posted the same thing about 4 posts back.

Yeah I read that and added support. Didn't see it on BF rather someone who trains with the club.
Should be interesting.

Sounds like there must be some truth to it then, read somewhere that Henderson may have OP. The wheels are really starting to fall off and sadly we dont seem to have any young players to come in who are ready or up to it.
I find it pretty incredible that last year we had trouble delisting the required number of players, seem our list was over rated. this year we wont have the same problem.

..depth is great, but in my opinion the hawks last year showed exactly what hard work and team work can accomplish.. ..all season their ruck and tall defence was a shambles.. ..and yet smart coaching and G&D almost got them into the granny..

..injuries do play a part, but are no excuse for lack of effort.. ..i won't buy into that..

_________________
..if you can't be good, be good at it..

Kreuzer out in his current form is no great loss. Hendo however has been one of our few consistent players. Hope he's ok

_________________

*edited for accuracy*

A lot said about players and whether they are up to it.

Simple for me........not working nearly hard enough as a team.

Our list is ok.

Hang on - 5 years ago guys like this were part of the regular starting line-up: now they're getting a game cos there are heaps of injuries = depth!

This is a great opportunity for Touhuy.

_________________
Bawditawaba

Anyone heard anything about Kruezer and Hendo?

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

Structurally the team is struggling, ceetainly if Melbourne line up as selected or similar with the 2 ruck/forwards plus Watts and the high-flying Howe. That forces us to use Jamo and Hendo down back presumably for Clark and Sellar, then leaving whoever else we choose to play back a significant height disadvantage to Wats and probably to Howe as well. It certainly seems to me to kill any chance of Hendo being played forward and forces us to use the two resting rucks as forward marking targets. There doesn't seem to me to be a lot of flexibility in the team as far as talls is concerned, unless we are prepared to go with Walker as our second marking forward and free up Kreuzer (or Hampson) to play as amid or even as a defender (we might simply need the height down back). We are clearly banking on the conditions helping to linit the impact of talls on the game.

On a dryer day I kmight be tempted to pack the midfield with some more pace but in the circumstances I think big bodies will be important in there today. I'd personally have Brock as sub (well actually if it was my call he wouldn't be in the team at all) as an option if we need an extra big body, but I'd try other options first.

In terms of mids or prospective mids we can classify them into those who are strong, those who are quick , those who are both and those who are not particularly either quick or strong, some of whom however are quality players none the less..

BOTH Joseph Judd Tuohy Walker
STRONG Kreuzer McLean Robinson
QUICK Armfield Betts Bootsma Garlett Simpson Yarran
NEITHER Collins Curnow Ellard Gibbs Scotland

Given the requirement for strong bodies and the desire for speed, I'm inclined to run the "BOTH"group as our starting midfield with Warnock as ruck. Joseph can tag Kones, who seems to be there most obvious gut to tag. That leaves one more midfield starting slot and given the likely conditions we could run with strength but Im more inclined to go for Simpson as a natural winger. I figure we need Kreuze forward given lack of other options, Eddie is a key there who I'd like to see thrown into the midfield more often that n=he is but he is just too structurally important up forward. Ratts is clear that he wants Gibbs behind the ball so he goes to the backline as does Bootsma simply because we need the height there - not that he's that tall, but he'd be the closest thing we have to a 3rd tall defender in the line-up, unless you threw Walker back. The rest is largely a matter of the old "scatter fellas"school of team placement, but there are some constraints. First, I'm minded to let McLean take the subs spot and bring him on later when some speed is out of the game. If we find we need his strength in the middle then we sub him on earlier, but I figure he can only go midfield and with Joseph, Tuony and Walker being given a crack as strong mids alongside Judd, and the plethora of other midfielders in the side, we can run through PLENTY of options before we have to turn to Plan Broke. Robbo and maybe even Kreuzer up forward, as strong bodied options to run through midfield, Scotland and Armfield down back who could go in there and don't mind getting their hands dirty (although Scotto has disappointed in that regard this season so far) and Curnow, Ellard and even Collins on the bench being smaller types who nevertheless get in after the ball as mids. With Garlett as a natural forward, that leaves Yarran as the only player not slotted into a position, and though you could play him down back and release either Armfield or Scotland downfield, I think it might be time to reunite the three amigos up forward - or are they now "Hammer's/Kreuzer's Little Helpers"?

Hence

Armfield Henderson Jamison
Gibbs Bootsma Scotland
Simpson Tuohy Walker
Robinson Kreuzer Yarran
Betts Hampson Garlett
Warnock Judd Joseph
Collins Curnow Ellard
McLean

Blueinblood who posts on Bf is usually on the money and has posted that Bower will replace Henderson and he is hearing that Kreuzer probably out for Watson.

If Big Kruz play he should play on ball as a midfielder and rest forward.

Pretty good preview there Ian.

I'd like to see Yarran & others run/carry through to inside 50 more for a bit of a change in our scoring approach

Ratten prefers Gibbs at HB. If Gibbs were a running half back with some speed, I'd agree. Bottom line is that Gibbs just cleans up without taking the game on.
It's a defensive, defeatist and conservative mindset

Back your mids, back your defenders and back the structure to get the ball forward of centre where Gibbs can dominate with scoreboard impact.

As it stands, his role is a 'nothing' role in the main (save for a dozen quality performances against Goodes Pendlebury et al)

Gibbs is nothing even close to a gun (Cotchin has overtaken him at a great rate of knots)

But.....a new role forward of centre may be the making of him

_________________
If I want your opinion, I'll give it to you!

So basically we are going in with a VFL side. Backs to the wall stuff. Love it. I hope Melbourne bring thier A game. Just what we need. Blues by 35plus.

_________________
A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty" -Winston Churchill

L.M 35-06

cant see both Curnow and McLean in the guts at the same time, so expect one of these 2 to be the sub

think Joseph or Armfield will play the Carrazo run-with role (Curnow did last week)

Watched the Adelaide game again - was bloody impressed with Adelaide.
I thought Jacobs rucked to advantage really well. There was a good understanding between he and the onballer.

Also the way they kept making contest after contest and running forward and back really hard was very impressive. It just meant they made the most of their possessions.

On us.

I don't think it was the tactics that hurt us. It was more our inability to keep up with adelaide that hurt us.
So when you are losing the clearance count, this only makes it worse. We needed to win the clearances to neutralise their better running. We lost that battle and hence why there was a blow out.

Like everyone has repeated. Our game plan is underpinned by winning the clearance, so if we lose that we tend to lose the game (especially against the better teams)

The thing I will look for this week is rucking to advantage. If this improves then I think we are moving the right direction.
Winning the clearance count is a given.

_________________
'‘He had an enormous capacity to pump himself up and get the best out of himself when it mattered. He had a fire in his belly – a passion for the contest like few other players’' -- D Parkin in reference to the dominator

The sub should either be an inexperienced player or someone with pace.

Absolutely no point having either Brock or Ed as sub.

_________________
I hope Essendon* folds.

I agree.

It will be either Collins or Bootsma

_________________
“I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.” ― Richard Feynman