Preview Changes vs the Saints(Rnd 2)-In: Viney, Out: Harmes(inj), Chandler(Omit)

[Proper Gander]

Think Yze has come in with the midfield portfolio and forced Goody's hand to not play 3 bulls in there every single bounce.

I feel like we became extremely conservative with our midfield strategy in 2019-2020 especially, when Goody was desperate for results, feeling the pressure and not entrusting lesser lights to run through the midfield.

I love the way we've been speaking about Sparrow and Jordon playing these team roles in the midfield to do the dirty work and let our stars shine in there.

Brayshaw should also be sacrificing more of his game to just become elite at the team things in there which I think suits his skillset: tackling, pressure, blocking, quick releasing handballs and smart link play.

Let Clarry win first possession, let Viney bulldoze when necessary and let Trac do Trac things.

I feel better for reading this

So we win this weekend, yeah?

 

[schmuttt]

I feel better for reading this

So we win this weekend, yeah?

I've tipped the Saints as no sane person should ever tip Melbourne but have a funny feeling we might do them by a bit.

 

[markm106]

Reckon it’s only gonna be Viney in for Harmes. Goodwin almost confirmed that.

 

[schmuttt]

Reckon it’s only gonna be Viney in for Harmes. Goodwin almost confirmed that.

Would be shocked if Hunt survives for pig.

 

[Meds]

Would be shocked if Hunt survives for pig.

I thought being able to run fast and theoretically break lines was more important than defending and general footballing ability

 

[Proper Gander]

I thought being able to run fast and theoretically break lines was more important than defending and general footballing ability

We’re a very theoretical team. Theoretically dominant midfield on an “on paper” basis, theoretically benefiting from silver service in centre bounce, theoretical owners of the “contested brand of footy”. I can’t see us losing a theoretical game this year.

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

We’re a very theoretical team. Theoretically dominant midfield on an “on paper” basis, theoretically benefiting from silver service in centre bounce, theoretical owners of the “contested brand of footy”. I can’t see us losing a theoretical game this year.

POTY

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

GysbertsTheoretically2Bate

 

[CTHORANGE]

I've tipped the Saints as no sane person should ever tip Melbourne but have a funny feeling we might do them by a bit.

yeh seems our chances are being talked down a bit much like if st kilda are an elite team. they are probably roundabouts where we are, and we actually play docklands well under goody, I reckon we win just in another scrappy affair

 

[markm106]

Would be shocked if Hunt survives for pig.

I reckon that’s a good change. But Goody said the others will have to wait. So other than Viney I think it’s Hibberd and Melksham. Maybe Daw.

 

[Proper Gander]

yeh seems our chances are being talked down a bit much like if st kilda are an elite team. they are probably roundabouts where we are, and we actually play docklands well under goody, I reckon we win just in another scrappy affair

Would happily take that

 

[MarcMaverick]

 

[Daemon]

Would like to see Hibbered in for Hunt, Jones as injury sub, and Melksham in. Not the worst ins and outs, let's see what happens (I still reserve the right to melt about selections if we lose).

 

[schmuttt]

Hibbo still isn't playing over Hunt and he is named emergency so you'd expect he is match fit - insanity.

 

[Tulip]

Not only is Gus going to have zero impact on a wing all year, we’re also going to destroy his trade value. A classic MFC win-win.

Based off his podcast he seems pretty keen on playing there now. Maybe he’ll adapt to it better this year. Hopefully we don’t do a Tyson on him.

 

[Meds]

Pretty rough on Chandler to be listed as omitted when he didn't take the field

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

Based off his podcast he seems pretty keen on playing there now. Maybe he’ll adapt to it better this year. Hopefully we don’t do a Tyson on him.

Yeah I saw that afterwards too. Tbh the attitude change is a very positive sign. Had a pretty similar game to Langdon statistically except in metres gained (more handballing).

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

Their backline is fairly pox, hopefully Jackson can continue on from where he left off in the fourth quarter last weekend (but kick a bit straighter).

 

[Proper Gander]

Hibbo still isn't playing over Hunt and he is named emergency so you'd expect he is match fit - insanity.

Predictably insane. Pissed me off though.

 

[TheCount]

Pretty rough on Chandler to be listed as omitted when he didn't take the field

He has been dropped after a 0 disposal game ...

 

[Proper Gander]

Pretty rough on Chandler to be listed as omitted when he didn't take the field

Gives him a game though this week, albeit in the 2s.

Sub rule is a great way to destroy players and lose them to other clubs - consecutive weeks of prep, zero game time and solo running with Burgess would lose its appeal quickly

 

[mrmonkey]

Pretty rough on Chandler to be listed as omitted when he didn't take the field

I think Goodwin touched on this in his presser. He said a long the lines what can you do he doesn't deserve to get dropped but he deserves game time.

 

[Meds]

Gives him a game though this week, albeit in the 2s.

Sub rule is a great way to destroy players and lose them to other clubs - consecutive weeks of prep, zero game time and solo running with Burgess would lose its appeal quickly

Yeah, I agree he should play 2's this week, I just don't think he should be listed as omitted. None of the other emergencies that didn't play have been listed.

I get that by the AFL's rule he technically played last week but no-one likes seeing omitted next to their name and it's particular unfair in this situation

 

[ImissFrosty]

Yep, fair enough side. Just the one forced change. Would rather Hibbo over Hunt but fair enough to give him another shot.

 

[Proper Gander]

Yeah, I agree he should play 2's this week, I just don't think he should be listed as omitted. None of the other emergencies that didn't play have been listed.

I get that by the AFL's rule he technically played last week but no-one likes seeing omitted next to their name and it's particular unfair in this situation

Yeah. I get that. I don’t think there is another available term. Rested and injured don’t really work since both terms suggest unavailable. We need something new. I can’t think of anything that doesn’t reek of bullshit like “strategically managed” or whatever