Always Right Match Committee - Round 18 Vs Gold Coast Suns 2021

[Scraggers]

Welcome to the Always Right Match Committee Thread. The Match Committee threads has been named after long time WOOF member Always Right who tragically passed away in March 2018.

If you were on the Western Bulldogs match committee what changes would you make after our Round 17 match against Sydney Swans for our Round 18, 2021 match against Gold Coast Suns at Metricon Stadium (Date and Time to be confirmed)?

For those new to these threads, please give a brief explanation for your changes ... this would add a lot of value to the discussion.

[GVGjr]

Bump

[bulldogtragic]

In: Naughton, Schache, West
Out: Hannan, Jamarra, JJ

[GVGjr]

Im almost certain Dunkley will play

[Bumper Bulldogs]

In: Naughton and West.

Out Hannan and JJ

[DOG GOD]

In- Dunkley, Naughton,
Out- Hannan, JUH,

[G-Mo77]

I wouldn't drop JUH. Give him a shot at being the 3rd option and let him slip through the cracks a little.

[macca]

In: Dunkley, Nauhgton,
Out: Hannan, Wallis, JJ

I am going to persist with Young. His only played 20 games. But he needs to offer more physical presence. Sorry Schache, but Young is ahead in the queue for that HB role, and more physical KPD.

Dunks available, unfortunately Wallis makes way. Dunks offers more as a mid and can take a mark fwd.

Stick with the young players, Scott, Richards, Garcia, JUH, Young, Weightman and get games into them.

Sam Day on JUH will be good experience for him.

Not sure who takes JJ place did not read the VFL report but would be : West, Cavarra who need their chance. But JJ was poor today ( not alone)

[Axe Man]

I wouldn't drop JUH. Give him a shot at being the 3rd option and let him slip through the cracks a little.

I don’t want to hang the bloke because it wasn’t his fault but he can’t play again this year. I would have done better than him today.

[bornadog]

In: Naughton, Dunkley

Out: Hanan, Scott

[DOG GOD]

I don’t want to hang the bloke because it wasn’t his fault but he can’t play again this year. I would have done better than him today.

Should never had played. Simple as that.

[merantau]

I think Hannan has had a good run at it and it's time to give someone else a go.
I would not drop JUH. He didn't do much but neither did many others up forward and we are expecting him to have a long career with us. So keep him in
I would give Josh Schache a run in place of Scott. If Dunkley is ready he comes straight in and Garcia goes out

[Bullies]

Out : Wallis (He is a liability and offers little), Hannan (many chances), Garcia, Young

In: Naughton, Dunks, Crozier, MacLean

[Grantysghost]

Out : Wallis, Ugle-Hagen, Hannan (he was rubbish)
In: Dunkley, Naughton, McNeil

[westbulldog]

In Naughton Dunkley MacLean

Out Hannan Wallis JJ

[comrade]

Out : Wallis, Ugle-Hagen, Hannan (he was rubbish)
In: Dunkley, Naughton, McNeil

That's mine too.

Wallis can't play at senior level for us again, IMO. JJ on very thin ice.

[azabob]

That's mine too.

Wallis can't play at senior level for us again, IMO. JJ on very thin ice.

JJ was extremely poor today. He will be exposed big time in the finals.

[comrade]

JJ was extremely poor today. He will be exposed big time in the finals.

It's forward or bust for JJ. Can't trust him to beat an opponent in D50 anymore, needs to purely be a pressure forward from now on and if he can't do that, bye.

[macca]

It's forward or bust for JJ. Can't trust him to beat an opponent in D50 anymore, needs to purely be a pressure forward from now on and if he can't do that, bye.


He got outmarked today by Dawson, when we needed him to win that contest or at least spoil. Offers nothing aerially.

[bulldogtragic]

It's forward or bust for JJ. Can't trust him to beat an opponent in D50 anymore, needs to purely be a pressure forward from now on and if he can't do that, bye.

JJ has $600,000 (nearly 5% of our TPP) next season. I’m firmly in the bye category now.

[Grantysghost]

That's mine too.

Wallis can't play at senior level for us again, IMO. JJ on very thin ice.

Wally seemed to arrive at contests a second after it had been run and won. I don't see him in our best side.

[comrade]

JJ has $600,000 (nearly 5% of our TPP) next season. I’m firmly in the bye category now.

Unfortunately, we're stuck with him. No one is taking that on.

[bulldogtragic]

Wally seemed to arrive at contests a second after it had been run and won. I don't see him in our best side.

I don’t see him in our side next week. When he is dropped, that’s should be the moment he accepts another clubs offer. I didn’t see him last year, but save for some junk goals against 18th last week, I don’t see how he fits into our plans going forward. In a different forward line maybe he’s of value, but with us I unfortunately just don’t see it happening.

[bulldogtragic]

Unfortunately, we're stuck with him. No one is taking that on.

Everyone has a price. I’d take almost a draft points type trade, forgoing any tangible return and pay some of the contract if pushed. We just can’t tie our TPP up with 5% to an average forward pocket. Another club looking for a marketing face and thinks he can be a hbf might be tempted. This is the one really glaring contract we need to fix up. And Sam Power has to fix it.

[comrade]

I would also probably be ok if Marra got another game.

Something like:

Out: Wallis, Hannan
In: Dunks, Naughts

And once Martin is right to go, Marra comes out.

[angelopetraglia]

I love Wally. Love his energy, leadership and what he brings to the group. But he had a few pivotal moments today and every time he didn't get the job done. Dropped marks, fumbled, missed targets by hand (which is one of his key strengths) and just doesn't do enough (only 8 touches today). He can't play. I would have a number in front of him in that position including McLean and even Lippa who dominated in the VFL again.

In: Naughton, Lipinksi, Dunkley
Out: Marra, Wallis, Hanan

[The Bulldogs Bite]

We have a lot of players out of touch currently.

Hannan and Wallis top of the list, JJ is struggling, Scott has been quiet but I still think he's ahead of others, the ruck situation is an issue and also doesn't allow Lewy to settle as a KPD, Williams is struggling and Cordy...

Marras debut was awful if we're being honest. I'd rather play him than Hannan though.

I still hate what we're doing with the ruck.

In - Dunkley, Naughton
Out - Hannan, Wallis

McLean is one I'd ideally like in the side if he's OK to go. Sweet should have played today so I can't see why we'd play him now with Naughton coming back.

We really need a few of our injured players back as we can't keep carrying Hannan/Wallis/Marra/Scott/Garcia etc.

[Scraggers]

If Dunks is right, then he’s an instants in. Hannan makes way for Naughts.
So McNeill, Scott and Hannan out
Dunks, Naughts and Crozier (sub)

[Grantysghost]

If Dunks is right, then he’s an instants in. Hannan makes way for Naughts.
So McNeill, Scott and Hannan out
Dunks, Naughts and Crozier (sub)

Dunkley spoke prior to the game to the Player Sponsors and said he's ticked all the boxes and is definitely ready to go. Said he would've played this week if it was a final.

[GVGjr]

If Dunks is right, then he’s an instants in. Hannan makes way for Naughts.
So McNeill, Scott and Hannan out
Dunks, Naughts and Crozier (sub)

Dunks said a few telling things today.
If it was a final, he was more likely to have played.
He didn't think there were anymore boxes to tick.
He's been in contact drills for a few weeks now.

I guess the only question is if he gets a week at Footscray.

[Happy Days]

I’d drop the Mitches for Naughton and Dunkley, and could be talked into JJ for McNeil.

[Dry Rot]

Dunno why some of you are calling for Garcia to be dropped.

[Scraggers]

Dunno why some of you are calling for Garcia to be dropped.

Garcia plays. He has done enough to keep his position. His in and under and hardball need to stay in our game.

[GVGjr]

Dunno why some of you are calling for Garcia to be dropped.

For accuracy it's one person who's nominated him not some.

[divvydan]

For me, the easy part are the ins. Naughton comes in. If fit, Dunkley comes in. Who goes out is harder. We've been playing poorly for two weeks now, I hope it's because we're in a heavy training block, but who knows. Realistically we have half a dozen players who should make way. My thoughts are;

In: Naughton, Dunkley
Out: Hannan, Wallis.

I personally think we're best off when we play 3 talls and I don't think either of Hannan or Wallis do enough either in the air or as defensive players. I think it's likely that Bevo will take out Marra instead of Hannan and I can understand that but I think Marra did enough to suggest that he can provide defensive pressure, even if his hands are way too hard in the marking contest. Having watched around 3/4 of the VFL game, I didn't really see any standouts that warranted inclusion in the AFL team, so I wouldn't be inclined to bring anyone else in. If Dunkley isn't fit, then probably Hannan keeps his place.

[1eyedog]

Contrary to my posts last week I don't really care how crap Sweet is playing in the VFL he simply must come in to allow English to play forward. English forward was where we looked our most dangerous earlier in the year. I'm not really seeing the negative roll on affect dropping Cordy, Hannan, JJ or Scott for Sweet.

Lewy Young needs to play CHB. He's a Barrass-type player not a forward and not a second ruck (even though he did battle manfully yesterday).

McNeil needs to play he's got good intensity and covers a lot of ground quickly I have no idea why he hasn't been given more of an opportunity.

Naughton in for Hannan
Sweet in for Cordy and Lewy Young to CHB
McNeil in for Scott
Dunks in for Wallis

[comrade]

Contrary to my posts last week I don't really care how crap Sweet is playing in the VFL he simply must come in to allow English to play forward. English forward was where we looked our most dangerous earlier in the year. I'm not really seeing the negative roll on affect dropping Cordy, Hannan, JJ or Scott for Sweet.

Lewy Young needs to play CHB. He's a Barrass-type player not a forward and not a second ruck (even though he did battle manfully yesterday).

McNeil needs to play he's got good intensity and covers a lot of ground quickly I have no idea why he hasn't been given more of an opportunity.

Naughton in for Hannan
Sweet in for Cordy and Lewy Young to CHB
McNeil in for Scott
Dunks in for Wallis

I'm off Sweet after his last 3 weeks in the VFL, but there's no denying our structure is buggered at the moment with English as solo ruck and Young being thrown to the wolves.

I could get behind all these changes

[bulldogsthru&thru]

We're effectively playing ZERO ruck without Martin in the side. As far as I'm concerned, English is not a ruckman.

[comrade]

We're effectively playing ZERO ruck without Martin in the side. As far as I'm concerned, English is not a ruckman.

Martin is arguably our most important player on the sidelines right now. Inditement on our list management over the last 3 years that the ruck is still such a massive concern.

[Happy Days]

One thing to consider is that GC are probably the only team to treat the ruck with more contempt than us, playing Burgess (who is bad and possibly shorter than me) as their number one with pretty much no support.

I think if we can make due against Nicnat without Martin then it shouldn’t sting too bad against GC.

[Rocco Jones]

The ruck call is not a decision between right or wrong but one between bad or worse.

Burgess actually makes me more open to playing Sweet as it brings in his ability to win hitouts against poor/non rucks. Against a semi-decent AFL ruck, he gets beaten in the contest then is a liability elsewhere. The irony is that if we play him against the Suns, he will be up against a far inferior player in the ruck contest than his previous 3 VFL opponents.

Sweet was so poor in the first half that we had to move him to keep us in a VFL game. I get Sinclair is AFL level-ish but that's concerning short term (I am overall please with Sweet's progress). Thought Sweet fought back well after moving forward and was better in the ruck later on.

