Page 3 of 20 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast
Results 25 to 36 of 233

Thread: Changes for Rnd 7 V Brisbane.

  1. #25
    Can you feel it? Site Admin ugg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Chucked into the ruck
    Posts
    14,053
    @Stevo7AFL

    Kurt Tippett looks certain to miss more than one game, hip injury reasonably serious @7aflgameday

  2. #26
    Regular in the Side
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    914
    I think there has been a lack of flexibility with the selections. What I don't get with Longmire is that he seems think of players in terms of only one aspect of their game, speed, strength, height. As such we get someone like BJ on the forward line unable to compete with bigger players who may be almost as fast.

    We need versatile players that have as much height, speed and strength as you can get in one package. Aliir for instance can play in almost any position, backs, forwards, mids or on ball as a fill in ruckman. He is seldom beaten for speed, has great vision and takes the game on. He fits the bill for the unannounced new rules that the VFL has brought in to stop us.Towers, to a lesser extent, fills this bill and is probably still a positive despite his lack of football nouse.Dawson and Edwards will also fill this bill eventually.

    Some of the results of this lack of flexibility were the comical match-ups that we saw yesterday.

    This really is a new era and we need to adjust.

    The likely outs for next week seem to be Rohan and perhaps Grundy due to injury. BJ omitted is a no brainer. It seems that McVeigh, Tippett and Marsh will not be available.

    So potentially 3 changes. There are very few realistic options. Aliir (no brainer) Dawson, Cameron, Towers, Foote, Talia. Maibuam

    If Grundy really is injured the decision needs to be made as to whether he is replaced by Aliir or Talia/Maibaum. You could potentially replace either Rohan or BJ with Aliir and still bring Talia/Maibaum in to replace Grundy. In favour of Talia is experience (not much but some), Maibaum has been very tight in the reserves but doesn't run off his man much as yet.

    Towers, who at least has a combination of speed, power, height and spring, would provide an option up forward and would be in contention with Dawson, who has better skills but, like Towers, seems to have some decision making issues. Again its a matter of an up and comer against a player with some experience.

    My pick, assuming injuries are as suspected is:

    Out: Grundy (inj), Rohan(inj) and BJ.
    In, Aliir, Talia and Towers.

    Cameron into the side has been mentioned by some but with Talia and Aliir coming into the side an extra tall might be difficult against a side that has only one ruckman. My only other comment is that some people are calling for Rose to be dropped. He wasn't great but at least he showed something and would be better for the run.Another 4 changes is perhaps too many. Dawson is the logical replacement if he is dropped.
    We have them where we want them, everything is going according to plan!

  3. #27
    Out; Grundy, Rohan (both injured), BJ & Rose.
    In: Aliir, Talia, Towers & Cameron.

  4. #28
    Veterans List Ludwig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Chiang Rai
    Posts
    5,399
    I've been watching the Melbourne-Essendon game with Cam Pedersen going up against Bellchambers in the ruck. Pederson is about the age and size as Reg, but with far less game experience and credentials. Pedersen has lost the hitouts, but Melbourne are winning the clearances. It seems that the stoppages have been more or less break even. Tom MacDonald, a defender, has taken some turns in the ruck as well.

    Maybe Reg will miss next week with concussion, but if so, it's only likely to be a week. Reg is contracted until next year. I think he's become too slow to play in a modern defence, but not too slow to play in the ruck, where his work under pressure would be very useful once the ball hits the ground. He reads the play well and is a good mark. He also has a good tank.

    Here's an idea: We play we 4 tall defenders: Reg, Aliir, Talia and Melican. Reg plays as our 1st ruckman with help from Aliir. So we effective are only playing 3 in defence at any one time. Our forward line is not compromised by taking a forward to play in the ruck.

    I don't think Sinclair is a viable option. I like Cal because he puts in a big effort. He really gives it his best, but he is simply not good enough as a ruckman and cannot take a mark unless it uncontested and he gets 2 cracks at it. It's not going to work.

    Tippett should be the first option in the ruck, but waiting for Tippett to be right is like waiting for Godot.

    I like the idea of Cameron as a forward ruck and I'm sure we will give this a go. It may be a good option long term.

    Naismith gives us the best first use of the ball in the ruck, but has a way to go with his work around the ground. I hope he can develop into another Max Gawn. Both Max and Sam have been extremely injury prone though. So it may be a bit of a false hope. There is another downside if we look at the criticism from many that our game plan is based on contested footy at the stoppages and this doesn't suit modern footy. Naismith in the ruck brings us back to this kind of game plan, while the other solutions are not based on winning first use of the ball, so forces us into another game plan.

