Changes for Rd. 3 vs North Melbourne

[707]

In the post-match press conference Longmire said that Naismith won't be ready for this game

Sinclair had 27 hitouts, 11 to advantage, won on those stats. Goldy a bigger test as is the Norf midfield

- - - Updated - - -

That's disappointing because Horse doesn't have a Plan B. We were smashed by the one of the worst midfields in the league yesterday

I thought we won the clearances?

North are a hard outfit, so I'd bring in Gould at HB and move Dawson to a wing/high HF. Hayward or Gray to make way for Gould inclusion. Stephens needs more time in the gym before he plays seniors, looked all at sea in the pre season games.

Yesterday we had a heap of players having their worse game in a long time all at the same time! Hopefully we get a lot more from those down players this week. It will be a strange season, low ladder position equals high draft pick.

[Markwebbos]

Someone needs to tag Higgins. Don’t know if that will be a job for Hewett or we might see Clarke?

I wonder if Ronke might reappear in place of Gray or Hayward?

Would we rather Gould than Melican?

[Southern Swan15]

The only change we need is decent delivery into the fwd line. We had a fwd line with an average hight of 5ft 9 yesterday yet we continued to bomb it long and expect a Mark of the year. Essendon talls would not have believed there luck with that game plan. Players need to take responsibility but instead they are just following coaching directions.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

[AB Swannie]

The meltdowns on this board have certainly hit top gear quickly after the break.

We lost by 6 points. People played poorly for their first game in months. I understand that everyone is passionate and has a right to their own opinion but I think some need to take a breath and be grateful that we aren’t doing an autopsy as Crows, Bulldogs, or Weagles fans.

I’m not one for wholesale changes after one week. People deserve a chance to redeem. If they continue to struggle then you make a change. Therefore, for me, no change.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Sinclair had 27 hitouts, 11 to advantage, won on those stats. Goldy a bigger test as is the Norf midfield

Where do the "to advantage" stats come from?

[707]

Where do the "to advantage" stats come from?

AFL/Champion Data, in this mornings paper

[MattW]

Our one-on-one defence was really poor and our defensive coordination poor, unfortunately. Not Swans 'brand'.

Rampe was excellent; Lloyd was very good.

Aliir was good with ball in hand, but is prone to a dropped mark off a high ball.

Mills is prone to a clanger, generally - reckon he would have above average unforced errors in defensive 50 leading to turnover and goal conceded (holding the ball, kicking errors etc). He also needs to win a higher proportion of one-on-one defensive contests to be an elite defender.

O'Riordan doesn't win nearly enough one-on-one contests.

Brand is a good defensive mark, but slowish.

I think at least either Melican or Gould is in our best 22, ultimately. We need another tall who can kill the high ball and has a touch of pace. I think we could accommodate one with Brand, Aliir and Rampe. It's hard to know whether either comes in this week without any idea of how the rest of the squad is performing.

I am not sure we need both Gray and Taylor, particularly given they are low possession winners, on current evidence. Taylor looks sharp in the forward 50. One third of his possessions were in the defensive part of the ground and I don't think there needs to be any.

Suspect they're worried that including Stephens for Gray might leave us too inexperienced. If that's the case, I think I'd prefer Clarke - at least he wins the ball.

[Ludwig]

A problem with proposing changes for the next match is that we have little info on the form and fitness of players not selected for the Essendon game. I gather that Stephens, Gould and Warner are all doing well enough to be given a shot. It was reported that Melican was training well. I would like to see the 3rd year players, Bell, Ling and Stoddart, given a crack first, form permitting. I would put development ahead of winning when making decisions involving a single player, i.e. I'm not calling for wholesale changes, but rather getting development into a player or two who are reafy for AFL level.

I wouldn't be dropping either McCartin or Blakey. We don't know how much more we will be getting out of Franklin and Reid and need to prepare for the future. Same for Rowbottom, who has gotten off to a slow start, but we know he can play.

Sam Gray would be the first on my list to drop.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Didn't Clarke do particularly well against North last year?
On the other hand Rowbottom had 24 possessions against the Dons last year.
But I can't see Horse not giving Clarke a crack at Higgins.

Nor can I see any reason to give up on Rowbottom, he's 19 for goodness sake.

[dimelb]

He's reliant on having a dominant ruckman in Naismith, but hasn't been able to configure the midfield to cope when we have Sinclair at the centre bounces.

The worst thing about yesterday was Jobe Watson in pre-game pointed out that someone needs to be on the goal side of Shiel at the centre bounce and we completely ignored that all day. Either our coaching staff didn't have the smarts to provide that instruction, or they did provide the instruction and it was ignored. Not sure which is worse to be honest.

I couldn't believe the open grass we laid out for Shiel.

[Scottee]

He's reliant on having a dominant ruckman in Naismith, but hasn't been able to configure the midfield to cope when we have Sinclair at the centre bounces.

The worst thing about yesterday was Jobe Watson in pre-game pointed out that someone needs to be on the goal side of Shiel at the centre bounce and we completely ignored that all day. Either our coaching staff didn't have the smarts to provide that instruction, or they did provide the instruction and it was ignored. Not sure which is worse to be honest.

I got the strong feeling watchimng the game that we were grossly undercoached. This was reinforced by not seeing anyone other than Horse and Cox in the coaching box.

[Scottee]

A problem with proposing changes for the next match is that we have little info on the form and fitness of players not selected for the Essendon game. I gather that Stephens, Gould and Warner are all doing well enough to be given a shot. It was reported that Melican was training well. I would like to see the 3rd year players, Bell, Ling and Stoddart, given a crack first, form permitting. I would put development ahead of winning when making decisions involving a single player, i.e. I'm not calling for wholesale changes, but rather getting development into a player or two who are reafy for AFL level.

I wouldn't be dropping either McCartin or Blakey. We don't know how much more we will be getting out of Franklin and Reid and need to prepare for the future. Same for Rowbottom, who has gotten off to a slow start, but we know he can play.

Sam Gray would be the first on my list to drop.

Really annoying that the club couldn't even manage a one paragraph report on the scratch match with GWS.I also wonder about the value of the extra short quarters in the scratch match as preparation for senior selection.They will all be underdone.Agree on Gray. We need another tall (McLean, Maibuam,Gould - who would know is in form based on no info?).