I get both sides of the argument but don't get how you can be strongly one way or another. Both options are bad and more about extracting things elsewhere. As stated previously by others, a mature ruck would be nice. Doesn't have to that good.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

I get both sides of the argument but don't get how you can be strongly one way or another. Both options are bad and more about extracting things elsewhere. As stated previously by others, a mature ruck would be nice. Doesn't have to that good.

I agree with the in between parts but not the end RJ!

We spent 3 years seeing English fail more than he succeeded as a solo ruck, aided by midfielders (Dunkley, Jong, Bont, Macrae), key defenders (Cordy, now Young) and key forwards (Bruce, Schache). This included English being hammered in the ruck and fatigued around the ground, fatigued mids and then a lack of structure both back and forward.

We spent roughly 6 weeks seeing how dangerous English can be as a second ruck/forward which was when we looked at our best. Whenever Cordy is forced to be our second KPD, we're in trouble. When we played Melbourne, May/Lever contained Bruce/Naughton but if you enable English to play 60-70% forward then that throws them a big challenge.

I think it's negligent what we're currently doing - we KNOW English as a solo ruck doesn't win us big games and doesn't win us finals. It's proven. So why persist? We KNOW English, as a ruck/forward, really troubles sides with Bruce and Naughton. Why wouldn't we look to continue this, even IF Martin is injured?

Sweet isn't a great option, but him playing means English can play more forward. It means Young can play KPD without being shifted to 3 areas of the ground. It means our mids play as mids and our key forwards play as key forwards.

Does anyone really think playing Sweet instead of one of Hannan/Scott/Wallis hurts us in ANY way?

[Mantis]

I agree with the in between parts but not the end RJ!

We spent 3 years seeing English fail more than he succeeded as a solo ruck, aided by midfielders (Dunkley, Jong, Bont, Macrae), key defenders (Cordy, now Young) and key forwards (Bruce, Schache). This included English being hammered in the ruck and fatigued around the ground, fatigued mids and then a lack of structure both back and forward.

We spent roughly 6 weeks seeing how dangerous English can be as a second ruck/forward which was when we looked at our best. Whenever Cordy is forced to be our second KPD, we're in trouble. When we played Melbourne, May/Lever contained Bruce/Naughton but if you enable English to play 60-70% forward then that throws them a big challenge.

I think it's negligent what we're currently doing - we KNOW English as a solo ruck doesn't win us big games and doesn't win us finals. It's proven. So why persist? We KNOW English, as a ruck/forward, really troubles sides with Bruce and Naughton. Why wouldn't we look to continue this, even IF Martin is injured?

Sweet isn't a great option, but him playing means English can play more forward. It means Young can play KPD without being shifted to 3 areas of the ground. It means our mids play as mids and our key forwards play as key forwards.

Does anyone really think playing Sweet instead of one of Hannan/Scott/Wallis hurts us in ANY way?

English played as a forward against Melbourne and we still got beat pretty comfortably so whilst we threw Melb the challenge, they still had our measure.

And to your last point the opportunity for a ruckman to influence a game is much greater than a small/medium forward... agree that those 3 in particular aren't giving us what we need and should be replaced by like types moving forward, but I don't think we can view the impact they have on the game the same.

[MrMahatma]

Out: Hannan, Wallis
In: Naughton, Dunkley

I think on balance we need VDM back asap.

Also JUH stays in for me, I'd predict he gets dropped though.

[Mantis]

Out: Hannan, Wallis
In: Naughton, Dunkley

I'd keep Wallis in... for now. He'll be out when VDM is back.

Also JUH stays in for me, I'd predict he gets dropped though.

You would? :confused:

[Rocco Jones]

I agree with the in between parts but not the end RJ!

Which part do you disagree with? I am being quite neutral and unsure if I am being unclear.

[The Pie Man]

More what I think will happen than what I’d do

In: Dunkley, McNeill, Naughton
Out: Wallis, Hannan, JUH

If they’re not comfortable with Dunks straight in, then McLean for Wallis.

Can’t see JJ copping it for that outing, as bad as it was.

Big week coming up, hoping a bit of weekend sunshine might lift them

[Mofra]

The ruck call is not a decision between right or wrong but one between bad or worse.

Burgess actually makes me more open to playing Sweet as it brings in his ability to win hitouts against poor/non rucks. Against a semi-decent AFL ruck, he gets beaten in the contest then is a liability elsewhere. The irony is that if we play him against the Suns, he will be up against a far inferior player in the ruck contest than his previous 3 VFL opponents.

Sweet was so poor in the first half that we had to move him to keep us in a VFL game. I get Sinclair is AFL level-ish but that's concerning short term (I am overall please with Sweet's progress). Thought Sweet fought back well after moving forward and was better in the ruck later on.

I get both sides of the argument but don't get how you can be strongly one way or another. Both options are bad and more about extracting things elsewhere. As stated previously by others, a mature ruck would be nice. Doesn't have to that good.
TBH I thought Young was ok as a ruck, just not very good forward of the ball (and I don't have much faith in him behind the ball either). If we are bringing in ruck support for English, Young is ahead of Sweet on current form.

Naughton in is a no-brainer and I love Wally but he's just not fitting in with our current gameplan.
Naughton for Wallis is my change with Young to take more first ruck duties and English to spend more time forward. JUH is raw as hell and not ready but he had a couple of better touches at the start of the last quarter and I'd be really tempted to give him one more game.

[comrade]

Bevo just about stamped Marra's papers in his presser when he was asked whether he'd get another go. Referred to John Northey's philosophy of always giving a kid 2 games and that he didn't agree with that. Reckon there is absolutely no chance he plays next week.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Bevo just about stamped Marra's papers in his presser when he was asked whether he'd get another go. Referred to John Northey's philosophy of always giving a kid 2 games and that he didn't agree with that. Reckon there is absolutely no chance he plays next week.

Hooray, another week of Hannan.

[Rocco Jones]

TBH I thought Young was ok as a ruck, just not very good forward of the ball (and I don't have much faith in him behind the ball either). If we are bringing in ruck support for English, Young is ahead of Sweet on current form.

Naughton in is a no-brainer and I love Wally but he's just not fitting in with our current gameplan.
Naughton for Wallis is my change with Young to take more first ruck duties and English to spend more time forward. JUH is raw as hell and not ready but he had a couple of better touches at the start of the last quarter and I'd be really tempted to give him one more game.

Yeah I agree with all that. Maybe Marra joins the group and is a medi-sub? Thing with Lewy, do we maybe bring in Crozier to help out down back?

[The Bulldogs Bite]

English played as a forward against Melbourne and we still got beat pretty comfortably so whilst we threw Melb the challenge, they still had our measure.

And to your last point the opportunity for a ruckman to influence a game is much greater than a small/medium forward... agree that those 3 in particular aren't giving us what we need and should be replaced by like types moving forward, but I don't think we can view the impact they have on the game the same.

We did but I thought our structure looked good - English kicked 2 goals and had 15 touches. Sweet was poor, but this is kind of my point - our structure looked better and Melbourne couldn't cover all of Naughton, Bruce and English. We just didn't play well collectively, but I'd rather lose like that than lose in a method we've lost by for 3+ years. Not saying we lost yesterday because of English, but our entire structure looked crap. We had no aerial presence anywhere on the ground.

[Rocco Jones]

Bevo just about stamped Marra's papers in his presser when he was asked whether he'd get another go. Referred to John Northey's philosophy of always giving a kid 2 games and that he didn't agree with that. Reckon there is absolutely no chance he plays next week.

Bevo is pretty frank with that kind of stuff. Not sure if the reference was his own or if asked of him. He is type of guy who just gives him opinion. I agree with him re: Northey. Back in those days you could have Marra playing 15-20 mins total game time too. All that being said, you're probably right.

[Grantysghost]

TBH I thought Young was ok as a ruck, just not very good forward of the ball (and I don't have much faith in him behind the ball either). If we are bringing in ruck support for English, Young is ahead of Sweet on current form.

Naughton in is a no-brainer and I love Wally but he's just not fitting in with our current gameplan.
Naughton for Wallis is my change with Young to take more first ruck duties and English to spend more time forward. JUH is raw as hell and not ready but he had a couple of better touches at the start of the last quarter and I'd be really tempted to give him one more game.

Totally agree Young was actually pretty decent in the ruck. Most impressed I'd been with him. Used his body well and timed his taps. Your suggestion is very astute.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Which part do you disagree with? I am being quite neutral and unsure if I am being unclear.

A little tongue in cheek, but more that I disagree with the notion about not being strong on a point either way. I just think that we know what we get when we go in with yesterday's structure i.e. 'makeshift' - we lose out in multiple areas of the ground. If Sweet's getting beaten in the ruck, at least we give ourselves a chance when we go forward if English is there and especially yesterday when there was no Naughton.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Totally agree Young was actually pretty decent in the ruck. Most impressed I'd been with him. Used his body well and timed his taps. Your suggestion is very astute.

I think Young has been solid in these two games, especially considering he hasn't been able to settle into one position. As a young fringe player trying to find his way, that's not ideal.

The problem is that when Young goes into the ruck, Cordy is our second key defender and we know how that goes. Even yesterday, Cordy was outpointed/outmarked by the likes of Hayward and Amartey.

If that situation happens against the top 3-4, we're in more trouble.

[Rocco Jones]

When your better players are out and others aren't at their best, it really exposes your 'depth' guys. I guess a few questions come up. Should we be playing role specific guys? Should we be bringing in players who might be 'better' individual player and can get more involved in the game/less likely to be a passenger? Are we playing the wrong role guys? It's hard. VFL such a difference.

For mine I think Wally just doesn't offer us enough. Hannan I get we like how he can push up a bit more, speed and all that. Just his KPIs seem very low to me. I am open to Bevo being able to prove to me via footage or what not his value to the side. I get it's not all about what's obvious but I also honestly don't think he gives us enough. Scott the same boat but I guess I see more of the defensive side. Still, with him needing to shift back week before and being poor, I don't see that value. Marra I think we are a bit too win now to play him. I am not a subscriber to belief that being omitted is automatically a blow to belief/lack of faith. I think we can handle it positively and a good learning experience for him. Naughts coming back, it being a one game thing etc. I thought Bevo's comments on Marra were right.

Bevo mentioned something about winning/experienced guys, forget his wording and perhaps not reading it right but I think we will go with guys who can be involved/less likely to be 'passengers'.

Out- Wally, Hannan, Scott, Marra
In- Dunks, Naughts, Crozier (helping free Lewy to ruck/a senior guy who can get involved), McNeil (a bit of speed, maybe just replacing a role guy who does little for a different role guy who does little but I think has a point of difference)

Medi-sub: Marra/Lip

[Rocco Jones]

A little tongue in cheek, but more that I disagree with the notion about not being strong on a point either way. I just think that we know what we get when we go in with yesterday's structure i.e. 'makeshift' - we lose out in multiple areas of the ground. If Sweet's getting beaten in the ruck, at least we give ourselves a chance when we go forward if English is there and especially yesterday when there was no Naughton.

Ha yeah I don't really like centrism so fair enough. More that I can get Sweet playing and not playing. One is bad and the other is worse. I am with Mofra and Lewy is our best ruck option at the moment regardless.

[bornadog]

If we drop Marra, then he should go back to the VFL to get game time

[Rocco Jones]

If we drop Marra, then he should go back to the VFL to get game time

Yeah, that's probably right. I mean if we want to give him the experience of being with the AFL guys. I am not sure he offers us much value short term anyway and can give him rest of the season in VFL + start again during the pre-season.

[MrMahatma]

You would? :confused:

Ha! Changed that as I posted it. I’d have him out now. I think it makes our fwd line still unbalanced, but better balanced than with him in it.

