SandyRd 1 Sun Vs Frankston Scores

[Bernard Shakey]

Raph and Stanley in.

Roo and Zac out.

[plugger66]

Raph and Stanley in.

Roo and Zac out.

Zac aint getting dropped. If you want those 2 in you need another dropped IMO.

[suss]

Yeah, I agree with this. With Kosi coming back next week Stanley's inclusion may only last one game - that doesn't make sense with Raph more likely to be a part of our most complete team.

Er, he is not replacing Kosi, he would be replacing Roo.

Yeah I know that - I was trying to suggest that if Stanley replaced Roo, it is likely he would only last a week before being replaced by Kosi.

I think that Raph is a more likely long-term inclusion and should therefore be in ahead of Stanley.

I also think that my original explanation was ordinary.

[Leo.J]

Raph and Stanley in.

Roo and Zac out.

Zac aint getting dropped. If you want those 2 in you need another dropped IMO.

Agreed, I'd be amazed if Zac was dropped.

[kaos theory]

Our team relies on structure. And our structure requires at least one KP marking forward, usually 2....

Goddard is not a KP marking forward. The only remaining player in the team that could play that role would be gardnier, but he will at most rotate through the forward line, because he is required in ruck.

The issue with Stanley is his rawness & inexperience. He can get easily led under the ball, and turned inside out by an experienced defender. He is liable to struggle with applying forward line pressure as well, and runing back to gard space. He could do some ruck, as well, but against sandilands, that's a tough job. On the positive, he will add pace, excitment, & unpredicability for freo

We don't have many other choices. If Raph is bought in, then possibly Fisher & Godard will rotate through the forward line with Gards, but not an ideal solution for the way we play.

So its looks like one change, with either Raph or Stanley. I'd love to see steven get in, but I don't know who he would replace. Doubt dawson will be dropped...

[saintnick12]

By the way I believe Stanley is 202cm, the same as King.

How did you measure him.
Football record and the club website (both hopelessly unreliable) have him at 200cm.

If you were standing in front of him with the measuring stick behind him, the angle could make the reading 220cm.

It's confirmed by Stanley himself at the bottom of this article that he is 202cm - and he doesn't want to get any taller

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/r ... 5837501011

[Wigsy]

Well, as it stands, we have no Roo, no Kosi, and no third tall. So something has to give!!

I'd support two younger talls come in to reduce the pressure on them both, but obviously Lynch is out of the question (can someone confirm he can't come straight in?). A tall forward line of McEvoy or Gardiner plus Stanley, even despite the latter's undoubted pace, would seem a bit of a joke, but it seems that that is where we are headed. I guess we have little choice if Lynch cannot play and Cahill, unless he has grown a leg, are out. Just playing four ruckmen-size types seems ridiculous. I'm an unabashed non-fan of ruckmen-size players going forward, but we have little choice with Kosi. I know its sticking the knife in but I never could understand why Steven couldn't have been the pace answer and we couldn't have instead offered the first pick for a medium, third type forward. Maybe they didn't exist, but the old pressure cooker forward line struggles a bit when you're forwards can't move around.

[bergholt]

The issue with Stanley is his rawness & inexperience. He can get easily led under the ball, and turned inside out by an experienced defender. He is liable to struggle with applying forward line pressure as well, and runing back to gard space. He could do some ruck, as well, but against sandilands, that's a tough job.

his forward pressure can only be better than that of gardiner or king, if they're sent down there. he'll get beaten in the ruck, but so does everyone against sandi. mcevoy's been beaten in the ruck for every one of his fourteen games thus far - it's the nature of the beast.

it makes a lot of sense to me to have two ruckman/forwards in the side and one permanent ruckman - steven king. king goes into the middle for half the day and off for the rest. the other two share a spot in the middle, rotating forward and off at unpredictable intervals. it keeps us with a predictable structure and means we don't have to rob peter too much in other parts of the ground. s fisher or bj permanent forward is a disaster, though cameos are fine if the rest of the ground is under control.

so one of those ruckman/forwards is definitely gardiner. the other is either pattison, mcevoy or stanley. pattison and mcevoy weren't impressive in their last saints outings, and weren't named in the best for sandy last week.

give stanley a run.

the kid only has to contest regularly and kick a couple of goals to have been a success. any forward pressure, goal assists or wins in the ruck are icing on that cake.

[Con Gorozidis]

No McEvoy in there - really does need to lift.

Having said that, there's now 3 contenders for Roo's spot:-

- Stanley
- Cahill
- McEvoy

And Gaertner!

[Con Gorozidis]

Why do people want McQualter dropped?

I think Stanley comes in for Riewoldt. Rotate Gardiner and Goddard into the forward line. No other changes.

I reckon this most likely outcome yes.

[Con Gorozidis]

Raph and Stanley in.

Roo and Zac out.

Zac aint getting dropped. If you want those 2 in you need another dropped IMO.

Agreed, I'd be amazed if Zac was dropped.

The alternative is raph comes in and goes back and that leaves the option of sending Zac fwd. Zac has kicked a bag or 2 in the VFL. And is capable of being a lead-up fwd. We all know he can kick. JUst seems he lost a bit much weight over the summer. But I would not be surprised it was roo out - raph in. and zac going fwd.

[Thinline]

Raph and Stanley in.

Roo and Zac out.

Zac aint getting dropped. If you want those 2 in you need another dropped IMO.

Agreed, I'd be amazed if Zac was dropped.

The alternative is raph comes in and goes back and that leaves the option of sending Zac fwd. Zac has kicked a bag or 2 in the VFL. And is capable of being a lead-up fwd. We all know he can kick. JUst seems he lost a bit much weight over the summer. But I would not be surprised it was roo out - raph in. and zac going fwd.

So Blake to FB and Raph, Fisher and Gwilt in support?

Maybe.

I haven't seen Zac do anything particuilalrly notable as a forward I myust say. But I don't get the Sandy games up here.

Personally, I reckon Stanley seems a reasonable punt. Kid's gotta learn sometime.

All I'll say is I'm glad we have options (look at Adelaide) and I'm glad others have to make the decision.

[Con Gorozidis]

Zac kicked some bags when he was at Box Hill. So it is an alternative.

But i reckon Stanley will get a crack first up and be plan a. Ross seems to like him and will give him a go playing the roaming fwd pushing up the ground using his pace on the wings - and then he can leave big gards deep in the fwd line with gwilty and bj playing cameos fwd. we will need goals from milney and schneids.

if that doesnt work plan b will be raph down back alongside our normal backline and zac attack to full forward as a traditional style leading target.

[samoht]

I'd like to see Stanley come in... I agree with other posters that he would (or should anyway ) provide the forward pressure and at least demand a tall defender.

Like for like in a way .. with Roo out ?

Also at Etihad the ball will be delivered better to him than was the case in blustery conditions at Frankston - you can't use that game as a guide, but nevertheless he was named as a good contributor and the best tall - which is noteworthy.

Forward pressure and being tall puts him ahead of others in my humble opinion.

[borderbarry]

If Gardiner should be unavailable, I would play Stanley in front of McEvoy. McEvoy has disappointed this year. He has had 4 NAB matches and 2 H & A games, and has really done very little. He and Stanley both played as Ruck yesterday, and it was Stanley named amongst the best. He has gone past McEvoy in my opinion.

[saintsRrising]

Whatever the changes...the set -up needs to be a player that can work with Kosi back in the line up. This will count against Patto as the two are too similar.

Stanley and Cahill are better fits to work with Kosi. As I have already posted in an earlier thread my current preference with Zac out of form would be:

OUT Roo, Zac
In Raph and one of Stanley/Cahill

Post the Sandy game I would still go with this.

Which of two forward options will be seen as capable of delivering a four quarter "Saints footy" game will be important and indeed may count against both by the coaches.

Hard bodies and minds are required and being young they probably lack in both departments.

I don't like the idea of raiding our backline for the forward line though.

[Bernard Shakey]

Raph and Stanley in.

Roo and Zac out.

Zac aint getting dropped. If you want those 2 in you need another dropped IMO.

I take it that you think Zac has earned his spot this year.

In my opinion he has been woeful and needs to find form at Sandy.

