West Coast vs Fremantle - Teams

[Bacchus]

I can handle those changes (or lack there of). Just hate the fact the sub rule means one of the fringe players will likely get stuff all time.

That's one of the major downsides of this stupid sub rule. Generally the sub doesn't get a chance to make his case for inclusion in the 21.

In the 1960's and 70's and before, subs were called reserves and usually only came on if there was a game ending injury, or near the end of the game.

A regressive step if ever there was one. Interchange players on the bench were one of the great positive innovations to our game IMO and now for some mysterious reason we're going backwards. Coachs don't want it, players don't want it, and nor do many fans.

 

[Quinz]

We're going to run all over Freo now. Three slow useless giants? Yes please!

Which three useless giants are they playing?

 

[Eagle87]

Which three useless giants are they playing?

One assumes he means Sandi, Clarke & Griffin. Whether they are useless is subjective, they certainly are giants though ...

Obviously the plan is to use one of them forward and logic suggests Clarke (with the odd bit from Sandi) but neither of our rucks would be worried v Griffin and it does seem to rob them of a running player.

I'm not sure if the kick it in high tactic really worries us, we seem more susceptible to the get it in quick, over the back and run onto it type attacks. I guess we'll see.

 

[TruBluEagle]

Which three useless giants are they playing?

Shaking in my boots about this one. Average goals per game:
Clarke 0.48
Grif 0.22
Sandi 0.39
So they are good for 1 goal between the three of them. Compare this to cox (0.55) and nic nat (0.59). I am liking these teams more and more.

 

[Quinz]

Big Zac at least is quick, he's decent up forward too when the ball is delivered well. Sandilands can be dominant in the middle, I'm really not sure of the idea behind including Griffin.

 

[prattsta]

Shaking in my boots about this one. Average goals per game:
Clarke 0.48
Grif 0.22
Sandi 0.39
So they are good for 1 goal between the three of them. Compare this to cox (0.55) and nic nat (0.59). I am liking these teams more and more.

Clarke is averaging 1.0gpg this season; exactly the same as Naitanui.

Sandilands is averaging 0.5gpg this season; Cox is averaging 1.25gpg (0.7gpg prior to last week).

I don't know, using this seasons numbers seems relevant to me for some reason.

Big Zac at least is quick, he's decent up forward too when the ball is delivered well. Sandilands can be dominant in the middle, I'm really not sure of the idea behind including Griffin.

Griffin will allow us to play Clarke as a permanent forward. It will also allow us to use Sandilands up forward for longer periods. Sandilands is #3 in the AFL for contested marks, trialling him up forward for longer stretches - typically over his career he's spent 80-90% on-ball - is worth a shot.

Worst case scenario, Griffin ends up playing the Q-Stick battering ram role from the first derby last season and makes life easier for Sandilands in the 4th quarter.

 

[Max zero]

Seems like they are trying to out tall us. As we found out against the Bombers having tall players in the team just for being tall does not work.

Our talls are better kicks, more mobile, more dangerous going forward and better contested marks.

Bring it on.

I would be far more concerned if they went for speed.

 

[Quinz]

They could always sub Griffen out too I guess if they need speed later on in the game.

 

[getgaff]

As expected Priddis replaces Stevens. See what happens with Hams but i dont think the 22 is settled yet

Interesting tactic by the boys from the wharf. IMO if all three play (still could be a late withdrawal) Clarke will play majority of the game inside 50. Emac or Schoey are our tall defensive options for him. No Spurr hurts my fantasy footy but

 

[Righteo]

We're going to run all over Freo now. Three slow useless giants? Yes please!

Clarke isn't exactly slow, especially for a ruckman, and I wouldn't call a 3-time AA player useless either but it's your board and you're entitled to your interesting opinion of course. It can only work if one of them plays FF permanently.

Our team is slow as shit though and you will run over us I agree with that much.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Except realistically, we wont play Lycett unless Cox/Naitanui is down so it is an odd selection.

Lycett could get a game irrespective of Cox and Naitanui's fitness, depending on his form when playing forward in the WAFL.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Clarke isn't exactly slow, especially for a ruckman, and I wouldn't call a 3-time AA player useless either but it's your board and you're entitled to your interesting opinion of course. It can only work if one of them plays FF permanently.

Our team is slow as shit though and you will run over us I agree with that much.

Really? I know a few Fremantle members that think Sandilands is past it.

Clarke doesn't scare me as a forward given our three tall defenders.

Sandilands is always a threat but if you take him out of the middle and throw him forward you are going to start losing in the ruck, especially if Clarke comes in.

 

[sTeeL]

Lycett could get a game irrespective of Cox and Naitanui's fitness, depending on his form when playing forward in the WAFL.

Definately possible. *IF* he had 4 games across 6 weeks or so showing last weeks form. We would be incredibly unlikely to bring in a 3 gamer off 1 good week of WAFL form.

 

[beatlesmith]

If they try and play Clarke up forward I'd back Mackenzie to beat him, but if they also put Sandilands down there for extended periods of time we may have some issues, and in that case we might have to drag Cox back, leaving us a bit light up forward.