[Danjul]

I think Young has been solid in these two games, especially considering he hasn't been able to settle into one position. As a young fringe player trying to find his way, that's not ideal.

The problem is that when Young goes into the ruck, Cordy is our second key defender and we know how that goes. Even yesterday, Cordy was outpointed/outmarked by the likes of Hayward and Amartey.

If that situation happens against the top 3-4, we're in more trouble.

from bornadog (Footscray thread)

Josh Schache (15 disposals, 11 marks, one goal) was important floating between attack and defence.

Big man Jordon Sweet (31 hit-outs, two goals) was important in the ruck and around the ground,

Seems like either or both could help fix what was glaringly obvious yesterday- total lack of the structure that got the team to the top of the ladder.

That was 3 talls coordinating well in the forward line (allowing smalls to stay down).
Ruck whose job is to Â’bodyÂ’ opposition ruckman (does not matter if he wins or loses)
2 tall defenders as as key position. (Cordy is third defender).

Most of this was missing yesterday (apologies to Young who tried to do all three).

[Jeanette54]

Our forward line looks impotent without Naughton and English, and if we agree with that two things have to change. We need a ruck alternative to allow Tim to go forward, and a forward to make way for Aaron. Sweet would not be the first player to get a game, on the strength there is really nobody else who can realistically perform the role. It might not be a reward for good form, but needs must.

Unless Hannan is doing something to instruction that we are not aware of, then he (for me) is the obvious out. Personally I wouldn't drop Marra, but I would advise some caution about getting involved with social "influencers" if he is serious about his football. Happy snaps after a bad defeat is not a good look, IMHO.

Finally there is no doubt that Dunks is an mid field upgrade over almost anyone, Bont, Libba or Macrae excepted. Baz returned to good form, and it would be unthinkable to drop him. With English going forward its probably a choice between Wallis and JUH to make way. So Wally gets to wear the sub vest, and I hate that. He just might be able to re-invent himself as a niche sub (a la Gia).

Considering the mount of incoming, unpressured deliveries inside the Swans F50, the backline held up reasonably well defensively, however it was severely underperforming when it came to inducing turnovers and spring boarding attacks. Run and carry has traditionally been JJ's territory, but that is something we currently are not seeing from him. Richards is the most likely to inherit this role.

For mine its Sweet, Naughton and Dunks in. With Hannan, Wallis (sub) and JJ out.

[soupman]

Personally I wouldn't drop Marra, but I would advise some caution about getting involved with social "influencers" if he is serious about his football. Happy snaps after a bad defeat is not a good look, IMHO.


Weird comment. He just played in his first ever AFL game, surely he is entitled to celebrate that even if the team did lose. It isn't like he is throwing shakas with a dejected Zaine Cordy in the background.

[The Adelaide Connection]

I hope JUH gets another game and I think him getting a taste of a road trip with the team can’t be a bad thing. Playing GC with a smaller crowd etc. couldn’t hurt.

[Rocco Jones]

The VFL side will be going to GC too, so Marra gets the experience of travelling with AFL crew either way.

[comrade]

Jon Ralph reporting both Naughton and Dunks will be back this week.

[bulldogtragic]

Jon Ralph reporting both Naughton and Dunks will be back this week.

Music to my ears.

[Dry Rot]

I get Sinclair is AFL level-ish

If there are no other alternatives or very ordinary ones, would you be up for getting Sinclair in to replace Martin next year?

[Go_Dogs]

In: Naughton, Dunkley, McNeil

Out: JUH, Wallis, Garcia

I like Garcia but we need to get McNeil back into our forward half mix. He didn’t do much on the scoreboard but was an important part of the side when we were travelling well. His energy important. Garcia has a future at the level no doubt.

Wallis / Dunkley a straight swap and easy one.

JUH - would love for him to play another game, but this is now cut throat, must win for top 2. He’s had a taste, let’s back him in to go back to VFL for a couple more weeks and if we don’t see any improvement from Hannan, and JUH has runs on the board, we can make the swap. Hannan beats him on sheer work rate and versatility for now.

[azabob]

In: Naughton, Dunkley, McNeil

Out: JUH, Wallis, Garcia

I like Garcia but we need to get McNeil back into our forward half mix. He didn’t do much on the scoreboard but was an important part of the side when we were travelling well. His energy important. Garcia has a future at the level no doubt.

Wallis / Dunkley a straight swap and easy one.

JUH - would love for him to play another game, but this is now cut throat, must win for top 2. He’s had a taste, let’s back him in to go back to VFL for a couple more weeks and if we don’t see any improvement from Hannan, and JUH has runs on the board, we can make the swap. Hannan beats him on sheer work rate and versatility for now.

Pragmatic changes GD.

Did you give thought to keeping Garcia and not JJ?

[SquirrelGrip]

In: Naughton, Dunkley, McNeil

Out: JUH, Wallis, Garcia

I like Garcia but we need to get McNeil back into our forward half mix. He didn’t do much on the scoreboard but was an important part of the side when we were travelling well. His energy important. Garcia has a future at the level no doubt.



McNeil is an interesting one. When we are at our best, we have players breaking the lines - VDM, Treloar and McNeil with his "McSteals" were a dynamic counterpoint earlier in the year. Richards is also capable of this, whereas JJ has maybe done it in only two games this year.

It's an important feature when we are at playing well, and is a role we need covered.

[Go_Dogs]

Pragmatic changes GD.

Did you give thought to keeping Garcia and not JJ?

I think JJ just edges him out and it’s probably a slightly different role they play in any event. We need JJ to use his speed to chase and close down, and to be forward of the ball closing in on the goal square as we transition forward. He can be a difference maker, but he’s just floating a bit at the moment. I’m confused about what we are asking him to do, but if we get it right and keep it simple he’s part of our best side.

[Go_Dogs]

McNeil is an interesting one. When we are at our best, we have players breaking the lines - VDM, Treloar and McNeil with his "McSteals" were a dynamic counterpoint earlier in the year. Richards is also capable of this, whereas JJ has maybe done it in only two games this year.

It's an important feature when we are at playing well, and is a role we need covered.

Yes, a few bigger names moved ahead of him but their form has lapsed and McNeil needs to come back in now. He’s refreshed and ready to go.

[The Doctor]

Naughton for Wallis

Dunks for Hannan

Marra stays in.

[mjp]

Most of this was missing yesterday (apologies to Young who tried to do all three).



I thought he tried hard as well...

[Nuggety Back Pocket]

Sweet needs to play to allow us to get back to our great start to the season by playing the 3 tall forwards in Naughton Bruce and English which was a winning formula. Dunkley coming back will provide us with another option up forward when resting. Expect at least 3 of Hannan JJ JUH Scott and Wallis to miss after a pathetic forward line against the SS

[Danjul]

Sweet needs to play to allow us to get back to our great start to the season by playing the 3 tall forwards in Naughton Bruce and English which was a winning formula. Dunkley coming back will provide us with another option up forward when resting. Expect at least 3 of Hannan JJ JUH Scott and Wallis to miss after a pathetic forward line against the SS
In SweetÂ’s last game (a bad loss) English and Bruce combined to kick 5 goals. In the 5 games Since then, (reverting to the 2018 game plan ??), English has kicked 1 and Bruce 6. And the Dogs have lost 2 games they were expected to win.

Earlier in the year they were all over Richmond until Martin was injured. Then they were overrun.

Since the decision to play without another ruckman (and remove English from the goal area) the number of possessions has fallen from an average of 400 to an average of 350. ItÂ’s a lot harder to outscore your opponent when you have 50 less possessions.

We need to get serious about winning again , and focus on the structure that generated the early success.

[jeemak]

In SweetÂ’s last game (a bad loss) English and Bruce combined to kick 5 goals. In the 5 games Since then, (reverting to the 2018 game plan ??), English has kicked 1 and Bruce 6. And the Dogs have lost 2 games they were expected to win.

Earlier in the year they were all over Richmond until Martin was injured. Then they were overrun.

Since the decision to play without another ruckman (and remove English from the goal area) the number of possessions has fallen from an average of 400 to an average of 350. ItÂ’s a lot harder to outscore your opponent when you have 50 less possessions.

We need to get serious about winning again , and focus on the structure that generated the early success.

This is absolute trash. Our clear personnel issues mean we've reverted to the 2018 game plan because we're not playing a ruck who isn't at this stage ready, knowing that 2018 was a transition year for the list anyway?

As for the rest of it, we've also won games we didn't think we would, i.e. in Perth twice whilst almost winning in Geelong. Sweety as terrible as he has been wouldn't have saved us that day either.

What delivered early success was our mix of talent versus the talent put in front of us. Putting Sweet into anything we've done since he last played wouldn't have helped that equation.

[Danjul]

This is absolute trash. Our clear personnel issues mean we've reverted to the 2018 game plan because we're not playing a ruck who isn't at this stage ready, knowing that 2018 was a transition year for the list anyway?

As for the rest of it, we've also won games we didn't think we would, i.e. in Perth twice whilst almost winning in Geelong. Sweety as terrible as he has been wouldn't have saved us that day either.

What delivered early success was our mix of talent versus the talent put in front of us. Putting Sweet into anything we've done since he last played wouldn't have helped that equation.
I expected us to win both games in Perth. Why wouldnÂ’t you expect the team on top of the ladder with the best scoring rate in the competition to defeat lower teams. All indicators predicted wins. If we meet West Coast or Freo again I expect another win. And it should be a big win.

I also expected a win against Sydney, a home game, but we had no firepower up forward. Naughton and English missing meant Bruce got a much better defender and the flow on across the forward line meant we were no longer competitive. 7 goals in a full game minus 15 seconds is not acceptable for potential premiers. Backmen got some of those 7 goals.

Forward Scoring power must be defended and English is an integral part of that. Against Geelong we used English in the ruck for 29 hitouts and no goals, and lost.

Once the ruckman went down against Richmond we stopped scoring, (2 goals in half a game against 9) and lost another game I expected us to win, that clearly showed goals are related to ruck structure for this squad.

[1eyedog]

This is absolute trash. Our clear personnel issues mean we've reverted to the 2018 game plan because we're not playing a ruck who isn't at this stage ready, knowing that 2018 was a transition year for the list anyway?

As for the rest of it, we've also won games we didn't think we would, i.e. in Perth twice whilst almost winning in Geelong. Sweety as terrible as he has been wouldn't have saved us that day either.

What delivered early success was our mix of talent versus the talent put in front of us. Putting Sweet into anything we've done since he last played wouldn't have helped that equation.

Yeah I'm not sure it's about Sweet being 'in' as much as it is English being forward. I have absolutely no idea if we win against Geelong (or Sydney) if Sweet rucks and English plays forward. FWIW I thought Chilli played his best game in the ruck against the Swans.

It's a shame the MC have next to zero trust in Sweet to help release English. The counter-argument to all of this of course is English has had one good game and several good moments forward, even when Stef or Sweet are playing. He does provide a good target and aerial contest though, and in my opinion should play there whenever Naughton doesn't.

Looking forward to the return of Martin and hope he can play out the year. We really need a solid, ready to go ruck.

[comrade]

One side says Sweet isn't good enough to be in the team and English is our best option right now. The other says playing English in the ruck is robbing our scoring ability (especially when Naughton is MIA).

It's funny to see people arguing against each other so vehemently when you both hold the same thesis which is: our ruck situation is a complete sh*t show and has been for years.

Whether it is a directive/lack of focus from the coaching group over this time or a list management whiff, it has the potential to derail our premiership chances if we don't resolve it quickly.