  5. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Ludwig View Post
    Out : Rohan, BJ, Rose, Grundy, Sinclair

    In : Aliir, Cameron, Dawson, Talia, Florent

    Also would replace Laidler with Marsh if fit although Laidler played okay for the most part. Tippett unlikely to play next week. Sinclair had some big ranking point numbers, but cannot mark the ball well enough to see any future in continuing to play him unless all 3 of our other ruckmen are injured.

    Another consideration is to bring back Towers to split the ruck duties with Cameron. Last and only chance remaining for Towers to continue his AFL career. He is contracted through next season, so worth a try given our current position.

    I'm half tempted to give Rose another week because if we drop him now it could be curtains for him.
    Agree with everything except replacing Laidler. He's so reliable, calm under pressure and can look after himself. I'm a nervous wreck watching Marsh!


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  6. #30
    I think McVeigh will be available for selection against the Lions and I think he's an automatic in if he is. Right now it feels like we need more on-field leadership than we've been getting.

    “... he is ok so, we will give Jarrad another week and he will train fully and be available, all things being equal, next weekend.”
    McVeigh ruled out - sydneyswans.com.au

    If Tippett isn't available then I would like to see them give Cameron a go rather than have Reid pinch hit and I'd also like to see a 3rd tall defender rather than a medium, all of which would give Reid a chance to play as a forward. I'm an Aliir believer if he plays as the 3rd tall not the 2nd. So Laidler out, Aliir in.

    I'm also not convinced that Grundy won't get up as his injury wasn't that serious.

    OUT: BJ, Gaz, Laidler
    IN: McVeigh, Cameron / Tippett, Aliir

  7. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Ludwig View Post
    ... Reg is contracted until next year. I think he's become too slow to play in a modern defence, but not too slow to play in the ruck, where his work under pressure would be very useful once the ball hits the ground. He reads the play well and is a good mark. He also has a good tank.

    Here's an idea: We play we 4 tall defenders: Reg, Aliir, Talia and Melican. Reg plays as our 1st ruckman with help from Aliir. So we effective are only playing 3 in defence at any one time. Our forward line is not compromised by taking a forward to play in the ruck.

    I don't think Sinclair is a viable option. I like Cal because he puts in a big effort. He really gives it his best, but he is simply not good enough as a ruckman and cannot take a mark unless it uncontested and he gets 2 cracks at it. It's not going to work.
    I agree that Sinclair hasn't been covering himself in glory, but he is improving week by week. Took a genuine contested mark and scored from it this week and another one inside FWD50 in the last quarter. I think he's going to be a better ruckman in the short-term than Reg. Wanting to not play Reg in defence is no excuse for playing him in the ruck.

    In the absence of Tippett / Naismith I would like to see Cameron get a go as a Fwd / ruck not Sam Reid.

  8. #32
    McVeigh must come back through the 2's.
    Tippet should not play unless 100%.

  9. #33
    Reefer Madness
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    in a yellow submarine
    Posts
    1,416
    Blog Entries
    1
    Some selection thoughts, not so much for next week as generally. It was prompted by a remark Longmire made last week that Aliir was out as Melican was playing in his spot. (And I say this as a Longmire fan). But it struck me he was saying we'd pretty much only play two tall defenders. When I reckon part of the issue is our defensive mix and what it frees up elsewhere.

    So, I'd start with Grundy, Melican and Smith as the three pure defenders - that is, first job to negate. Smith is still our best small defender, Grundy can still take the gorillas and Melican looks a great prospect.

    But from there, I'd have Aliir, as he can both take a third tall when required, or play on a medium forward comfortably with his athleticism. And the easier his assignment, the more he can be free to intercept and run.

    And when Rampe returns, that means at worst he's got to play on a fourth best tall or medium forward, which gets him free to sweep and cover and be a release kick - something we miss dearly and he's best suited to.

    I'd then put a combination of Jones & Lloyd in a running role too and one of the mids like a Mills or Heeney (which I will come back to) as floating back and marking cover on occasions.

    Now, this has the benefit of sending Mills and either Jones or Lloyd upfield for two reasons - one to free Mills from the pressures of defence, and to add to our midfield mix.

    Right now, I think the core three of Kennedy, Parker and Hanners are suffering from a few things, but one is they do almost all centre bounces. We saw in the first half yesterday what Heeney can add, and Mills could do the same. Whichever of Jones and Lloyd are not needed down back circulate through too. Suddenly, we have five or six excellent players to circulate through the core of the midfield - and some actually have real pace and run.

    A mix of Hewett and Newman and one or two others will have to round out the rotations, but it is a more versatile and deeper group. And who knows, there may be occasions where match ups allow us to slip Rampe through for patches.

