especially since we had just 6 days between round's 1 and 2) and that's the way it turned out.

Our other game that we played terribly in was again a week after an even more deflating loss (this time to Hawthorn) and again we came out flat the following week and were just simply off our game in almost all regards, like we were in the Bulldogs game.

This game I see as being similar to when we played Hawthorn, which was likewise coming off a really strong win, which came off the back of a really disappointing loss. I suspected that we were pretty tired by the end of last week's game, but with 8 days to recover for this week's game and having won that game, I think we ought to be cherry-ripe for this week and ready for another strong performance. Especially since it's only two weeks since our last really poor one.

 

[Persevering Saint]

I think it's pretty easy to see why we were so disappointing in the last quarter against a basically full-strength Port (which they haven't been at any stage since), at a ground where they have a big home-ground advantage, then 6 days later against the white-hot and full-strength Bulldogs and against the rapidly improving GWS (who just got Jeremy Cameron back).

We went into round 1 off the back of just one game of football in the previous 36 days and with 7 or 8 of our team having had just the one hit-out since last year (when clubs prefer them to have had at least two and most of Port's team presumably did), so I reckon it would have taken a miracle for us to have not hit the wall about 3/4 into that game. We evidently did and I imagine they would have been knackered by the end of the game and were also apparently really flat at having let a great opportunity slip, and then we had to back up just 6 days later, to take on a white-hot team and we just didn't really fire a shot and played terribly. I always thought once we missed that NAB Challenge game that we wouldn't start to really hit our straps until probably round 3 (especially since we had just 6 days between round's 1 and 2) and that's the way it turned out.

Our other game that we played terribly in was again a week after an even more deflating loss (this time to Hawthorn) and again we came out flat the following week and were just simply off our game in almost all regards, like we were in the Bulldogs game.

This game I see as being similar to when we played Hawthorn, which was likewise coming off a really strong win, which came off the back of a really disappointing loss. I suspected that we were pretty tired by the end of last week's game, but with 8 days to recover for this week's game and having won that game, I think we ought to be cherry-ripe for this week and ready for another strong performance. Especially since it's only two weeks since our last really poor one.

Don't forget it was actually quite warm here in Adelaide that day, too.

 

[FlyingSledghamer]

Although I love the sentiment, there is another way.

Simply get our defenders to whisper in his ear, "Remember what you were like when you played for Carlton?" at every opportunity.

He'll be back to the pre 2014 Jarrod Waite we all knew and loved in no time.

Lol i loved that guy who used to mark the ball with his head then punch the closest guy and get rubbed out for another 4 weeks.

 

[plugger66]

Any of the posts from the round 2 saints vs dogs autopsy thread

And any posts after selection before the pies and Melbourne game and that is why I want Acres and Membery dropped this week. There is a pattern and it suggests we on this board don't have a clue on selection.

 

[CHBench]

This is a game that we SHOULDN'T win, but that we COULD win.

These are pretty much my favourites.

We're due for a large scalp. Fremantle would've been the last one?

 

[Choomah]

Looks like robbo won't play

 

[Tom12]

You're overly optimistic

We'll see

 

[aussierulesrules]

And any posts after selection before the pies and Melbourne game and that is why I want Acres and Membery dropped this week. There is a pattern and it suggests we on this board don't have a clue on selection.

What melt after selection prior to the Collingwood game? The only change we made for that one was Gresham out and Minchington in and I think that was pretty much unanimously supported and hoped for/expected on here.

The big melt earlier in the year was after selection prior to the WB game (when we dropped Acres) and we of course were putrid that game, so you're theory isn't quite adding up.