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

[bird_man]

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

We have some very passionate supporters on here, some are well known for losing their shit and screaming for knee jerk reactions! Take a look at the Western Bulldogs and GWS post match threads.

 

[gringo2011]

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.

I think the boys have a tendency to drop their bundles and let the goals pile on late when they decide they aren't going to win. Port we got a few goals down then just dropped all intensity and let them do what ever they wanted. Against the Dogs and GWS we did the same thing.

 

[bird_man]

If we are really looking at winning the game I'd go

In: Goddard, Lonie
Out: Gresham, Minch

Might sound harsh on the two omitted but I think one needs to make way for Goddard and I think Lonie is best 22 quite easily when up and running. Minch was good in his first couple of games but his last two he has not found enough of the footy. Gresham's game I was happy with on the weekend, but I feel that Lonie would do better, especially now he's had a kick in the arse and responded well.

 

[The New Sainter]

I think the boys have a tendency to drop their bundles and let the goals pile on late when they decide they aren't going to win. Port we got a few goals down then just dropped all intensity and let them do what ever they wanted. Against the Dogs and GWS we did the same thing.

100% agree with this. And if this is our biggest complaint, in the scheme of things is not such a big deal.

 

[plugger66]

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.

I'm pretty sure that was the reason for the meltdown. matter of fact positive. people wanted more than one change after the WB effort so I reckon its 2 and 2=4

 

[Choomah]

Geary out hopefully

 

[plugger66]

Geary out hopefully

Why?

 

[Choomah]

Why?

Because his name is jarryn

 

[Joffaboy]

Why?

He is hopeless?

and his name is jarryn

 

[The New Sainter]

I rate Geary highly. True, honest footballer (despite the skills).

 

[plugger66]

He is hopeless?

and his name is jarryn

I think you are right.

 

[Jade Buddha]

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.

Agree

Reward the actual form not the virtual form.

 

[Diehard Saint]

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

Hang around the board on selection night....you'll soon find out

 

[Choomah]

I rate Geary highly. True, honest footballer (despite the skills).

Yeah but his name is Jarryn

 

[Jade Buddha]

A left field suggestion.
Paddy for Gresham with Roo linking play between back and front half and floating into the back line to provide extra cover for defence. Can 3 KPFs (Bruce, Paddy & Members work)with Jack S, Jack B, Minch mopping up do the job or is it overkill?

Paddy wasn't omitted, he was managed. Perhaps they'll manage him back int the team.

 

[Rors]

With no Lindsay Thomas, does Gears have a matchup? Not saying he should be dropped, but who would he play on this week?

 

[Tommy Wigs]

Ha ha, Tim Watson's main problem with the Saints is the lack of replacements for an ageing defence. Sure, hard to replace champs. But I would have thought that there are other gaps to fill given some kids called Carlisle and Goddard in the wings.

 

[Mowman]

A left field suggestion.
Paddy for Gresham with Roo linking play between back and front half and floating into the back line to provide extra cover for defence. Can 3 KPFs (Bruce, Paddy & Members work)with Jack S, Jack B, Minch mopping up do the job do the job or is it overkill?

Paddy wasn't omitted, he was managed. Perhaps they'll manage him back int the team.

3 KPFs seems to work pretty good for North ( Petrie, Waite and Brown ) can't see why it won't work for us

 

[Rors]

3 KPFs seems to work pretty good for North ( Petrie, Waite and Brown ) can't see why it won't work for us

Ball will rebound to quickly as that structure isn't nimble enough & we'll get scorched on the overlap

 

[Tommy Wigs]

With no Lindsay Thomas, does Gears have a matchup? Not saying he should be dropped, but who would he play on this week?

They may bring in Nahas?

 

[Jade Buddha]

Ball will rebound to quickly as that structure isn't nimble enough & we'll get scorched on the overlap

I'd argue that Bruce and Members are plenty nimble. Paddy's good below his knees but not the quickest. Last week it was Bruce, Roo and Members and that seemed to go OK.

 

[Rors]

I'd argue that Bruce and Members are plenty nimble. Paddy's good below his knees but not the quickest. Last week it was Bruce, Roo and Members and that seemed to go OK.

Inferior opposition though. This week it's Thompson, Firrito & Tarrant. Unless we are at optimal skill level upfield (extremely unlikely given our recent forward 50 entries), we won't be marking many balls I50 & Wright, LMac & Atley will have a field day running the ball out if we go in too tall. While Paddy offers a great target & contest, we need small at the fall. That won't work very well if there's Bruce, Paddy, Membrey & Roo all down there, unless Roo stays in the wing all game & gives us say Lonie, Sincs & Weller as smalls up forward

Up the other end, if we can bring in Goddard & with our tall defenders working in a team, we may be able to expose their excess forward height & burn them the other way. Look for a big influence from Sav, Joey, Newnes & Jimmy IMO

 

[Jade Buddha]

Inferior opposition though. This week it's Thompson, Firrito & Tarrant. Unless we are at optimal skill level upfield (extremely unlikely given our recent forward 50 entries), we won't be marking many balls I50 & Wright, LMac & Atley will have a field day running the ball out if we go in too tall.

Up the other end, if we can bring in Goddard & with our tall defenders working in a team, we may be able to expose their excess forward height & burn them the other way. Look for a big influence from Sav, Joey, Newnes & Jimmy IMO

Yeh look I agree about the work from our backline exit specialists but Hughy's not fast and could find himself like an extra leg under AFL pressure/speed. If he doesn't fire he becomes a liability with little flexibility. I think you've gotta back our improvement with entry into the forward 50 demonstrated last week (yes, piss poor opposition). North are strong and have the mature bodies but not necessarily the pace.

We've also got flexibility in that both Roo and Bruce can swing forward or back.

You could be right though if we bring our Dogs, GWS game it could get ugly.

 

[TheEnsign]

I would love to see us put up Paddy, Bruce and Membrey and go into total shoot-out mode.

I think everyone acknowledges that North have been drinking too much bathwater - their draw for the first six rounds has been super soft, particularly given how Freo have turned out this seasons.

We can definitely steal this one. Not a sports betting man, but 3.20 seems like very good odds.

 

[TheLonieRanger]

Yeah but his name is Jarryn

his beard is only just now looking half decent. delist