Changes for Rnd 17 V West Coast

[i'm-uninformed2]

My bet: the three outs plus B Jack, with Richards, Pyke, Heeney and Laidler the ins

[wolftone57]

Any way you look at it, we do not have enough leg speed to cover Hawthorn on the spread, in and under, hardness at the coalface, we have them matched, speed and skill, no

I'm not sure pure speed was the problem. I thought horse got the match ups all wrong or at least the Mids coach did, yes I mean you Dew. Lloydy on smith is never going to be a good bet, he should have played on Shiel. Jetts to Smith. Litherland was allowed to wander all through the ground on his own, I thought he must have leprosy. He was on his own for most of the first quarter and touched us up. When you are getting a run on you are always going to look faster. they were getting overlap and their disposal was the elite of elite. The reason they were getting overlap was because they has a loose player on the edge of the square at HB that was allowed to do anything he wanted. we never matched that player up and we wonder why we got flogged.

[aguy]

My bet: the three outs plus B Jack, with Richards, Pyke, Heeney and Laidler the ins

I think the same. And I think heeney will play as sub to be honest as they manage him back into the seniors so he comes on after the initial physicality will have died down a little.

X Richards and laidler both to start with Reid forward partnering buddy. We may even find that jones plays a bit more midfield as well.

[RogueSwan]

I think the same. And I think heeney will play as sub to be honest as they manage him back into the seniors so he comes on after the initial physicality will have died down a little.

X Richards and laidler both to start with Reid forward partnering buddy...

I like the look of this. Buddy and Reid as tall forwards, Heeney at Buddy's feet and Parker moving with Reid. Could Parker take on a Pebbles hard running forward role. With Mitchell and Kennedy in the contest with Jack and Hanners nearby could Luke be the forward option we are looking for? With his marking ability along with Reid's aerial capability they would probably need to be double teamed freeing up somebody, as long as our mids can kick to them properly.

[wolftone57]

I'm not missing any point. I just think the reaction is hysterical.

I'd love us to win more premierships. Finishing top 4 gives you the best chance to do that. I also recognise that they're bloody hard to win.

I think you're kidding yourself if you think the supporter base see something the coaches don't.

Were you like this in 2005 when the Saints outclassed us at Docklands? Or when Geelong ran away from us in the last H&A game of 2012? What about last year when we were 1-3?

Footy changes so quickly and I'm yet to see a flag given out in mid-July. Buckle up, there's plenty of 2015 to play out yet.

I think there is a difference in those games to this one. In those games we looked tired and after a few weeks we refreshed. In this game we just looked outclassed. totally outclassed. The saints never looked a class above. They just looked as though they had a day out. The Hawks look a class above the whole competition and a huge class above.

Just to finish top four is not good enough, the idea is to win premierships. I am well aware of how hard they are to win but the Hawks seem to be able to win them at will. We beat them in 2012 but don't expect that to happen again this year. In the first game they were the better side on the day but lost. We played about 2-2.5 quarters and managed to win. They played 3 quarters and managed to lose. I take that win with a 'phew we dodged a bullet'. Your point about last year is? Did I go to sleep and just dream we got flogged in a GF?

I think we have to recruit players who have good skills and can work under pressure. Too many of our older players waste too much ball and are susceptible under pressure. A few of our newer players are a bit scrappy under pressure but in general their delivery is better. If you look at the Twos there are players there who's skills are pretty good. But there is a problem in defensive key talls. Aliir has not developed as fast as we thought due to injury. Xav hasn't put on much bulk and is looking more like a third tall than a KPP. Melican has been injured all year so we really haven't had a good look at him even though he looked good in the NAB Challenge.

If Reid goes back against Eagles then we have a gap for a tall in the forward line. I would have brought Davis in for his first game if Reid plays back. The other thing is Davis (192) can go back if it isn't working. He would play on Darling. I think Sammy will have to play on Kennedy. But no Davis. We do have Xav in our extended bench. He hasn't been picked in the Twos team.

Laidler, Pyke, Heeney, X. Richards, Robinson & Towers. I'd say Robbo & Towers. towers will play reserves but Richards, Heeney & Robinson are omissions from the Twos team to play NT Thunder and they would already be up there now. hewett is also out but he is injured I believe as is Derrickx. so it will be interesting how we line up.

I think McGovern is a huge out for them. But horse cannot let them have a player loose on the back end of the centre square like he did Hawks for the whole game last week. If so they will cut us up with run and carry. He has to go man on man. If X Richards plays it will be very interesting as Reid will then play forward. I think Heeney will be a great addition to the side. He gives us much needed run. I think we need to start his mids education now as he is a fast learner and is skilled enough to play there. Lloydy to HF, Heeney to wing. Lloydy has to start taking responsibility and booting a few goals. He has the ability but tends to offload, often times to players who are not as good at the set shot as him. He also kicks 60 metres so needs to get that into gear. He needs to get a shot of confidence and I think the players must to tell him to back himself.

i think it will be a very difficult game to win but the West Coast are going to have problems in the back half. But they are bringing in a mature age defender who is the bast FB in the WAFL to take McGovern's place. but it is a bit of a step up to this level. We must to win the clearances but our delivery needs to be much more specific to the forwards and less erratic.