[Grantysghost]

One side says Sweet isn't good enough to be in the team and English is our best option right now. The other says playing English in the ruck is robbing our scoring ability (especially when Naughton is MIA).

It's funny to see people arguing against each other so vehemently when you both hold the same thesis which is: our ruck situation is a complete sh*t show and has been for years.

Whether it is a directive/lack of focus from the coaching group over this time or a list management whiff, it has the potential to derail our premiership chances if we don't resolve it quickly.


Agree. It's structure v form I guess. Sweet's reduction to park footballer v Sinclair on the weekend early hardly warrants selection.

If we are not going to play Young as a permanent KPD, then I'd use him as the starting ruck with English forward maybe rotate 70/30.

[bornadog]

Whether it is a directive/lack of focus from the coaching group over this time or a list management whiff, it has the potential to derail our premiership chances if we don't resolve it quickly.

We banked on having Tom Boyd and English as our ruck duos but Tom retired in May 2019. Sweet was brought in as backup in rookie draft in 2018.

Yes we could have done something in the trade period that year, but we went for Bruce and Keath and had no capacity to get someone. Come 2020 we took on Martin.

Not ideal

I am all for chucking Sweet into the deep end until Martin is back.

[DOG GOD]

My worry is if Martin doesn’t get back, and keeps breaking down with soft tissue injuries.
I’d rather Sweet get used now to give him games before Martin comes back, then rucking English alone in a final.

We need Naughton, English and Bruce up fwd if we are a chance for the premiership.

We say about Dunks and Treloar, but Martin might be the most important cog.

[bornadog]

My worry is if Martin doesn’t get back, and keeps breaking down with soft tissue injuries.

Dunks is back :D

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

One side says Sweet isn't good enough to be in the team and English is our best option right now. The other says playing English in the ruck is robbing our scoring ability (especially when Naughton is MIA).

It's funny to see people arguing against each other so vehemently when you both hold the same thesis which is: our ruck situation is a complete sh*t show and has been for years.

Whether it is a directive/lack of focus from the coaching group over this time or a list management whiff, it has the potential to derail our premiership chances if we don't resolve it quickly.

That to me is the real issue. Its been a strategic weakness for a long time, and must be addressed. The reality is right now as a result of failure to address this strategic weakness, the Match Committee are only capable of making tactical adjustments to mitigate the strategic gap.
Clearly they want English to play predominantly forward, but its not going to be at any cost. They're clearly trying to scramble to find a combination that doesn't throw our whole game plan out of whack.
It is possible to both hold the club accountable for failing to address this strategic weakness, whilst still having some understanding and empathy for the tactical dilemma they're trying to solve in-season.

[DOG GOD]

Dunks is back :D
He’s probably thinking the same thing.

[comrade]

We banked on having Tom Boyd and English as our ruck duos but Tom retired in May 2019. Sweet was brought in as backup in rookie draft in 2018.

Yes we could have done something in the trade period that year, but we went for Bruce and Keath and had no capacity to get someone. Come 2020 we took on Martin.

Not ideal

I am all for chucking Sweet into the deep end until Martin is back.

Tom Boyd was never going to be a primary ruckman capable of 70-80% game time in the ruck, even if he was fit. Even so, he was done years ago. We've had multiple off seasons and mid year drafts to bolster the area and the best we could come up with was a 34 year old at the very very tail end of his career.

In hindsight, we should have prioritised a mature ruckman over Bruce. We'd be a much more formidable team if we had a trustworthy ruckman than a hit and miss key forward.

If English is our #1 ruck come finals, we're not winning a flag, imo. If Sweet is #1 ruck, we probably aren't either. Sh*t situation to be in, to be honest.

[soupman]

We banked on having Tom Boyd and English as our ruck duos but Tom retired in May 2019. Sweet was brought in as backup in rookie draft in 2018.


Comrade keeps steealing what I'm gonna say (and quite well too) but I'm gonna persist anyway.

Boyd was a bad solution. He was a half hearted option out of necessity because we were paying him a shitload and he was a terrible forward. He was ok as a hitout negator, which is the only area he had English covered in (and even that English is improving at). Lets not pretend he was the solution to our ruck woes and it's only bad luck that we find ourselves in our current position.



In hindsight, we should have prioritised a mature ruckman over Bruce. We'd be a much more formidable team if we had a trustworthy ruckman than a hit and miss key forward.


I don't think it even had to be one or the other. There is always an abundance of rucks in the league waiting for an opportunity, just never at our club. There is no way half the rucks in the league cost anything, either in trade value or salary cap.



If English is our #1 ruck come finals, we're not winning a flag, imo. If Sweet is #1 ruck, we probably aren't either. Sh*t situation to be in, to be honest.

Agree. I'm hoping that Martin more than being a viable option for us is more important as proof of concept. Getting him for his handful of games has shown that we can work (and be better) with an actual ruck supporting English and co. Martin is done, and at this rate is looking at retirement, but if we come away from his recruitment knowing we need to grab an actual ruck and finally follow through on that then his recruitment is a big win.

[bornadog]

Comrade keeps stealing what I'm gonna say (and quite well too) but I'm gonna persist anyway.

Boyd was a bad solution. He was a half hearted option out of necessity because we were paying him a shitload and he was a terrible forward. He was ok as a hitout negator, which is the only area he had English covered in (and even that English is improving at). Lets not pretend he was the solution to our ruck woes and it's only bad luck that we find ourselves in our current position.
.

I am not saying he was the solution or whether it would have worked, I am saying that is what the list management was banking on.

List management did not just avoid not doing anything at all. Tom to ruck till English comes good and then use both as Ruck/fwds.

Whether it would have worked who knows, but Tom did pretty well in the ruck over the couple of years he played the role. Remembering he was only a young buck at the time, and both Boyd and English will/would of peaked mid 20s.

Well it was bad luck that Tom had mental Health issues and couldn't play.

[comrade]

Agree. I'm hoping that Martin more than being a viable option for us is more important as proof of concept. Getting him for his handful of games has shown that we can work (and be better) with an actual ruck supporting English and co. Martin is done, and at this rate is looking at retirement, but if we come away from his recruitment knowing we need to grab an actual ruck and finally follow through on that then his recruitment is a big win.

Yeah, that's the silver lining and I'm praying we learn the lesson and do something about it. The problem we face is that clubs are more aware than ever that rucks are critical to success - just look at how every young ruck talent available was hoovered up at the mid season draft. Other clubs also know its an area of weakness for us and won't easily let us resolve it without paying full price.

[Bulldog Joe]

Given what we have available, I would like to see Lewy Young do significant ruck stints.

He is competitive in the hitouts and can take a mark. He also has some mobility.

On VFL form Sweet has lost all confidence and getting smashed at the lower level, although he did have a presence forward.

Hard to believe he is the same player that got coaches votes against Paddy Ryder.

[Hotdog60]

Sweet is still learning the trade and I think he would benefit with playing senior football.
In our present situation I think if Martin isn't on the park Sweet is and hopefully Sweet will get better as he goes along.
At least Sweet will fill a gap until a better option comes along. If we are setting up to a loosing ruck then it doesn't matter how many hit outs he gets as long as he can nullify to some extent the opposition ruck.

[MrMahatma]

Why are people so keen to put time into Sweet cause “he’ll develop”, knowing he’s not up to it currently, yet fully write off English as a ruck option forever? So English can’t get better?

[comrade]

Why are people so keen to put time into Sweet cause “he’ll develop”, knowing he’s not up to it currently, yet fully write off English as a ruck option forever? So English can’t get better?

English has had years of development and still gets thrown around, unable to position himself correct at throw ins etc and has been given games throughout his career that he probably didn't deserve on merit. If English had developed into a quality AFL standard first ruck, we wouldn't be in this situation.

[GVGjr]

Tom Boyd was never going to be a primary ruckman capable of 70-80% game time in the ruck, even if he was fit. Even so, he was done years ago. We've had multiple off seasons and mid year drafts to bolster the area and the best we could come up with was a 34 year old at the very very tail end of his career.

In hindsight, we should have prioritised a mature ruckman over Bruce. We'd be a much more formidable team if we had a trustworthy ruckman than a hit and miss key forward.

If English is our #1 ruck come finals, we're not winning a flag, imo. If Sweet is #1 ruck, we probably aren't either. Sh*t situation to be in, to be honest.

Well before he retired Boyd had a very problematic issue with his back even seeking solutions overseas.
If we looked the other way with that challenge and if we secretly planned for him to be our number 1# ruck man ignoring his limitations (I highly doubt we did) Boyd himself was also unaware of it. I talked to him at a club function and he indicated he would very likely be a 70% forward and 30% ruck man.

He missed games in 2017 and 2018 with his back and was hampered by it and we were managing it as best we could so we knew it was a significant challenge and a potential risk.

I'm not sure how much longer we can keep speculating that Boyds retirement is the reason why we haven't been able to address the ruck position years later but to me it seems to be a convenient excuse.
But if the club is still using it as it's often as it's suggested here then it reminds of that old joke.

Q: What's the difference between the club using Tom Boyds retirement as an excuse and a cow?

A: The club has never milked a cow. :)

I think we just need to acknowledge that we had other priorities and rolled the dice and if we did plan for it then we ignored the signs that should have been evident.

[Rocco Jones]

English has had years of development and still gets thrown around, unable to position himself correct at throw ins etc and has been given games throughout his career that he probably didn't deserve on merit. If English had developed into a quality AFL standard first ruck, we wouldn't be in this situation.

Also, he looks really good as a forward.

[1eyedog]

Why are people so keen to put time into Sweet cause “he’ll develop”, knowing he’s not up to it currently, yet fully write off English as a ruck option forever? So English can’t get better?

Cause English has looked shit hot forward.

[Mantis]

Cause English has looked shit hot forward.

But has he really? He was really good against Brisbane, but he’s only been average at best in all other games when played predominantly as a forward.

[Bumper Bulldogs]

But has he really? He was really good against Brisbane, but he’s only been average at best in all other games when played predominantly as a forward. I think when English plays forward he is a problem match up. His height and his ability are concerns for the opposition. Instead of naughts and Bruce getting the best two backman. When English is played forward T times he gets one of the best two and that allows the others to play on a smaller less equipped back.

I recon the match committee are thinking about what we lose in the ruck playing English forward vrs what we gain playing him forward. Fact is none of us would be having this conversation if both Dunks and His BBF were playing in the side.

[1eyedog]

But has he really? He was really good against Brisbane, but he’s only been average at best in all other games when played predominantly as a forward.

Yeah he's been a big threat every time one of Martin or Sweet play. The Brisbane game as you've noted and also very good against North (3) and our most dangerous forward against Melbourne (2) as well when we were smashed across the ground. Three really good games but unfortunately the sample size is still small due to either his concussion against GWS or Stef being injured. He's also kicked at least one goal and taken at least 8 marks every other time Stef has played. I'm certainly optimistic about the combination.

As BB says above there's additional benefits to playing English forward as well. IMO we have looked our most dangerous playing three tall forwards this year which we can afford to do due to Astro's ground game.

[westbulldog]

There is a tendency here to write off Sweet completely, I don't agree. With Sweet in there is a major benefit in freeing up English to go forward where he, Naughton and Bruce present a huge dilemna for anyone, yes May and Lever included. Sweet at least has a bit on mongrel and grunt, at worst our gun midfield roves to losing hitouts.
Young in a more stable defensive role (i.e Cordy out) could pinch hit in the ruck.

[The Adelaide Connection]

I can’t link the image (it always tells me I’ve exceeded my quota despite not having any uploads on file) but Bains has said we are taking 24-25 up to the GC. It was supposed to be an entire club trip but the VFL game has been cancelled. I’ve since seen photos showing JUH and Dunkley have gone.