    Finally, my other beef - how we play Tippett. I know he was a terrific ruck in the first half of last year, but his forward play has gone to crap. Both marking, and with it, goal production. And yet, at his best, he's a three goal a game forward.

    Play him deep. Full stop. If he needs to do 20 percent of the game in the ruck ok, but his primary role should be as a forward. Buddy can then float 30-70m out, and Reid can roam through too. But three tall targets each with different strengths is a bugger for most defences, and gives Papley and Hayward or resting mids something to feed off, and our mids something to kick to.

    Anyway, I appreciate its not a best 22 and dependent on injuries and fitness (for example, Parker is clearly struggling with a lack of pre-season) and general lack of cohesion being fixed but I think you get what my thinking is on trying to create a more stable defence, run, and deeper midfield, as well as some structure up forward.

  10. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by i'm-uninformed2 View Post
    Some selection thoughts, not so much for next week as generally. It was prompted by a remark Longmire made last week that Aliir was out as Melican was playing in his spot. (And I say this as a Longmire fan). But it struck me he was saying we'd pretty much only play two tall defenders. When I reckon part of the issue is our defensive mix and what it frees up elsewhere.

    So, I'd start with Grundy, Melican and Smith as the three pure defenders - that is, first job to negate. Smith is still our best small defender, Grundy can still take the gorillas and Melican looks a great prospect.

    But from there, I'd have Aliir, as he can both take a third tall when required, or play on a medium forward comfortably with his athleticism. And the easier his assignment, the more he can be free to intercept and run.

    And when Rampe returns, that means at worst he's got to play on a fourth best tall or medium forward, which gets him free to sweep and cover and be a release kick - something we miss dearly and he's best suited to.

    I'd then put a combination of Jones & Lloyd in a running role too and one of the mids like a Mills or Heeney (which I will come back to) as floating back and marking cover on occasions.

    Now, this has the benefit of sending Mills and either Jones or Lloyd upfield for two reasons - one to free Mills from the pressures of defence, and to add to our midfield mix.

    Right now, I think the core three of Kennedy, Parker and Hanners are suffering from a few things, but one is they do almost all centre bounces. We saw in the first half yesterday what Heeney can add, and Mills could do the same. Whichever of Jones and Lloyd are not needed down back circulate through too. Suddenly, we have five or six excellent players to circulate through the core of the midfield - and some actually have real pace and run.

    A mix of Hewett and Newman and one or two others will have to round out the rotations, but it is a more versatile and deeper group. And who knows, there may be occasions where match ups allow us to slip Rampe through for patches.

    Finally, my other beef - how we play Tippett. I know he was a terrific ruck in the first half of last year, but his forward play has gone to crap. Both marking, and with it, goal production. And yet, at his best, he's a three goal a game forward.

    Play him deep. Full stop. If he needs to do 20 percent of the game in the ruck ok, but his primary role should be as a forward. Buddy can then float 30-70m out, and Reid can roam through too. But three tall targets each with different strengths is a bugger for most defences, and gives Papley and Hayward or resting mids something to feed off, and our mids something to kick to.

    Anyway, I appreciate its not a best 22 and dependent on injuries and fitness (for example, Parker is clearly struggling with a lack of pre-season) and general lack of cohesion being fixed but I think you get what my thinking is on trying to create a more stable defence, run, and deeper midfield, as well as some structure up forward.
    there is a lot of sense here. Just need to sort out long term ruck situation. Naismith and tippo are to fragile to play no1 ruck. Need to persevere with Sincas and Cameron (who looks good) for the long term

  11. #35
    Veterans List Ludwig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Chiang Rai
    Posts
    5,399
    Quote Originally Posted by Billericay View Post
    I agree that Sinclair hasn't been covering himself in glory, but he is improving week by week. Took a genuine contested mark and scored from it this week and another one inside FWD50 in the last quarter. I think he's going to be a better ruckman in the short-term than Reg. Wanting to not play Reg in defence is no excuse for playing him in the ruck.
    1. I don't think Sinclair is actually improving. I've always given him credit for effort and he does tackle. The problem is that in the position he plays he has to absolutely nail his marks. He will take some marks. Many are uncontested. A fair few are double takes. He simply drops too many. I know Horse is often happy if a tall forward just brings the ball to ground, but when a 2 mtr. player is a clear position to mark the ball, he has to do it.
    2. I am looking for something for Reg to do outside of his usual position in backline. I think Reg would at least as effective as Sinclair in the ruck and much more of an asset around the ground. Reg can definitely take a contested mark. He can also nullify the opposing ruckman who goes forward, as that's a very normal role for Reg.


    I am just offering other options to the much maligned game plan of trying to win the contested ball. Let's try to give ourselves a different look that might give opposition something to think about.