Anticipating having to drop Cox back to compete with multiple rucks is probably the best justification I can think of for bringing Lycett in.

Ambitious by Freo. Can see it either blowing up in their faces as we run all over them or working marvellously with us unable to cope with their height.

Assuming they line up the way they are listed, i'm disappointed that we didn't drop a small defender given how tall the freo forward line is shaping up, unless we're thinking of say putting Mcginnity on Hill, A.Selwood in the guts, Butler on Ballantyne and Brennan/Schofield on Mayne.

Shaping up as an intriguing contest to say the least.

 

[averil]

What if they put Sandi on Cox as a defender? Since Cox mostly takes overhead marks, wouldn't Sandi be able to spoil his marking attempts and nullify him?

 

[Eastern Rangers]

We will spank them out of the middle and it won't be an issue.

 

[Righteo]

Really? I know a few Fremantle members that think Sandilands is past it.

Clarke doesn't scare me as a forward given our three tall defenders.

Sandilands is always a threat but if you take him out of the middle and throw him forward you are going to start losing in the ruck, especially if Clarke comes in.

I hope you realise a few reactionary posts on the Freo board after a loss aren't indicative of the entire supporter base, if true though then they're idiots pure and simple. Going by the Freo board Mundy, Pavlich and Mcpharlin are all past it too

 

[beatlesmith]

What if they put Sandi on Cox as a defender? Since Cox mostly takes overhead marks, wouldn't Sandi be able to spoil his marking attempts and nullify him?

There's no way they'd do that unless Coxy was plucking everything and on his way to kicking 8-10.

Cox would be far too nimble for him on the lead/at ground level and if he pushed up towards CHF Sandilands suddenly becomes a massive lumbering liability. Not to mention the loss they incur up in the midfield by missing their best ruck and up forward by missing their best contested mark.

 

[Obeanie1]

Lycett as an emergency and covers us if any one of Cox, NN, Lynch or ,dare I even mention the possibility of Darling , missing the game.

I really thought Lycett looked lost in the games he's played this year and that may be due to him being inexperienced but the structure and planning up forward also have a part to play.

I'd set Lycett up with a very simple game plan and make sure the other forwards ahere to it. He starts deep in the goal square and leads staight out to provide the long target 20m out, its not hard. The other forwards need to time their leads / movements alot better and take the other defenders away from Lycett and the space needed. Sure other defenders may cover the space in front but give him a run at that spot he will create a pack marking contest.

 

[new breed]

Lycett was very good in the WAFL last week , so maybe the two weeks AFL experience has helped and Lycett will improve a good deal from the experience . Lycett has some 18 possessions , 13 HO and 4.1 gls is a pretty good game in a losing team . Hopefully on the way up !

 

[he85595]

A lot of confidence from eagles supporters at the minute. Has not been too many blow outs in derbies of late. Sure we are better on paper but we lost twice to this mob the year we won our last flag. Im nervous.

 

[The Falcon Strike]

A lot of confidence from eagles supporters at the minute. Has not been too many blow outs in derbies of late. Sure we are better on paper but we lost twice to this mob the year we won our last flag. Im nervous.

Happy to lose to them twice again if it
means we win the flag again.

My main concern is that we get to the bye 9-1. Our start to the season has been relatively soft, which has been a boon given our injuries. 9

If we want to make a GF our best chance is top
2 and that means beating all the sides out of too 4 contention.

 

[beatlesmith]

Lycett as an emergency and covers us if any one of Cox, NN, Lynch or ,dare I even mention the possibility of Darling , missing the game.

I really thought Lycett looked lost in the games he's played this year and that may be due to him being inexperienced but the structure and planning up forward also have a part to play.

I'd set Lycett up with a very simple game plan and make sure the other forwards ahere to it. He starts deep in the goal square and leads staight out to provide the long target 20m out, its not hard. The other forwards need to time their leads / movements alot better and take the other defenders away from Lycett and the space needed. Sure other defenders may cover the space in front but give him a run at that spot he will create a pack marking contest.

Yeah at the very least his role would be to make a contest and bring the ball to ground. He can take a contested grab, but I think for the moment he is struggling to do so against the quality defenders in the AFL. Some players have that problem; Sam Day and Jack Watts spring to mind as players who could pluck a lot of marks at junior level but have struggled to translate that in the big leagues. Then again, others like Darling, Butcher and Hurley have done it almost seamlessly.

Confident he will become a good player in time. We have to remember that he's 19 and is being expected to play two roles, roles which traditionally take the longest to develop.
Probably not ready to be anything more than serviceable at this stage, but that is to be expected. For this reason his WAFL and training performances are probably more important at this point in his career.

 

[BigBirds1987]

Freos ruckmen for their size are pretty mobile and cover a lot of ground. Having Sandilands and Clarke up forward could strech us, but if the ball goes to the ground we should win it 9 times out of 10.

 

[Belltower]

Just heard that nicnat could be out, definitely makes it a 50/50 game if it happens because lycett is not ready yet and will get monstered by sandilands and griffin.