View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
MagpieBat
Joined: 27 Nov 2010 Location: Brooding in a cave... somewhere... maybe...
|
Post subject: | |
|
IN: Wills, Cox, Greenwood, Phillips
OUT: Pendlebury (finger)
Wills named on the ground (which means he's in), the other three jokers are on the extended bench... _________________ I am vengeance. I am the night. I am MagpieBat. |
|
|
|
|
MatthewBoydFanClub
Joined: 12 Feb 2007 Location: Elwood
|
Post subject: | |
|
Wills is a good addition to the side. Just ridiculous naming Adams on the interchange bench. The idea is you name players on the interchange bench to keep the opposition guessing who you intend playing. |
|
|
|
|
Jezza
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 06 Sep 2010 Location: Ponsford End
|
Post subject: | |
|
Willis is a great inclusion and I'm very happy to see Phillips in the list of inclusions as well since I'm big fan of what he contributes to the team.
The inclusion of Cox is the only one I have reservations on as it stands. _________________ | 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | |
|
|
|
|
MatthewBoydFanClub
Joined: 12 Feb 2007 Location: Elwood
|
Post subject: | |
|
I realise you're bias against against Cox, but if he just got a go at it by playing a few senior games in a row, you might be able to form an opinion of him. Not under this coach. |
|
|
|
|
BazBoy
Joined: 11 Sep 2014
|
Post subject: | |
|
Mason is fine but I like Reid and Darcy as our go to tall-would like to trial a goal sneak like K.K _________________ I'm not arguing--just explaining why i am right |
|
|
|
|
Jezza
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 06 Sep 2010 Location: Ponsford End
|
Post subject: | |
|
BucksIsFutureCoach wrote: | Jezza wrote: | Willis is a great inclusion and I'm very happy to see Phillips in the list of inclusions as well since I'm big fan of what he contributes to the team.
The inclusion of Cox is the only one I have reservations on as it stands. |
I realise you're bias against against Cox, but if he just got a go at it by playing a few senior games in a row, you might be able to form an opinion of him. Not under this coach. |
I don't have anything against Cox. Considering he wasn't exposed to the game until 2014, I find his development remarkable in some capacity. Although, I think if Cox isn't taking marks, he offers very little at ground level and around the ground.
I suppose the one positive of his inclusion (if he ends up making the final team) is it will help Moore and Reid be freed up with him taking the tallest defender and therefore allowing them to be a threat along with Elliott and Fasolo. _________________ | 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | |
|
|
|
|
BazBoy
Joined: 11 Sep 2014
|
Post subject: | |
|
We now have the Will to win _________________ I'm not arguing--just explaining why i am right |
|
|
|
|
Ev5Magpies
Ev5Magpies
Joined: 05 Feb 2003 Location: Aspendale, Victoria
|
Post subject: | |
|
Have they announced who is skipper this week?
Cox hopefully doesn't play. He's a liability. Only way he plays if they believe Reid plays on Kennedy. Surely Dunn gets first crack.
Eagles play Etihad well, not confident with this one. Hopefully I'm wrong. _________________ Ohhhh the premierships a cakewalk for the good old COLLINGWOOD |
|
|
|
|
Piesnchess
piesnchess
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
|
Post subject: | |
|
Good ins, but I really wanted young Kirby in this week, our fyture X factor. _________________ Poverty exists not because we cannot feed the poor, but because we cannot satisfy the rich.
Chess and Vodka are born brothers. - Russian proverb. |
|
|
|
|
Magpietothemax
magpietothemax
Joined: 28 Apr 2013
|
Post subject: | |
|
Obviously we are considering the option of sending Reid down back to play on Kennedy (since they also have another tall forward in Petrie). If Cox came in, who would we drop? Would have to be, one would assume, a defender, so I am guessing either Scharenberg or Langdon though i would not wish to drop either. Not sure how Cox could come in....maybe a radical move, like Cox in, Blair out, Maynard to replace Blair and both Schazza and Langdon remain where they are.
I'd love to see Maynard let loose on our half forward line and in the centre. Dunn can get first crack against Kennedy, but if he struggles and we are forced to bring Reid back into defence, I am not sure that our forward line with just Moore as a tall can generate much danger to the opposition. I thought Cox's game against Essendon was not nearly as bad as everyone else seems to have judged.
If Cox is not played, then I prefer Greenwood to Blair as Greenwood can play through the midfield more so than Blair, and maybe tag Gaffe? In this scenario, if Reid had to go into defence to defend against Kennedy, we could bring Howe forward as a possible marking target in the forward line.
Once again, everything depends on our midfield pressure. If our midfield can apply high quality pressure in both directions (and this is another reason why I like the idea of replacing Blair with Greenwood), I can't see why we don't have a chance to win this game. |
|
|
|
|
qldmagpie67
Joined: 18 Dec 2008
|
Post subject: | |
|
West Coast have named 3 talls in the forward line in Kennedy Darling Petrie so I'm assuming Reid must go back to give us some extra height in defence.
Dunn will get Kennedy, Reid either Darling or Petrie and Howe the other. Means our Jetta and Yeo need to be contained I would think Crisp on Jetta and Maynard on Yeo leaves Varcoe & Scharenberg on the other forward. I would prefer Scharenberg as our loose man back as he's the best reader of play we have left back and can provide the chop out and intercept mark.
Which means we need Cox in up forward for the height and taking a defender away from Moore.
Hurn has been providing a lot of run for them so I would play Greenwood on him in a tagging capacity.
Wills plays on Gaff
That's my thoughts but lord knows what side will actually take the field.
On a side note we haven't named a skipper to replace Pendles ? Is it some sort of national secret or don't we have one ?
We have Adams Sidey Howe as vice captains will they share the role or what ?
I would have thought Adams would have been named as skipper as he's the logical long term successor to Pendles |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
^^^ Well, you'd hope so. The teams, as named, would put Goldy up against Kennedy. Much as I love Goldy, that's a bit too much to ask. I'm not sure who will take Darling. Reid is too slow for that task but then Toovey was too small and always pantsed Darling because he hasn't been much of a competitor over his career. Maybe Goldy could take him? Darling will do the odd brilliant thing whoever he's on but Goldy will make it hard for Darling and that's definitely not what Darling likes.
The only way Adams could be Pendlebury's "successor" would be if they let him wear number 11. |
|
|
|
|
MatthewBoydFanClub
Joined: 12 Feb 2007 Location: Elwood
|
Post subject: | |
|
Pies4shaw wrote: | ^^^ Well, you'd hope so. The teams, as named, would put Goldy up against Kennedy. Much as I love Goldy, that's a bit too much to ask. I'm not sure who will take Darling. Reid is too slow for that task but then Toovey was too small and always pantsed Darling because he hasn't been much of a competitor over his career. Maybe Goldy could take him? Darling will do the odd brilliant thing whoever he's on but Goldy will make it hard for Darling and that's definitely not what Darling likes.
The only way Adams could be Pendlebury's "successor" would be if they let him wear number 11. |
Goldy is the natural matchup for Darling as you say, like Toovey was against Darling, but as Goldy now is playing as a CHB, we have a problem finding anyone who can play on an opponent more than 6'4". So I expect someone like Maynard playing on Darling, which won't be fun watching. We got into this situation in the first place by deciding to play Goldy as a CHB, so it's all self inflicted. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
BucksIsFutureCoach wrote: | Pies4shaw wrote: | ^^^ Well, you'd hope so. The teams, as named, would put Goldy up against Kennedy. Much as I love Goldy, that's a bit too much to ask. I'm not sure who will take Darling. Reid is too slow for that task but then Toovey was too small and always pantsed Darling because he hasn't been much of a competitor over his career. Maybe Goldy could take him? Darling will do the odd brilliant thing whoever he's on but Goldy will make it hard for Darling and that's definitely not what Darling likes.
The only way Adams could be Pendlebury's "successor" would be if they let him wear number 11. |
Goldy is the natural matchup for Darling as you say, like Toovey was against Darling, but as Goldy now is playing as a CHB, we have a problem finding anyone who can play on an opponent more than 6'4". So I expect someone like Maynard playing on Darling, which won't be fun watching. We got into this situation in the first place by deciding to play Goldy as a CHB, so it's all self inflicted. |
Was it deciding to play Goldy as a CHB that was the problem - or deciding not to use a draft pick on a potential KPD since 2006? |
|
|
|
|
MatthewBoydFanClub
Joined: 12 Feb 2007 Location: Elwood
|
Post subject: | |
|
What's the use of drafting a KPD if they spend all their time playing in the VFL? |
|
|
|
|
|