    As things might have it, we have suddenly come into a plethora of good KPDs with Aliir, Melican, Talia, Maibaum and AJ. Toby Pink has been playing forward and looking a reasonable prospect. Even if he doesn't make it as a forward, I think he could be a good key defender. Good size and agility. He's played in defence as a junior. Playing in the ruck could be a better option than the NEAFL for someone of Reg's experience.

    It's a good year to experiment and try a few different things.

  12. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by i'm-uninformed2 View Post
    Some selection thoughts, not so much for next week as generally. It was prompted by a remark Longmire made last week that Aliir was out as Melican was playing in his spot. (And I say this as a Longmire fan). But it struck me he was saying we'd pretty much only play two tall defenders. When I reckon part of the issue is our defensive mix and what it frees up elsewhere.

    So, I'd start with Grundy, Melican and Smith as the three pure defenders - that is, first job to negate. Smith is still our best small defender, Grundy can still take the gorillas and Melican looks a great prospect.

    But from there, I'd have Aliir, as he can both take a third tall when required, or play on a medium forward comfortably with his athleticism. And the easier his assignment, the more he can be free to intercept and run.

    And when Rampe returns, that means at worst he's got to play on a fourth best tall or medium forward, which gets him free to sweep and cover and be a release kick - something we miss dearly and he's best suited to.

    I'd then put a combination of Jones & Lloyd in a running role too and one of the mids like a Mills or Heeney (which I will come back to) as floating back and marking cover on occasions.

    Now, this has the benefit of sending Mills and either Jones or Lloyd upfield for two reasons - one to free Mills from the pressures of defence, and to add to our midfield mix.

    Right now, I think the core three of Kennedy, Parker and Hanners are suffering from a few things, but one is they do almost all centre bounces. We saw in the first half yesterday what Heeney can add, and Mills could do the same. Whichever of Jones and Lloyd are not needed down back circulate through too. Suddenly, we have five or six excellent players to circulate through the core of the midfield - and some actually have real pace and run.

    A mix of Hewett and Newman and one or two others will have to round out the rotations, but it is a more versatile and deeper group. And who knows, there may be occasions where match ups allow us to slip Rampe through for patches.

    Finally, my other beef - how we play Tippett. I know he was a terrific ruck in the first half of last year, but his forward play has gone to crap. Both marking, and with it, goal production. And yet, at his best, he's a three goal a game forward.

    Play him deep. Full stop. If he needs to do 20 percent of the game in the ruck ok, but his primary role should be as a forward. Buddy can then float 30-70m out, and Reid can roam through too. But three tall targets each with different strengths is a bugger for most defences, and gives Papley and Hayward or resting mids something to feed off, and our mids something to kick to.

    Anyway, I appreciate its not a best 22 and dependent on injuries and fitness (for example, Parker is clearly struggling with a lack of pre-season) and general lack of cohesion being fixed but I think you get what my thinking is on trying to create a more stable defence, run, and deeper midfield, as well as some structure up forward.
    I agree about 3 tall defenders. We were playing 2 talls plus Rampe, which worked because Rampe is a medium who plays tall. Marsh v Cameron proved a disaster. I'd rather have Aliir in there than Laidler. If speed is an issue, Aliir is faster than Laidler and can do more offensively. When Rampe returns it will be interesting to see who'd make way.

    I also agree about too much being left to Parks / Joey / Hanners. We absolutely need to rotate a few more through there. Heeney is already happening. I'd like to see Jones on the ball as he is hard and breaks the lines, although he doesn't seem to tackle much. Mills / Newman feel like they'd sit behind the play and distribute rather than win the ball. Hewitt is going OK as an onballer. Does Ronke have the potential to play inside, if he actually exists.

    Ruck is a huge problem for us right now. Tippett playing deep didn't work for us which is why he ended up going into the ruck, with great success for the first half of last year. Now he's out of form, can we afford to play him back into form in the AFL or should he have a stint in the NEAFL? I'd like to give Cameron a go and take the pressure off Tippett to rush back into the side. I know he has great "potential" but he hasn't got anywhere near it this year.

    Not convinced Sinclair has the potential to be our #1 ruck, but they have to keep playing him to give him every opportunity until Naismith returns. I have really high hopes for Naismith. I'm not convinced he is injury prone; players just need to stop falling onto him. But again, I'd keep going with Sinclair until Naismith has had a game or 2 in the twos and is back in form, rather than rushing him back in.

    It feels like the Swans need to stop picking unfit / out of form players and only play those that are fit and are playing well. Easier said than done when there's not much to come in from the NEAFL.

Page 3 of 20 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO