Changes for the Prelim.

saint patrick · Mon 14 Sep 2009 11:46am

Quite possibly none but Geary , Max and possibly Gwilt will certainly be considered.

Geary for his pace and goal sense.Max for his experience in big matches and Jimi as a 3 rd forward option.

Interested in what the consensus is

SainterK · Post: # 819230Post **SainterK** » Mon 14 Sep 2009 11:48am

I'd like to bring Gwilt in, kicked 2 against the Doggies last time....matches up well.

saintlee · Post: # 819233Post **saintlee** » Mon 14 Sep 2009 11:49am

No change

SaintWodonga · Mon 14 Sep 2009 11:58am

Geary for Eddy

Sam23 · Post: # 819281Post **Sam23** » Mon 14 Sep 2009 12:40pm

there will be no change imo

St Chris · Post: # 819313Post **St Chris** » Mon 14 Sep 2009 1:34pm

Still think Max is a massive chance - really matches up well on Brad Johnson, and Johnson is a guy who has traditionally struggled against us - but could kill us in a final if he can exploit a bad matchup, ie take dawson up the ground or take Gilbert back to the goalsquare...

saintsRrising · Mon 14 Sep 2009 1:46pm

IMO no change.

But if there was (and assuming no injuries):

Possible outs: Eddy and Raph
Possible ins: Gwilt, Armo, Geary, Dempster

Max for Zac would not seem likely.

plugger66 · Post: # 819320Post **plugger66** » Mon 14 Sep 2009 1:51pm

Max not even a slight chance you would think as he has no match up. Only possible is Eddy for either Gwilt or geary. No change for me though.

maverick · Post: # 819325Post **maverick** » Mon 14 Sep 2009 1:54pm

plugger66 wrote:Max not even a slight chance you would think as he has no match up. Only possible is Eddy for either Gwilt or geary. No change for me though.

And the match up for Zac is?

plugger66 · Post: # 819329Post **plugger66** » Mon 14 Sep 2009 1:56pm

maverick wrote:
plugger66 wrote:Max not even a slight chance you would think as he has no match up. Only possible is Eddy for either Gwilt or geary. No change for me though.
And the match up for Zac is?

I have brought that up previously. I am not sure he has one either but if he doesnt play that will not help Max as they arent going to replace one tall with another who isnt going as well.

StPeter · Post: # 819341Post **StPeter** » Mon 14 Sep 2009 2:05pm

I would definitely prefer Geary or Gwilt for Eddy but knowing Lyon's love for Eddy unlikely to happen.

I like Dawson but believe Max is our best match-up for Johnson but also not likely.

plugger66 · Post: # 819342Post **plugger66** » Mon 14 Sep 2009 2:08pm

StPeter wrote:I would definitely prefer Geary or Gwilt for Eddy but knowing Lyon's love for Eddy unlikely to happen.

Something tells me his love gor Eddy as you put it has something to do with how he carries out the task assigned to him by the coach each week.

maverick · Post: # 819347Post **maverick** » Mon 14 Sep 2009 2:09pm

plugger66 wrote:
maverick wrote:
plugger66 wrote:Max not even a slight chance you would think as he has no match up. Only possible is Eddy for either Gwilt or geary. No change for me though.
And the match up for Zac is?
I have brought that up previously. I am not sure he has one either but if he doesnt play that will not help Max as they arent going to replace one tall with another who isnt going as well.

Yeah I know you have, I posted in that thread, but i would have though Max could play on a medium and even Acker as an example, whereas Zac can't...

plugger66 · Post: # 819357Post **plugger66** » Mon 14 Sep 2009 2:16pm

maverick wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
maverick wrote:
plugger66 wrote:Max not even a slight chance you would think as he has no match up. Only possible is Eddy for either Gwilt or geary. No change for me though.
And the match up for Zac is?
I have brought that up previously. I am not sure he has one either but if he doesnt play that will not help Max as they arent going to replace one tall with another who isnt going as well.
Yeah I know you have, I posted in that thread, but i would have though Max could play on a medium and even Acker as an example, whereas Zac can't...

Max's days of playing on anyone but a tall leading forward who doesnt go up the ground are well and truely over.

SaintHomer · Post: # 819459Post **SaintHomer** » Mon 14 Sep 2009 3:25pm

the obvious matchup for zac is minson if he goes forward. he can be exploited by the doggies faster more mobile forward line.

i am a max fan (more versatile), but i don't like his chances which is a sad for him.

gilbert would have to get the matchup on johnno... he was basically BOG in round 17 with that role.

no change for me (but geary is desperately unlucky).