[Hotdog60]

The AFL have postponed the VFL giving the sides a bye this week instead of next week

[G-Mo77]

In: Josh Dunkley, Hayden Crozier, Aaron Naughton, Roarke Smith
Out: Tom Liberatore (managed), Lewis Young, Mitch Wallis, Anthony Scott, Mitch Hannan

[The bulldog tragician]

In: Josh Dunkley, Hayden Crozier, Aaron Naughton, Roarke Smith
Out: Tom Liberatore (managed), Lewis Young, Mitch Wallis, Anthony Scott, Mitch Hannan

Where to start with this one ?!

[Go_Dogs]

Lewis Young hard done by.

On balance the other omissions seem OK.

Sensible to manage Libba if he’s sore.

Not sure who plays forward with the INS. Is the plan to play Dunks as a forward? Hard with Libba out too.

Probably means a 20 goal win. (No idea who kicks the goals other than talls)

[G-Mo77]

Where to start with this one ?!

Dunkley and Naughton back is huge.
JUH staying in is good news IMO.
Hannan out overdue.

It's OK but.....

Lewis Young needs to get onto the phone with his manager right now! This is ludicrous!

[Go_Dogs]

Might have forgotten Cody is our only non tall forward who kicks goals…

[divvydan]

Really rough for Young. Would rather him stay in over Cordy for that 2nd tall back if there's no other spot for him due to matchups. Not a bad week to rest Libba with Greenwood out for them, gives more mid time to Dunkley straight back in.

[Happy Days]

I get why Young the ruck/forward has been dropped, but I don’t get why Young the defender is playing as a ruck/forward.

Whatever. Stoked Jamarra is getting another game.

[The Underdog]

Leave Crozier out and Young in and I’d be pretty good with this weeks selections.
Fine with a rest for Libba. Good time for it.

[MrMahatma]

Young dropped… ����*!♂️

[azabob]

In: Josh Dunkley, Hayden Crozier, Aaron Naughton, Roarke Smith
Out: Tom Liberatore (managed), Lewis Young, Mitch Wallis, Anthony Scott, Mitch Hannan

So is McNeill the other in? (Four In, Five Out)

[1eyedog]

Lewy Young is a goner I'm afraid. Shame.

[bulldogtragic]

Lewy Young is a goner I'm afraid. Shame.

All the best Lewy, I will watch you play for another afel club next year with interest. I hope you get a better run at it and make the MC look silly for their choices.

[Before I Die]

There should always be one more out than in, on Thursday evening, as the Medical Sub is deemed part of the team, but not named until an hour prior to game time. So McNeil is not a new in, he is in fact already in the side. One of the emergencies will make up the 23 an hour before the game.

[FrediKanoute]

Where to start with this one ?!

WTF was my initial reaction. So who is going to 2nd ruck? I mean if I was Lewis Young I would be saying to Bevo, "mate, don't bother taking me to Qld, I have a number of clubs to speak with and facilities to visit so that I can sort out what I am doing next year. I'm a defender and a pretty good one at that". I reckon Wally can fall into that category though to be fair his game on the weekend was pretty putrid.

On the plus side, I got my wish that Hannan got dropped. Should have happened a few weeks ago, but still, bettr late than never. Scott, well it was coming, though how JJ has missed the chop is beyond me......I would have dropped him for missing the goal in the last which would have completely swung the momentum our way!

Of the ins, well Dunks will be underdone after 12 weeks off so I hope they use him forward. Rourke and O'Neil slot into the Hannan and Scott roles and Crozier is a decent in though it will be key to see how he is used.

Probably the best bit about all of this is that the match committee has chosen to give JUH another shot.

I'm not sure though that this team is going to beat a pretty red hot GCS.

[Before I Die]

Lewis Young hard done by.

On balance the other omissions seem OK.

Sensible to manage Libba if he’s sore.

Not sure who plays forward with the INS. Is the plan to play Dunks as a forward? Hard with Libba out too.

Probably means a 20 goal win. (No idea who kicks the goals other than talls)

Dunks covers Libba

Naughton covers Wallis

McNeil covers Scott

Crozier covers Young

Roarke covers Hannan

[Before I Die]

Where to start with this one ?!

I'm pretty happy with the changes.

The MC has us second with a 11-4 record. They are doing ok.

Clearly Young is not doing what is required. I don't get the fixation with him. He is tall and can take a mark in the backline. If he was also able to play his part in our team defense he wouldn't be getting omitted.

Looks like Bruce will do some ruck work. I am ok with that to. We will still have three talls when he is rucking and after last week the run around won't hurt him.

just my thoughts.

[Rocco Jones]

Lewy really struggled to fit last time we played Suns. Don't get me wrong I'd have played him as a ruck but they don't really have a ruck either and aren't tall forward besides King.

[Mantis]

Last week I was full of self adulation in correctly picking the changes.

I’m now firmly back in the WTF section… our treatment of Young is beyond embarrassing. If only he was named Zaine and not Lewis.

As per our posters comments it’s time for Lewis to clean out his locker and head to a club where he’s given the same opportunities as the rest of the group as it’s clearly not the case at our club.

[Go_Dogs]

Dunks covers Libba

Naughton covers Wallis

McNeil covers Scott

Crozier covers Young

Roarke covers Hannan

It may be a moot point as none of our stalls have consistently impacted the scoreboard, but Wallis, Scott and Hannan have more runs on the board than McNeil and Roarke. I was calling for McNeil in (so happy with that) but he hasn’t been a player who has kicked multiple goals.

Anyway, it was working well earlier in the year and may again. Midfield will need to hit the scoreboard. Let’s see how we go…

Mainly upset about Lew tbh.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Young dropped is pretty bloody annoying. On what basis did Cordy out perform him? Nevermind the fact we've used Young in 3 areas of the ground.

We're second on the ladder, I get it, but how Cordy and Hannan continually get game after game while Young plays fine and gets dropped after 2 weeks AGAIN is utterly ridiculous.

We will not win a flag with Cordy as our second key defender. Not now, not ever.

[Grantysghost]

In: Josh Dunkley, Hayden Crozier, Aaron Naughton, Roarke Smith
Out: Tom Liberatore (managed), Lewis Young, Mitch Wallis, Anthony Scott, Mitch Hannan

I'm ok with those changes. Young doesn't quite do it for me, I know I'm probably in the minority but I feel he just really lacks body impact for a big guy and finds himself out of position a bit.

Still in surprised a little with Gardner out, match ups?

Considering he played every position last week it seems the coaches just can't settle on a spot for him.

Good that JUH is getting another go.

Wallis mightve played his last game for us.

[josie]

Sheesh-agree with comments about Lewy Young. Thought he was ok. Much higher benchmark for him. Seems so unfair. Really hope he carves a good career and is given more opportunities to do so. Looks like it’s not with us. Could it be GC are a shorter side? What are their rucks like?

[comrade]

Hopefully Libba comes back next week and it's just a genuine rest.

Crozier in is meh, was in terrible touch before getting dropped and while he is getting plenty of it at VFL, still making some bad errors. Would prefer Young any day of the week for his height and versatility. A backline with Keath, Cordy and Crozier switching play gives me the sweats.

And looks like we're going with English/Bruce/Macrae/Dunkley as ruck options which is exciting.

So yeah, obviously Naughts and Dunks are great ins but a monkey could have made those decisions. Not overly rapt with what we're doing at the fringes.

[G-Mo77]

I'm ok with those changes. Young doesn't quite do it for me, I know I'm probably in the minority but I feel he just really lacks body impact for a big guy and finds himself out of position a bit.

Still in surprised a little with Gardner out, match ups?

Considering he played every position last week it seems the coaches just can't settle on a spot for him.



Maybe our coach could play him in 1 position and give him a decent run of games there instead of playing him in multiple positions in one game then dropping him for it. It's going to hurt watching another key defender walk away for nothing and do well elsewhere.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

I would love to know the selection rationale behind Young's omission. I actually thought his intensity had improved in his last couple of outings.
I wonder if its more of a straight up match up issue. Gold Coast aren't blessed with ruck options nor heaps of tall forwards.

[Grantysghost]

Maybe our coach could play him in 1 position and give him a decent run of games there instead of playing him in multiple positions in one game then dropping him for it. It's going to hurt watching another key defender walk away for nothing and do well elsewhere.

Yes I agree with you there, it really can't hurt to play him for an extended period in one position. Clearly we don't know what happens off field etc, and although I don't rate him highly (yet, he's young) whilst Gardner is out it's a pragmatic idea. But, I'm not agast at him being dropped either.

Apart from what I see, what do others think are the main reasons for his omission?

[azabob]

Sheesh-agree with comments about Lewy Young. Thought he was ok. Much higher benchmark for him. Seems so unfair. Really hope he carves a good career and is given more opportunities to do so. Looks like it’s not with us. Could it be GC are a shorter side? What are their rucks like?

Gold Coast are a very short team

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

Yes I agree with you there, it really can't hurt to play him for an extended period in one position. Clearly we don't know what happens off field etc, and although I don't rate him highly (yet, he's young) whilst Gardner is out it's a pragmatic idea. But, I'm not agast at him being dropped either.

Apart from what I see, what do others think are the main reasons for his omission?

I just looked through Gold Coast's lineup, they're not blessed with loads of talls up forward or ruck, and it looks to me as if we really want to beat them with our run and pressure. It may be as simple as there just not being a natural matchup.

[Grantysghost]

I just looked through Gold Coast's lineup, they're not blessed with loads of talls up forward or ruck, and it looks to me as if we really want to beat them with our run and pressure. It may be as simple as there just not being a natural matchup.

Seems like the clubhouse leader so far. Wonder if he travelled.

[Happy Days]

I just looked through Gold Coast's lineup, they're not blessed with loads of talls up forward or ruck, and it looks to me as if we really want to beat them with our run and pressure. It may be as simple as there just not being a natural matchup.

Yeah I’m pretty sure that’s the reason. I just think it blows and we’re gonna belt them anyway, and think Young could be really good in a position of need for us. It’s really frustrating.

[MrMahatma]

Very glad JUH keeps his spot and Hannan is out.

Annoyed with the Young dropping as I reckon we need him (or a competent 3rd tall defender…) to win the flag and why not give him more experience?

Also happy with resting Libba. I think it makes sense.

Definitely expect a win. Astro and Dunks back is massive! Astro could be AA this year and Dunks prob would be if he didn’t get injured.

[Grantysghost]

Looks like Hannan and Scott travelled from the images I've seen. Couldn't see Young.

[Danjul]

Yes I agree with you there, it really can't hurt to play him for an extended period in one position. Clearly we don't know what happens off field etc, and although I don't rate him highly (yet, he's young) whilst Gardner is out it's a pragmatic idea. But, I'm not agast at him being dropped either.

Apart from what I see, what do others think are the main reasons for his omission?

Gold Coast is 14th with half as many wins and half the percentage. We should be developing our strongest possible team, letting them gel as a unit, and letting Gold Coast worry about us.

And based upon what Young has shown in his 4 games this year he is certainly best 22. (17 possessions and 400 metres gained at centre half back- GardnerÂ’s best 12 and 100) (hitouts 9 - Bruce 5 is his best) (His goal from the boundary last week was a gem).

Does his contract specify only 2 consecutive games???

[Ghost Dog]

Glad Naughton is back.
Interesting to read about the concussion detecting mouth guard technology being employed across contact sports.

Weather, nothing out of the ordinary.
Fair bit of belief in this Gold coast side at the moment.
They will make us earn it. Hope not too much Covid uncertainty on the player's minds.