[Plugger46]

I think there is a difference in those games to this one. In those games we looked tired and after a few weeks we refreshed. In this game we just looked outclassed. totally outclassed. The saints never looked a class above. They just looked as though they had a day out. The Hawks look a class above the whole competition and a huge class above.

Just to finish top four is not good enough, the idea is to win premierships. I am well aware of how hard they are to win but the Hawks seem to be able to win them at will. We beat them in 2012 but don't expect that to happen again this year. In the first game they were the better side on the day but lost. We played about 2-2.5 quarters and managed to win. They played 3 quarters and managed to lose. I take that win with a 'phew we dodged a bullet'. Your point about last year is? Did I go to sleep and just dream we got flogged in a GF?

The Saints outclassed us that night in every sense of the term. I remember it well.

The point about last year was obvious. We fought back from 1-3 to make the GF after most were questioning whether we would even make the 8. First you have to make the top 4. That gives you a chance and the more you do it, the greater your chances are of winning premierships. You've said that you're well aware of how hard they are to win but just about every point contradicts that statement.

Sometimes you need a bit of luck. Hawthorn have been shaky in prelims. It may happen again. Port were 3.9 at QT last year, different ball game if they kick straight. That's footy. The Crows had the better of us in 2005/2006 and we avoided them because the Eagles had their measure.

I have absolutely no idea whether we can win the flag this year but writing the season off when we're sitting in the top 4 is ridiculous. There are numerous examples of the best H&A team not winning the flag.

If Hawthorn play to their best for 3 matches in September they'll win the Premiership but it isn't that simple.

[wolftone57]

The Saints outclassed us that night in every sense of the term. I remember it well.

The point about last year was obvious. We fought back from 1-3 to make the GF after most were questioning whether we would even make the 8. First you have to make the top 4. That gives you a chance and the more you do it, the greater your chances are of winning premierships. You've said that you're well aware of how hard they are to win but just about every point contradicts that statement.

Sometimes you need a bit of luck. Hawthorn have been shaky in prelims. It may happen again. Port were 3.9 at QT last year, different ball game if they kick straight. That's footy. The Crows had the better of us in 2005/2006 and we avoided them because the Eagles had their measure.

I have absolutely no idea whether we can win the flag this year but writing the season off when we're sitting in the top 4 is ridiculous. There are numerous examples of the best H&A team not winning the flag.

If Hawthorn play to their best for 3 matches in September they'll win the Premiership but it isn't that simple.

you have to make and win finals first. If you have a look at who we have beaten this year then we don't look that great. We have only beaten GWS & Hawks of the sides in the Eight. granted we have yet to play West coast & Pies but they remain the only sides in the eight we haven't played. Every time we have gone into a finals series without beating the finals sides in the H&A we have capitulated. If you can't beat them in the H&A then it becomes more difficult in the finals. Years ago this was a far better indication I know because we played most of the competitors twice. But if you look at Hawks, Freo & even Bullies we don't match up so well on them. Not sure about Eagles as we haven't played them yet. Other than GWS the highest team we have beaten is Hawks but then got smashed but other than them the sides we have beaten are; 10th, 11th, 12th, 14th, 15th, 16th, 17th & 18th. The last by 21 points. I don't think in 2005 or 2012 we only beat the bottom 8 or 10 to make the four.

[wolftone57]

According to the NEAFL site these players are all playing in the Twos. I had a bit of a giggle;

X. Richards, Towers, Robinson, Heeney, Lloyd, Jones, & BJ.

The Ins are; 10. Zak Jones, 33. Brandon Jack, 44. Jake Lloyd, 31. Harrison Marsh & toppies.

I wonder if Jones, Robbo, Isaac, Xav & Lloydy will all fly to Perth Sunday from Darwin to play in the Seniors

[Dosser]

I'm not sure pure speed was the problem. I thought horse got the match ups all wrong or at least the Mids coach did, yes I mean you Dew. Lloydy on smith is never going to be a good bet, he should have played on Shiel. Jetts to Smith. Litherland was allowed to wander all through the ground on his own, I thought he must have leprosy. He was on his own for most of the first quarter and touched us up. When you are getting a run on you are always going to look faster. they were getting overlap and their disposal was the elite of elite. The reason they were getting overlap was because they has a loose player on the edge of the square at HB that was allowed to do anything he wanted. we never matched that player up and we wonder why we got flogged.

The ball, once it is kicked, travels a lot faster than a player can run. We can take their speed out of the equation simply by hitting targets.

[Hotpotato]

I just like $3.35 Swans head to head .
We have a pretty sound record in The West and they will be pretty motivated to respond .
If not , players should be paid simply on their win/loss .

[Plugger46]

X.Richards in for Jack.

[Conor_Dillon]

X Richards very lucky B Jack very stiff.