Do we go with Zac next week

plugger66 · Post: # 818073Post **plugger66** » Sat 12 Sep 2009 9:51am

I am a real Zac fan now, am converted, but does he have any match up this week against the Dogs. He isnt a Blake type who can play small and the Dogs didnt really use Minson or Welsh much forward at all last night. Are we better using Raph in the backline permanently and bringing in another runner.

By the way this isnt a Max V Zac thread as Max has very little chance of playing even if Zac misses out.

bigcarl · Post: # 818077Post **bigcarl** » Sat 12 Sep 2009 9:58am

he played in the two previous games against the bulldogs (i think). would be surprised if he didn't again.

perfectionist · Sat 12 Sep 2009 10:01am

Missed the 2nd courtesy of the MVP.

bigcarl · Post: # 818081Post **bigcarl** » Sat 12 Sep 2009 10:03am

perfectionist wrote:Missed the 2nd courtesy of the MVP.

ah, okay. he would have played if not suspended though, surely.

perfectionist · Sat 12 Sep 2009 10:05am

bigcarl wrote:
perfectionist wrote:Missed the 2nd courtesy of the MVP.
ah, okay. he would have played if not suspended though, surely.

Yep, as he has in every other game.

plugger66 · Post: # 818083Post **plugger66** » Sat 12 Sep 2009 10:12am

perfectionist wrote:
bigcarl wrote:
perfectionist wrote:Missed the 2nd courtesy of the MVP.
ah, okay. he would have played if not suspended though, surely.
Yep, as he has in every other game.

Fair enough but who would he play on if Minson or Welsh dont play forward. By the way i think he will play just cant see a good match up for him at the moment.

TimPekin'sDirtyGuernsey · Sat 12 Sep 2009 10:15am

plugger66 wrote:
perfectionist wrote:
bigcarl wrote:
perfectionist wrote:Missed the 2nd courtesy of the MVP.
ah, okay. he would have played if not suspended though, surely.
Yep, as he has in every other game.
Fair enough but who would he play on if Minson or Welsh dont play forward. By the way i think he will play just cant see a good match up for him at the moment.

Any chance that he could be used up forward?

Put the onus on the Dogs to find a match up for him instead.

bigcarl · Post: # 818086Post **bigcarl** » Sat 12 Sep 2009 10:15am

plugger66 wrote:
perfectionist wrote:
bigcarl wrote:
perfectionist wrote:Missed the 2nd courtesy of the MVP.
ah, okay. he would have played if not suspended though, surely.
Yep, as he has in every other game.
Fair enough but who would he play on if Minson or Welsh dont play forward. By the way i think he will play just cant see a good match up for him at the moment.

if he doesn't play i'd say minson or welsh will play forward.

anyway, i'm sure ross and sos will work it out.

plugger66 · Post: # 818087Post **plugger66** » Sat 12 Sep 2009 10:17am

bigcarl wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
perfectionist wrote:
bigcarl wrote:
perfectionist wrote:Missed the 2nd courtesy of the MVP.
ah, okay. he would have played if not suspended though, surely.
Yep, as he has in every other game.
Fair enough but who would he play on if Minson or Welsh dont play forward. By the way i think he will play just cant see a good match up for him at the moment.
if he doesn't play i'd say minson or welsh will play forward.

anyway, i'm sure ross and sos will work it out.

I'm hoping they do as we still have enough talls to cover them and it would make our job easier.

reincarnated · Sat 12 Sep 2009 10:20am

plugger66 wrote:
perfectionist wrote:
bigcarl wrote:
perfectionist wrote:Missed the 2nd courtesy of the MVP.
ah, okay. he would have played if not suspended though, surely.
Yep, as he has in every other game.
Fair enough but who would he play on if Minson or Welsh dont play forward. By the way i think he will play just cant see a good match up for him at the moment.

Welsh plays a floating roll imbetween the forward and backlines (a useless playing floating around makes Eade a mastercoach). Does Blake trail him?

Max to Johnson

No room for Zac as Minson is hardly worth matching up on he is that useless. Reincarnated believes he is not worth a pinch of s***

Milton66 · Post: # 818105Post **Milton66** » Sat 12 Sep 2009 10:56am

plugger66 wrote:
perfectionist wrote:
bigcarl wrote:
perfectionist wrote:Missed the 2nd courtesy of the MVP.
ah, okay. he would have played if not suspended though, surely.
Yep, as he has in every other game.
Fair enough but who would he play on if Minson or Welsh dont play forward. By the way i think he will play just cant see a good match up for him at the moment.

Simple, drop him for Max. Max is a better player.

SainterK · Post: # 818112Post **SainterK** » Sat 12 Sep 2009 11:11am

I am not sure if Welsh will play down back again, he turned it over a bit didn't he? BL were just not able to capitalise on it much...

JABBER · Post: # 818172Post **JABBER** » Sat 12 Sep 2009 12:51pm

YES He is a very good kick and Bulldogs dont have powered forwards to push him a side.