Think we can make it over the line without Libba. A few players will be looking to atone from last week.

[BornInDroopSt'54]

Great player management.
Given the philosophy of being strong through player turnover with ready players.
We will not be a settled line up leading to finals with all the players coming back late in the season.
Bonus that Marra gets games.
Lewis may yet play in a final.

[DOG GOD]

Well I’m pleased to see Hannan and Wallis out. Both pathetic last week.
Scott obviously didn’t tick his KPI’s last few weeks
Young should be on his phone to his manager tonight if he hasn’t already. Not surprised with the favouritism of some players. Hopefully he excels at another club and embarrasses our MC.

Interesting GC bring in Corbett. Like Sexton, he’s a fan of our backline so I’m expecting some contested marking goals from him.

With Libba out, dunks will need to be right on song, otherwise I can see them breaking even in the centre clearances.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

I just don't see the omission of Young as necessarily meaning 'papers stamped' or being a bad thing.

We've found it hard to discern selections, but I think the reason behind that is different than in recent years.
My opinion, and obviously, it is only that, without access to internal intel, is that the players and club have a clear set of KPIs driving selection decisions. I also think that our strategic issues/limitations around the ruck position, might also add another layer of decision making from week to week.
We do seem to value pressure, and a commitment to defensive spreading and work rate off the ball to keep a specific shape.
Our best work, comes off the back of being able to deny the opposition quantity of opportunities in their forward half and keeping the ball in our half.

We were not beaten in the content by Sydney, or in the ruck. We were beaten by our inability to keep the ball inside our forward 50. They moved the ball with impunity from d50 to their forward line way too easy.
As good as Naughts is in the air, his coming back, helps us here. He's a great defensive forward.

Gold Coast are not a tall side, and I actually don't see a natural matchup for Lewis Young. English, as solo ruck, ain't gonna be the difference here, so maybe we're really looking to stretch Gold Coast on the run?

As long as the reason's for omission are clear, and the players know what the KPI's are (and our 2021 win-loss record suggests it's not impacting player buy-in) and communication to players is clear then I'm happy to give our Match Committee the benefit of the doubt.
We've used all bar 2 players on our list, and yet that doesn't seem to have impacted our overall performance. I'd love to see a comparison of players used and ladder position across seasons and clubs. I reckon we're well and truly bucking the trend. That speaks to me a few things, being:

* we're really clear with players as to what our selection policy is
* we understand our squad's strategic and tactial weaknesses, and move the magnets accordingly from week to week to suit.
* the whole squad is buying in.

I'd say Young's omission has more to do with JUH staying in, and I am stoked our club has backed Marra in this week.

[Before I Die]

Gold Coast is 14th with half as many wins and half the percentage. We should be developing our strongest possible team, letting them gel as a unit, and letting Gold Coast worry about us.

And based upon what Young has shown in his 4 games this year he is certainly best 22. (17 possessions and 400 metres gained at centre half back- GardnerÂ’s best 12 and 100) (hitouts 9 - Bruce 5 is his best) (His goal from the boundary last week was a gem).


Does his contract specify only 2 consecutive games???

Except that he clearly isn't. Those numbers indicate that he may be a better ruckman than Bruce. The thing is that Bruce in not in the team as a ruckman. They show that his highest possession game this season was higher than Gardners. It was probably higher than 95% of Dale Morris' games across his entire career too. That doesn't make him a better backman than Gardner or Morris. Statistics provide some insight, but they are only part of the full picture. The saying 'Lies, damn lies, and statistics' was coined for good reason.

I am extremely confident that the MC not only has a lot more statistics than us, but they also understand the contexts and correlations between the data. I hope Young keeps listening to the feedback he is receiving and gets to a stage where he really is best 22.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

Except that he clearly isn't. Those numbers indicate that he may be a better ruckman than Bruce. The thing is that Bruce in not in the team as a ruckman. They show that his highest possession game this season was higher than Gardners. It was probably higher than 95% of Dale Morris' games across his entire career too. That doesn't make him a better backman than Gardner or Morris. Statistics provide some insight, but they are only part of the full picture. The saying 'Lies, damn lies, and statistics' was coined for good reason.

I am extremely confident that the MC not only has a lot more statistics than us, but they also understand the contexts and correlations between the data. I hope Young keeps listening to the feedback he is receiving and gets to a stage where he really is best 22.

Please post more! That's exactly the sort of nuance that stimulates interesting conversation here! We don't know what the MC are thinking, but what we can be sure of is that its not a simplistic equation. Its a multi-variable analysis, with lots of discussion around risk mitigation of our weakness balanced with consideration of where, how and who can deliver us a competitive advantage.
I'm pretty sure no decision is made just to single stats in one area. Its a balancing act. And it's not an exact science.

[Danjul]

Except that he clearly isn't. Those numbers indicate that he may be a better ruckman than Bruce. The thing is that Bruce in not in the team as a ruckman. They show that his highest possession game this season was higher than Gardners. It was probably higher than 95% of Dale Morris' games across his entire career too. That doesn't make him a better backman than Gardner or Morris. Statistics provide some insight, but they are only part of the full picture. The saying 'Lies, damn lies, and statistics' was coined for good reason.

I am extremely confident that the MC not only has a lot more statistics than us, but they also understand the contexts and correlations between the data. I hope Young keeps listening to the feedback he is receiving and gets to a stage where he really is best 22.
Based upon what I saw last week against Sydney Bruce should be dropped and Young should stay in. He contributed twice what Bruce did. Bruce was back to 2020 form, dropped marks and poor kicking. I’m certain the MC understands what they are doing but very few on WOOF are capable of explaining it.

[soupman]

Pretty content with the changes.

Scott has been good imo but is due for a break and McNeill in for him is effectively no change.

Dunkley makes the loss of Libba much easier to deal with.

Naughton for JUH, and JUH for Hannan is amazing. Hopefully it allows them all to shine and I am optimistic JUH has a much less nervy game this week.

Smith for Wallis improves our run drastically.

The only one I don't like is Young for Crozier. I'm still yet to be convinced by Young but I think he has a lot more to offer us than Crozier. If we are looking to play three talls down back then Crozier does not help that, and Wood is better at his role anyway.

Happy with us not playing Sweet, Gold Coast are terrible in the ruck, but I don't see Sweet as actually making a meaningful difference in there and English will suffice. I know the argument is that Sweet in allows English to play forward but that means JUH out and I'd much rather see a side that has English around the ground and JUH up forward than Sweet not linking up and English forward.

Also I have been really pleased with what Cordy has offered this year and would absolutely pick him over what Young has shown.

[comrade]

Marra staying in is the highlight, for sure. Given Bevo's presser, I gave him practically no chance of playing this week but I'm chuffed he's getting another opportunity especially with Naughts by his side. We get to see the future, now.

[Danjul]

In round 12 against Fremantle Gardner came back from injury and had 3 possessions. He clearly wasnÂ’t match fit but was lauded for meeting all his KPIs. Can someone please explain how. That will help this contributor understand selections.

Just donÂ’t do it by simply saying each of his possessions is worth 4 of YoungÂ’s.

Similarly, Against Sydney
Young had 13 possessions, 9 hitouts, 6 one %ers and a goal.
Bruce had. 8 possessions, 0 hitouts, 0 one %ers and a goal.

And I am the only person who canÂ’t see how YoungÂ’s performance is vastly inferior.

On second thoughts, donÂ’t bother.

[jeemak]

I just don't see the omission of Young as necessarily meaning 'papers stamped' or being a bad thing.

We've found it hard to discern selections, but I think the reason behind that is different than in recent years.
My opinion, and obviously, it is only that, without access to internal intel, is that the players and club have a clear set of KPIs driving selection decisions. I also think that our strategic issues/limitations around the ruck position, might also add another layer of decision making from week to week.
We do seem to value pressure, and a commitment to defensive spreading and work rate off the ball to keep a specific shape.
Our best work, comes off the back of being able to deny the opposition quantity of opportunities in their forward half and keeping the ball in our half.

We were not beaten in the content by Sydney, or in the ruck. We were beaten by our inability to keep the ball inside our forward 50. They moved the ball with impunity from d50 to their forward line way too easy.
As good as Naughts is in the air, his coming back, helps us here. He's a great defensive forward.

Gold Coast are not a tall side, and I actually don't see a natural matchup for Lewis Young. English, as solo ruck, ain't gonna be the difference here, so maybe we're really looking to stretch Gold Coast on the run?

As long as the reason's for omission are clear, and the players know what the KPI's are (and our 2021 win-loss record suggests it's not impacting player buy-in) and communication to players is clear then I'm happy to give our Match Committee the benefit of the doubt.
We've used all bar 2 players on our list, and yet that doesn't seem to have impacted our overall performance. I'd love to see a comparison of players used and ladder position across seasons and clubs. I reckon we're well and truly bucking the trend. That speaks to me a few things, being:

* we're really clear with players as to what our selection policy is
* we understand our squad's strategic and tactial weaknesses, and move the magnets accordingly from week to week to suit.
* the whole squad is buying in.

I'd say Young's omission has more to do with JUH staying in, and I am stoked our club has backed Marra in this week.

I've recently been lucky enough to spend some time in leadership workshops with an ex-AFL premiership captain and from what I can gather functional clubs nail the feedback metrics and communication to players in most instances, and what we think they might be are well and truly not what's being measured.

It's not inconceivable that we have a blind spot when it comes to Lew in a qualitative sense, it's not inconceivable that he is judged more harshly in qualitative areas than others. What would be inconceivable to me though is if his quantitative KPIs to play aren't entirely well known in his line coaching/ team structure amongst both his colleagues and his coaches, and whether it's clear if he's met them or otherwise. The whole feedback process relies on integrity in this area. You buy in, you do what you're supposed to, you get rewarded. For him to get yo-yo'd but still be on the list after all this time of it happening suggests to me his quantitative targets aren't being met consistently, and that they're well known.

[Before I Die]

In round 12 against Fremantle Gardner came back from injury and had 3 possessions. He clearly wasnÂ’t match fit but was lauded for meeting all his KPIs. Can someone please explain how. That will help this contributor understand selections.

Just donÂ’t do it by simply saying each of his possessions is worth 4 of YoungÂ’s.

Similarly, Against Sydney
Young had 13 possessions, 9 hitouts, 6 one %ers and a goal.
Bruce had. 8 possessions, 0 hitouts, 0 one %ers and a goal.

And I am the only person who canÂ’t see how YoungÂ’s performance is vastly inferior.

On second thoughts, donÂ’t bother.

Bruce had an ordinary game, no doubt. Young is a bit unlucky to get dropped, no doubt. Though the statistics you provide cannot be used to compare them as they played different roles and had different opponents.

But the reality is that Young is not competing with Bruce for a place in the team. Young is competing with Crozier and the MC gave Crozier the nod. Crozier was dropped last week. He had a good game in the two's and clearly ticked whatever boxes he had been asked to tick. Young's omission has nothing to do with Bruce.

Bruce could have been dropped based on his poor game, though he has a lot of runs on the board this season which would have helped him. Naughton had to come back in. One of Bruce, Marra or Hannan had to go to make space. Dropping Hannan seems a pretty reasonable outcome.

[Bulldog Joe]

In round 12 against Fremantle Gardner came back from injury and had 3 possessions. He clearly wasnÂ’t match fit but was lauded for meeting all his KPIs. Can someone please explain how. That will help this contributor understand selections.

Just donÂ’t do it by simply saying each of his possessions is worth 4 of YoungÂ’s.