Milton66 · Post: # 819469Post **Milton66** » Mon 14 Sep 2009 3:31pm

plugger66 wrote:
maverick wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
maverick wrote:
plugger66 wrote:Max not even a slight chance you would think as he has no match up. Only possible is Eddy for either Gwilt or geary. No change for me though.
And the match up for Zac is?
I have brought that up previously. I am not sure he has one either but if he doesnt play that will not help Max as they arent going to replace one tall with another who isnt going as well.
Yeah I know you have, I posted in that thread, but i would have though Max could play on a medium and even Acker as an example, whereas Zac can't...
Max's days of playing on anyone but a tall leading forward who doesnt go up the ground are well and truely over.

Max should play coz GT said so.

matrix · Post: # 819470Post **matrix** » Mon 14 Sep 2009 3:32pm

Milton66 wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
maverick wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
maverick wrote:
plugger66 wrote:Max not even a slight chance you would think as he has no match up. Only possible is Eddy for either Gwilt or geary. No change for me though.
And the match up for Zac is?
I have brought that up previously. I am not sure he has one either but if he doesnt play that will not help Max as they arent going to replace one tall with another who isnt going as well.
Yeah I know you have, I posted in that thread, but i would have though Max could play on a medium and even Acker as an example, whereas Zac can't...
Max's days of playing on anyone but a tall leading forward who doesnt go up the ground are well and truely over.
Max should play coz GT said so.

thank you

opps
busted
darn

Ghost Like · Post: # 819472Post **Ghost Like** » Mon 14 Sep 2009 3:32pm

St Chris wrote:but could kill us in a final if he can exploit a bad matchup, ie take dawson up the ground or take Gilbert back to the goalsquare...

Wouldn't those two just swap? I watched our defenders last week and they seem well drilled in holding their positions and marshalling each other to decide the best match up for their area.

I believe the Dogs forwards will mostly play up the ground, wing / half forward and try to get the ball over the top to their umpteen players running forward.

Ghost Like · Post: # 819485Post **Ghost Like** » Mon 14 Sep 2009 3:39pm

For the record I believe (IMO) there's an outside chance of one change, Dempster in for Eddy but most likely no changes for this week.

However if I was to envisage a smokey or slightly left field change it would be Steven in for Eddy, adding some pace to our midfield whilst freeing BJ up to play the 3rd lead up forward.

Steven has shown (in one game) he can get the ball, tackles well, has pace and knows where the goals are.

aussiejones · Mon 14 Sep 2009 3:48pm

Are we fast enough against the Dogs .......or should I stop worrying

meher baba · Post: # 819513Post **meher baba** » Mon 14 Sep 2009 3:56pm

Ghost Like wrote:For the record I believe (IMO) there's an outside chance of one change, Dempster in for Eddy but most likely no changes for this week.

However if I was to envisage a smokey or slightly left field change it would be Steven in for Eddy, adding some pace to our midfield whilst freeing BJ up to play the 3rd lead up forward.

Steven has shown (in one game) he can get the ball, tackles well, has pace and knows where the goals are.

I will leave aside the fact that it would be insane to bring in a guy who has played only one ok game of AFL ahead any of the more experienced group of Eddy, Dempster, Geary, Armitage and Gwilt.

But what I don't get is that I keep reading that BJ needs to be "freed up" to play as 3rd forward. However, I have watched games in which he seems to be expected to play as 3rd forward and note that he keeps drifting back. I actually don't think BJ wants to play 3rd forward: I think he likes being back of centre and setting up play from there. Moreover, I think he is really good at it.

Apart from the game against the Eagles earlier this year, where he played as a sort of unexpected "4th forward", I have never been particularly impressed with BJ playing up forward. I don't think it's his forte.

Faulky · Post: # 819521Post **Faulky** » Mon 14 Sep 2009 4:02pm

What about Max in for Eddy and Dawson moved to become the 3rd forward. Max has played well on Johnson and kept him out of the game many times prior?

older saint · Mon 14 Sep 2009 4:10pm

No changes
Good Balance
Eddy did a role on Maxwell and will look to do the same on Gilbee or Murphy ( if plays back).

Raph gives flexibility better than any of the proposed ins'

If it aint broken don't fix it.

saintlee · Post: # 819527Post **saintlee** » Mon 14 Sep 2009 4:10pm

aussiejones wrote:Are we fast enough against the Dogs .......or should I stop worrying

Stop worrying, we have comfortably beaten them twice this year already...I can't see this going any different...I expect to win by about 30 points

SaintHomer · Post: # 819533Post **SaintHomer** » Mon 14 Sep 2009 4:16pm

aussiejones wrote:Are we fast enough against the Dogs .......or should I stop worrying

you're a saints supporter.... you'll always be worrying.