Which defender would be dropped if max comes in i dont know

Moods · Post: # 818177Post **Moods** » Sat 12 Sep 2009 12:57pm

Max WON'T come in. Ross Lyon virtually said as much at half time last night. Said that if the bullies win, will be hard to pick Max. I agree with plugger though - not sure who he'll play on though. Could almost go in with Blake, Fisher and Gilbo as our taller defenders.

Although if we put enough pressure on their mid fielders bringing it in, then it will be hard for them to spot up passes to smaller fwds and they'll have to bomb it. Our tall backs will eat that up. That's how we've taken care of the bullies the last 2 games we've played em. Maybe we just stick with our proven structures and let them worry about us

ausfatcat · Post: # 818206Post **ausfatcat** » Sat 12 Sep 2009 2:15pm

Minson plays a lot forward, he's a good match up for Zac

borderbarry · Sat 12 Sep 2009 2:17pm

Zac should not play at Max's expense.

Ghost Like · Post: # 818222Post **Ghost Like** » Sat 12 Sep 2009 2:29pm

borderbarry wrote:Zac should not play at Max's expense.

NEWSFLASH: He is and he will.

Spinner · Post: # 818235Post **Spinner** » Sat 12 Sep 2009 2:44pm

I would suggest that if Zac doesn't play then you will see Minson down in the forwardline a lot more.....

Definitely needs to be in there to cover all bases....If the dogs go small, just let him control the square by taking some marks.

saintluke · Post: # 818246Post **saintluke** » Sat 12 Sep 2009 3:19pm

He plays. Wasn't too bad last week against Rocca. The first Rocca mark was dubious imo. To keep a powerforward to 1/2 goals isn't too bad.

St. Luke · Post: # 818319Post **St. Luke** » Sat 12 Sep 2009 5:16pm

I tihnk one question remains: Is Zack Dawson going to hold his head in finals?? I know Max can! ....do or die from here on in...it's a big gamble!

Don't get me wrong, Dawson has served us well this season, and perhaps gotten us to where we are now. Max has also made some sacrifices...a lot!!!...and for a long, long time! I can't help but feel for him. Max is still an awesome defender, IMO one the the very best. His time i running out, Dawson still has his entire career ahead of him.

SainterK · Post: # 818326Post **SainterK** » Sat 12 Sep 2009 5:21pm

St. Luke wrote:I tihnk one question remains: Is Zack Dawson going to hold his head in finals?? I know Max can! ....do or die from here on in...it's a big gamble!

The flip side is will Max physically be able to see out a final, this is also a big gamble?

St. Luke · Post: # 818328Post **St. Luke** » Sat 12 Sep 2009 5:24pm

ohwhenthesaints! wrote:
St. Luke wrote:I tihnk one question remains: Is Zack Dawson going to hold his head in finals?? I know Max can! ....do or die from here on in...it's a big gamble!
The flip side is will Max physically be able to see out a final, this is also a big gamble?

True. I remember a few years ago when Melbourne edged us out of the finals (can you believe it

) and that was due to injury. I'm glad I'm not making the call. I'm a sentimentalist at best...and I know at this end of the season it counts for squat

snoopygirl · Post: # 818331Post **snoopygirl** » Sat 12 Sep 2009 5:30pm

Just wondering whether people were questioning the inclusion of Max in the 97 GF? That was Max' first season before he went on to become the stalwart in defence for us. No reason why Zac can't be the same.

ThomasR · Post: # 818346Post **ThomasR** » Sat 12 Sep 2009 5:52pm

Flogging a dead horse but here goes anyway. Would much rather Max in there but it's too late now. Feel very sorry for the guy, bleeds for this club and wears his heart on his sleeve, who could forget those tears, against the Doggies no less. He would be absolutely gutted to be sitting on the sidelines but by all reports is putting on a brave face.

Not going to load up on Zac as we are in a prelim and should be supporting the team. Over the past couple of months I have watched him pretty closely and while has done a decent job this year for a rookie he still has a lot to learn. eg when to bump/tackle, closer checking on leading forwards (does not have the closing speed/reach of Max), more awareness of his man when the ball is up the ground and in the opposition's possession, keeping eyes on the ball at contests, not giving away ridiculous free kicks trying to take speccies over the top of packs within scoring distance, etc

Many will argue that there is no room for sentimentality in finals football and I completely agree; I hope we do away with the rags-to-riches and playing-his-role story and pick a side on ability. If Max Hudghton does not play again this year which very much looks like the scenario now then it is a travesty. However it looks like his only way back will be through an injury/suspension or maybe if we play Adelaide. Keep your chin up Maxy

saintly · Post: # 818347Post **saintly** » Sat 12 Sep 2009 5:52pm

i'm sorry to say, that i belive the only way max will paly in the next two weeks (assuming we make the grand final) is if zac is injured or suspended.

Do we go with Zac next week

Do we go with Zac next week

Re: Do we go with Zac next week

do we go with zac this week