Similarly, Against Sydney
Young had 13 possessions, 9 hitouts, 6 one %ers and a goal.
Bruce had. 8 possessions, 0 hitouts, 0 one %ers and a goal.

And I am the only person who canÂ’t see how YoungÂ’s performance is vastly inferior.

On second thoughts, donÂ’t bother.

The issue isn't about possessions.
If it was Dale Morris would not have got to 20 games.

Selection is surely about meeting the team objectives and the assigned individual role.

Gardner, when he plays is clearly meeting the requirements as a tall defender with an ability to negate. Our small rebounders seem to play better when Gardner plays.

With Young, it seems that others need to cover his competitive deficiencies and that reduces their positive impacts.

These nuances will not show in stats and without a comprehensive understanding of team requirements, we are all guessing.

Personally I see Young's best efforts occurring when he rucks, but he is way short of what we need for that position.

He may find a side that plays him to his strengths, but that won't be a side coached by Luke Beveridge.

[bornadog]

T
Gardner, when he plays is clearly meeting the requirements as a tall defender with an ability to negate. Our small rebounders seem to play better when Gardner plays.

Agree - Gardner has only lost 1, one on one whilst playing this year. He is doing his job

[westbulldog]

Young is being crucified, how can Hannan, for example, be given multiple games for 3/5 of 5/8 of sfa output when Young isn't given a similar opportunity. A Cordy at chb in any final will cruel our chances imo. The only thing Cordy has done is several years was to put Callan Ward out of that final. Sweet is also being pilloried by all and sundry including the MC (who is on it btw?). How can these kids improve if they aren't given a decent run at it. I hope Marra plays every game.

[jeemak]

Young is being crucified, how can Hannan, for example, be given multiple games for 3/5 of 5/8 of sfa output when Young isn't given a similar opportunity. A Cordy at chb in any final will cruel our chances imo. The only thing Cordy has done is several years was to put Callan Ward out of that final. Sweet is also being pilloried by all and sundry including the MC (who is on it btw?). How can these kids improve if they aren't given a decent run at it. I hope Marra plays every game.

It's not important if you do or not, but see my post from the last page. The feedback mechanisms don't leave stuff to chance by and large at AFL clubs these days. Whether the metrics are fair to begin with probably warrants debate, but each player would well and truly know what they need to do to get a game or otherwise.

The days of Derek Kickett not knowing why he didn't play in a grand final are done and dusted, each player knows what they need to do to get a game and why they don't get a game.

It's just we don't, the media doesn't, and we think it's bullshit because of it.

[macca]

I would love to know the selection rationale behind Young's omission. I actually thought his intensity had improved in his last couple of outings.
I wonder if its more of a straight up match up issue. Gold Coast aren't blessed with ruck options nor heaps of tall forwards.

I like the last few games version of angry Young. He is a bit more aggressive and is prepared to throw this body around ( not much of it in terms of weight at the moment). Was hoping he get a few decent run of games, but MC think otherwise which is disappointing.

In today's world of KPIs and metrics , how much is it affecting a player development for someone like Young? I see him someone who probably needs a good 50 games under his belt before he finds his feet. Shane tuck is a good example of sticking with a player.

Sports science vs lack of training in kicking, has really seen kicking quality/conversion drop, is another example.

Honestly not a fan of Young being dropped, and MC have got it wrong here. GC is exactly the type of team you want Young to perform, as there is less pressure due to the quality of opposition. Let him play on instinct. Sure he will make mistakes, but he will learn from them and get better. What makes me putrid is when players lack effort and application in their game. From last week's evidence of Young, his honestly looks to be trying.

I really feel for the bloke. Hopeful he games back an angrier person, and starts throwing his weight around.

I would be surprised if his still here next season.

[dog town]

Wondering whether the thinking has changed around 3 tall defenders. It’s really only Geelong left in the top 5 with the ability to stretch us this way. Injury at Brisbane and West Coast dropping away may have changed things.

Adding to that our ranking for ball movement has plummeted recently. Are we making an adjustment to our mix/philosophy behind the ball to get our transition with ball working again? Does seem to always be Young but maybe that’s part of it and we want to make sure we have enough mobility/ball use to test the opposition on rebound.

[comrade]

Wondering whether the thinking has changed around 3 tall defenders. It’s really only Geelong left in the top 5 with the ability to stretch us this way. Injury at Brisbane and West Coast dropping away may have changed things.

Adding to that our ranking for ball movement has plummeted recently. Are we making an adjustment to our mix/philosophy behind the ball to get our transition with ball working again? Does seem to always be Young but maybe that’s part of it and we want to make sure we have enough mobility/ball use to test the opposition on rebound.

Maybe, but adding Crozier does nothing for our ball movement out of the defensive half. He’s not a run and carry type, and regularly just punts it long down the line. He’s also prone to slowing down switch plays with his decision making.

[merantau]

I really want Lewis Young to make it with US and no one else. He is still young. If not this year, we must keep him and only make a decision on him after he has been given a decent crack at it.

[Mofra]

Wondering whether the thinking has changed around 3 tall defenders. It’s really only Geelong left in the top 5 with the ability to stretch us this way. Injury at Brisbane and West Coast dropping away may have changed things.

Adding to that our ranking for ball movement has plummeted recently. Are we making an adjustment to our mix/philosophy behind the ball to get our transition with ball working again? Does seem to always be Young but maybe that’s part of it and we want to make sure we have enough mobility/ball use to test the opposition on rebound.
Melbourne are currently playing McDonald, Ben Brown and Luke Jackson as a forward/ruck.

Perhaps we've looked at 3 KPDs and now prefer the 'Gilbee' strategy (at least, until Gardner is back).
Fun fact: in 2009, Lindsay Gilbee was the only Bulldogs player to play on an opposition ruckman from every opposition team.

[Mofra]

I really want Lewis Young to make it with US and no one else. He is still young. If not this year, we must keep him and only make a decision on him after he has been given a decent crack at it.
I really have doubts about him behind the ball

[GVGjr]

I wonder what Hannan did different against the Swans than in previous weeks that earned him a spell?

Maybe it was that we decided to stick with JUH.

[GVGjr]

I really have doubts about him behind the ball

A couple of years back he was seen as an emerging intercept type defender.
He might be one of those promising types that never quite delivers on his ability.

[Mantis]

I really have doubts about him behind the ball

I think we all have our doubts, but have those doubts been proven?

And in fairness other players within our defensive group are making vital errors each week, but don't seem to come under the same scrutiny at the selection table.

[DOG GOD]

I think we all have our doubts, but have those doubts been proven?

And in fairness other players within our defensive group are making vital errors each week, but don't seem to come under the same scrutiny at the selection table.

Agree. He’s been hard done by, and how is he meant to improve if not being given a good go. Gardner goes out. Young should be in until Gardner is fit to return. At least Young can mark the ball. Something Cordy/Gardner very rarely do. I really feel for him.

Crozier is back to throw himself at contests. Will be watching to see how many times he butchers the ball to warrant that selection.

[bornadog]

Agree. He’s been hard done by, and how is he meant to improve if not being given a good go. Gardner goes out. Young should be in until Gardner is fit to return. At least Young can mark the ball. Something Cordy/Gardner very rarely do. I really feel for him.

Crozier is back to throw himself at contests. Will be watching to see how many times he butchers the ball to warrant that selection.

Crozier has had two big games in the VFL and deserves his spot

[DOG GOD]

Crozier has had two big games in the VFL and deserves his spot
Some guys play more than 2 games to get recalled though.
Let’s see if he’s learnt anything in those 2 weeks.

[Mantis]

Crozier has had two big games in the VFL and deserves his spot

What exactly does Crozier offer the team that we don't already have?

[Happy Days]

Young undoubtedly has some questions about him behind the ball, but for me most of those are about him as a number one key defender in opposition to big forwards. In the current construction of our backline there’s no need for him to play this role.

He’s shown himself to have quite a bit of potential as an interceptor, something that we’re really missing and could be quite a weapon. I really want to know what he’s not doing to even get a look in because it’s pretty frustrating to have to continue to guess.

[GVGjr]

Crozier has had two big games in the VFL and deserves his spot

He's been OK and is a proven player. I guess we either bring him back or leave him in the VFL
Hopefully he is now in better form.

[GVGjr]

What exactly does Crozier offer the team that we don't already have?

We have a number of similar players which is a bit of a problem.

[1eyedog]

I really have doubts about him behind the ball

I have bigger doubts on Cordy who also lacks pace and versatility.

I like Crozier but he has had a very ordinary year. His timing has gone out the window as has his decision making process. He's turned into a 5'11 spoiler who kicks down the line whenever he gets it. Actually he's turned into Easton Wood minus the explosive pace.

[Grantysghost]

I really have doubts about him behind the ball

I'd really love to see him hit a contest full bore and smash the ball away with his fists, but I'm not sure that's his game.

Maybe he's just not elite at anything a tall needs to be. Like a tall Lipinski.

[The bulldog tragician]

Regarding Young, I can understand the arguments about him not meeting KPIs and that we don’t know what these are, but I think these must be much harder to meet and measure for a player that played 3 different roles. At least with, say, Mitch Hannan, as a defensive forward, these must be simpler and more straightforward (to him and the coaches, not necessarily us). It’s harder when Lewy is thrown around. We’d all agree his best game this year was when he played all game as a defender v Brisbane.

My other question is about continuity and time. Ok, he presumably did things last week that didn’t meet what the coaches wanted from him, but he never seems to get the opportunity to keep addressing those by an extended period in the team. Just dropping him seems like a blunt instrument, unless he is a completely intransigent and uncoachable guy, and can’t help with confidence which is so much a big part of the battle for emerging players.

[1eyedog]

Also Sam Day is out so maybe Lewy just doesn't have a match up this week and has been told we're happy what you are doing but we're sitting you out this week.

Cordy does seem to be a better match up for Burgess.

[bornadog]

Some guys play more than 2 games to get recalled though.
Let’s see if he’s learnt anything in those 2 weeks.

He is an experienced player


What exactly does Crozier offer the team that we don't already have?

HB flanker with experience

[bornadog]

Regarding Young, I can understand the arguments about him not meeting KPIs and that we don’t know what these are, but I think these must be much harder to meet and measure for a player that played 3 different roles. At least with, say, Mitch Hannan, as a defensive forward, these must be simpler and more straightforward (to him and the coaches, not necessarily us). It’s harder when Lewy is thrown around. We’d all agree his best game this year was when he played all game as a defender v Brisbane.

My other question is about continuity and time. Ok, he presumably did things last week that didn’t meet what the coaches wanted from him, but he never seems to get the opportunity to keep addressing those by an extended period in the team. Just dropping him seems like a blunt instrument, unless he is a completely intransigent and uncoachable guy, and can’t help with confidence which is so much a big part of the battle for emerging players.

Does Lew Young work hard enough in a game and follow coaches instructions?

[Rocco Jones]

I get the angst with the Lewy omission, I disagree with it but I feel it's more an accumulation thing rather than this week's selection (which is fair enough and I know a lot would say it's that anyway).

Lewy is still 22. I get if he wants to leave but see it a bit greyer than him just being treated like crap. He has played 5 games this season after just 1 the season before. It's about what happens next for mine. If he is named as a sub, it shows he is really in the thoughts. If he plays against taller opposition etc.

Again, I get why posters are annoyed, I am too but I am not at 'just don't bother and bag your bags today Lewy' stage.

[Rocco Jones]

Regarding Young, I can understand the arguments about him not meeting KPIs and that we don’t know what these are, but I think these must be much harder to meet and measure for a player that played 3 different roles.

This is an excellent point. It's my issue with the omission.

[westbulldog]

It's not important if you do or not, but see my post from the last page. The feedback mechanisms don't leave stuff to chance by and large at AFL clubs these days. Whether the metrics are fair to begin with probably warrants debate, but each player would well and truly know what they need to do to get a game or otherwise.

The days of Derek Kickett not knowing why he didn't play in a grand final are done and dusted, each player knows what they need to do to get a game and why they don't get a game.

It's just we don't, the media doesn't, and we think it's bullshit because of it.

......And we similarly could not comprehend how the MC determined that Dunkley was suitable to be a second ruck. The feedback "mechanisms" as you call them resulted in Dunkley wanting to leave. The MC are given too much credence at times, akin to Chief Health Officers in every State ("don't touch the football").

[The bulldog tragician]

Does Lew Young work hard enough in a game and follow coaches instructions?

Maybe not, but that’s my question(s)…could he get the chance to do better in a run of matches, and given he’s switched around a lot, is it also possible it’s harder to meet what the coaches want of him?

[bornadog]

Maybe not, but that’s my question(s)…could he get the chance to do better in a run of matches, and given he’s switched around a lot, is it also possible it’s harder to meet what the coaches want of him?

I see Young and Schache to be very similar, ie very laid back, no aggression but both with some talent.

[Axe Man]

Also Sam Day is out so maybe Lewy just doesn't have a match up this week and has been told we're happy what you are doing but we're sitting you out this week.

Cordy does seem to be a better match up for Burgess.

Outside King they have Corbett at 190cm and Burgess at 191cm. From a matchup point of view we don't need 3 KPDs and at this point in the season I would prefer to prioritise winning over player development.

[Mantis]

HB flanker with experience

That's the best you could come up with?

[Grantysghost]

I see Young and Schache to be very similar, ie very laid back, no aggression but both with some talent.

That's a fair observation.

Young has had opportunities, remember he was chosen over Trengove late in 2019 who was then playing very well in a winning team. All but the death knell for his time with us.

He was actually selected as a ruck replacement for English in the GWS game where we thumped them, and the following week was retained as a defender. Two years on we still can't work out his best position.

Then whatever happened early 2020, who knows not worth speculating but he was on the nose for a while.

He's back in the mix this season, been given opportunity and is in and out like most of the fringe guys.

Lets hope he can take one of those opportunities and really cement himself as they'll not be around forever in this game.

Put him in the ruck! :cool: (I liked his ruck work last week).

I'm with the consensus this week and think it's match ups, and a shuffle at the fringe.

[Mantis]

Outside King they have Corbett at 190cm and Burgess at 191cm. From a matchup point of view we don't need 3 KPDs and at this point in the season I would prefer to prioritise winning over player development.

Who gives aerial support to Keath, and will make an impact to the contest if King starts to get a hold of a few?

But given we shifted Young away from his defensive role pretty early last week I guess we don't see that being a strength to his game even though he's shown some promise in the past.

#inbevowetrust

[Axe Man]

Who gives aerial support to Keath, and will make an impact to the contest if King starts to get a hold of a few?

But given we shifted Young away from his defensive role pretty early last week I guess we don't see that being a strength to his game even though he's shown some promise in the past.

#inbevowetrust

Has anyone got a hold of Keath this year, he is rarely beaten. But it's a team defence and just about all of the backline apart from Caleb are capable of providing aerial support. In fact they are often too keen to all fly and forget to leave anybody at ground level.

I don't think the old worry of having an opposition tall taking multiple contested marks deep forward has been an issue this season at all.

[Mantis]

Has anyone got a hold of Keath this year, he is rarely beaten. But it's a team defence and just about all of the backline apart from Caleb are capable of providing aerial support. In fact they are often too keen to all fly and forget to leave anybody at ground level.

I don't think the old worry of having an opposition tall taking multiple contested marks deep forward has been an issue this season at all.

Keath has had an amazing year, but King is the type of player that Keath can struggle with if the supply is ok and he's left to battle alone.

And to your second point given we are often stretched for height so it's generally an ''all up'' approach, rather than being a defined player to assist... chalk & cheese to how Melb set up.

[Grantysghost]

Who gives aerial support to Keath, and will make an impact to the contest if King starts to get a hold of a few?

But given we shifted Young away from his defensive role pretty early last week I guess we don't see that being a strength to his game even though he's shown some promise in the past.

#inbevowetrust

Can Crozier do a bit of that?

[Happy Days]

Can Crozier do a bit of that?

In theory. Haven't seen it in a couple of years though.

[1eyedog]

In theory. Haven't seen it in a couple of years though.

Crozier is being entrusted in the Wood role as third up yeah.

[SquirrelGrip]

Crozier is being entrusted in the Wood role as third up yeah.

Yes, plus Williams, Dale and Duryea do provide some third man aerial defence too.

[Mantis]

Crozier is being entrusted in the Wood role as third up yeah.

Wood hasn't really had that role for quite a while and has been playing as a lockdown defender on the oppositions most dangerous small forward.

The chopping and changing in our best defensive set-up to me isn't desirable. Do we really think that Melbourne would drop Petty if they were playing GC? As soon as Tomlinson got injured Petty replaced him and with May & Lever have continued on with the 3 KPD set-up... we haven't been helped by lack of continuity with our defenders, but at this point of the year we have NFI what defensive set-up works best for us which isn't where I hoped we would be.

[bornadog]

Wood hasn't really had that role for quite a while and has been playing as a lockdown defender on the oppositions most dangerous small forward.

The chopping and changing in our best defensive set-up to me isn't desirable. Do we really think that Melbourne would drop Petty if they were playing GC? As soon as Tomlinson got injured Petty replaced him and with May & Lever have continued on with the 3 KPD set-up... we haven't been helped by lack of continuity with our defenders, but at this point of the year we have NFI what defensive set-up works best for us which isn't where I hoped we would be.

Keath, Cordy, Williams, Duryea, Daniel have been pretty steady (other than injuries). Others have come in and out due to injuries (Wood, Gardner, Crozier)

[DOG GOD]

It doesn’t matter how many back flankers we have but as some have said, if Cordy is to be the 2nd KPP come finals then that is asking for disaster. Dale, Williams and Daniel should be back with Keath, Cordy/Gardner and Young. Crozier/wood/Duryea should be fighting for a 1-2 bench spots.

[mjp]

Based upon what I saw last week against Sydney Bruce should be dropped and Young should stay in. He contributed twice what Bruce did. Bruce was back to 2020 form, dropped marks and poor kicking. I’m certain the MC understands what they are doing but very few on WOOF are capable of explaining it.

I agree with your comments re- Bruce and Young and the Sydney game.

Taken across the season (and you can include last season) Bruce is 1st choice key forward. It does not see to me that Young and Bruce are competing for the same spot...I mean, they might play the same/similar 'ROLE' in some games but Bruce has a spot and Young is purely there as backup/support. I get that this doesn't necessarily make sense but having a clear view of your preferred structure/best 18 (well, it's really best 12-14 or so because there is always going to be change 'around the edges') is coaching in a lot of ways...and yep, this is the sort of thing that leads to accusations of 'playing favourites' but having a settled side is also important.

I'm a bit confused with the selections this week but with Naughton, Bruce and JUH we don't need another tall-ish forward. And with Bruce and JUH, we don't need another forward who either cannot or will not apply pressure. So - I can see why he hasn't been selected as a forward. And unless Cordy was going to be dropped - and he is the backline equivalent of Bruce - then there is no room for Young in the side. Because you can't go into a game without a clear role for each player...because you cannot make it up as you go. Young is either a tall forward or a tall defender...if he is behind Naughton and Bruce in the first category and behind Keath and Cordy in the 2nd - AND we are only playing 2 of each???

I don't know. I understand it I guess. But I thought Young really showed great effort last week. But if he had been selected for a game in which there was no clear position for him, well...he would have been on and off the ground as the MC hunted for a position for him and that would not have ended well. Perhaps this way, he is at least in a positive position to return in the near future?

Is he 'ACTUALLY' behind Bruce and Cordy? Well - Bruce is our leading goal-kicker and whilst Cordy is frustrating, he does show great effort.

The difficult part of all this hypothesising? If Gardner was available I suspect he would play (as would Cordy and Keath) and then we WOULD be un-balanced and then, well, who knows what then!

[comrade]

The difficult part of all this hypothesising? If Gardner was available I suspect he would play (as would Cordy and Keath) and then we WOULD be un-balanced and then, well, who knows what then!

If Gardner was fit, wouldn't be play him in place of Crozier?

[bornadog]

If Gardner was fit, wouldn't be play him in place of Crozier?

Are they competing for the same spot? I don't think so.

[comrade]

Are they competing for the same spot? I don't think so.

Who does Gardner come in for if fit?

[1eyedog]

Who does Gardner come in for if fit?

Yeah Gardner plays Cordy's role and Cordy moves into Crozier's third up kick it to no-one role.

[GVGjr]

It doesn’t matter how many back flankers we have but as some have said, if Cordy is to be the 2nd KPP come finals then that is asking for disaster. Dale, Williams and Daniel should be back with Keath, Cordy/Gardner and Young. Crozier/wood/Duryea should be fighting for a 1-2 bench spots.

12 months ago I thought Cordy would struggle this year but in fairness he hasn't performed too badly at all.
Sure it's Keath taking the oppositions best key forward most weeks but Cordy has done a better than decent job particularly in the absence of Gardner and that the MC doesn't appear to have a lot of faith in Young.
Crozier hasn't been close to his best this year and given Dales outstanding form Crozier might now be seen as more of a depth player for us.

Where does Richards fit in for you?

[macca]

Cordy has massively benefited from :
1. Keith taking the number 1 defender and being a fantastic mark
2. Revelation of Dale down back and being the rebounder. There is more to go with him, I think he could improve his pace and acceleration and really hurt teams like Zach Touhy
3. General improvement in Duryea, Williams and Gardner.
4. Depth in players knocking at the door: Roarke , Young, Richards. Wood, Crozier to name a few, and maybe Buku and Schache ( when MC realize MC backline is place to be for him)

We can play Cordy with his short comings because of the overall fantastic improvement in our backline.

Overall very pleased that Cordy is performing.

[Scraggers]

With Libba being rested, I would love to see ‘Sonny’ Garcia given a chance in the centre as an in-and-under mid. I’d love to see a bit of mongrel at the ball.

[Bulldog4life]

Also Sam Day is out so maybe Lewy just doesn't have a match up this week and has been told we're happy what you are doing but we're sitting you out this week.

Cordy does seem to be a better match up for Burgess.

I think that is the case. There will be other times when we will have 3 talls in defence.

[1eyedog]

With Libba being rested, I would love to see ‘Sonny’ Garcia given a chance in the centre as an in-and-under mid. I’d love to see a bit of mongrel at the ball.

I like his enthusiasm and attack on the ball but am worried about him being undersized for an inside mid role. If he can carve out a role as a defensive small forward that may be his best option moving forward.

We need one and he has the physical attributes to be that player. He's certainly an animal when the ball hits the ground and has shown he's handy inside F50.

[DOG GOD]

12 months ago I thought Cordy would struggle this year but in fairness he hasn't performed too badly at all.
Sure it's Keath taking the oppositions best key forward most weeks but Cordy has done a better than decent job particularly in the absence of Gardner and that the MC doesn't appear to have a lot of faith in Young.
Crozier hasn't been close to his best this year and given Dales outstanding form Crozier might now be seen as more of a depth player for us.

Where does Richards fit in for you?

Richards for mine is on the opposite wing to Hunter.