[Saintsfan]

Thank christ in all his/her glory that Sam Fisher returned so soon. He plays back and it frees up another quality runner or Goddard closer to goal.

We could be in a world of trouble with Fisher, Reiwoldt and Kosi out even for a match as it would have a bit of a domino effect.

[SainterK]

I thought he showed some glimmers of his 09 form against Sydney in round one, it's just a matter of getting his confidence back. Not completely sure dropping him to Sandy will improve that, but I understand that his form needs to improve significantly or this will be the case.

Ross certainly mentioned Gaertner OTC as one of the names potentially pushing for selection, and I assume that Zac's would be the position that he is suited to?

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

Sammy FISHER to CHF, GODDARD to FF.

FREMANTLE TO 25 GOALS

ST.KILDA TO 3-1


seriously.

Seriously, yes. Seriously stupid.
Did you not notice that we sat on top of the ladder after 2 rounds with a percentage of over 180? How did Sam Fisher go in those two games? Unless my memory fails me, he didn't even play and we won them both extremely well. So we've more than proved we can win without him in the backline. We also got right on top of Collingwood late in the 3rd on the weekend and for most of the last and how was Fisher going down back then? And how many goals did Collingwood kick in his absence? Please remind us all. It's the number before 1.
As for Goddard going forward, are you suggesting our midfield with Hayes (now approaching full fitness), Dal, Joey, Jones, Ray, Gram etc would be unable to get on top of the Freo midfield, in Goddard's absence? As if.
Freo put everything they had into the game yesterday and on their home ground only just got over a Geelong team without Scarlett, Mooney (who dominated the week before) and Ottens (who also dominated last week). They will be spent today and they have to travel over here to face us on our home ground this week. We've had 2 extra days to prepare.
There's more chance of pigs flying out of all our asses, than of Freo then kicking 25 goals against our incredible "team defence", even with Chips and BJ playing forward.

[plugger66]

Raph and Stanley in.

Roo and Zac out.

Zac aint getting dropped. If you want those 2 in you need another dropped IMO.

I take it that you think Zac has earned his spot this year.

In my opinion he has been woeful and needs to find form at Sandy.

Zac has been average at best this year but RL is huge on structure and Zac IMo is important to structure.

[BAM! (shhhh)]

Some creative selection ideas. Doubt we'll see Goddard as full time FF (and would be opposed to it), but wouldn't be at all surprised to see Fisher at CHF most of the game.

My efforts to read the tealeaves inside Lyon's head:

For R5+, it's going to be pretty straightforward, Kosi get's first bite at the cherry, with McEvoy & Gardiner rotating at FF, and King in for ruck only duties - perhaps we can ease off a bit against Hawthorn, but otherwise, I expect it to be ruck centric.

The reason for this is the contests near the goals. One of the things the Saints do a lot of that doesn't get measured on the (public) statsheets (I suspect the Saints actually record the numbers even if Champion Data don't) is bring the ball to ground at FF. Religiously. If the ball is switched to a HFF, none of the leads are good, but everyone's in motion, the kicker will try and put the I50 behind the moving pack. While at times this creates a mark to a Kosi/Roo/Gardiner and easy shot at goal, frequently the defenders will get on it, and multiple defenders will be at the contest. It's then Kosi's job to bring the ball to ground.

For this reason, I see the FF position likely to be filled by ruck forwards who are likely to be able to maintain current structure.

Reiwoldt's spot is much harder to fill (I hear you all saying "duuuuuh!" ) it requires someone to do the hard running, contest the ball, create a target when the opposition does slow our ball movement - not a terribly difficult task.

For R4, this is a much mroe interesting proposition: no Kosi, not a position which can realistically be filled by Gardiner, McEvoy et al. the open ranging has never really been their gig.

While it makes me nervous as we go head to head against the current hotshots of the AFL that we have no idea: I can't wait to see selection on Thursday. Realistically though, provided he can play, I think we saw our answer last Friday: Sam Fisher is another gun, maybe not Roo-level, but few are. He can take a contested grab, he can run. He may not have the engine, but we'll likely do some rotation regardless, as the only guy who I think has the engine is Blake, and the engine is probably all he's got.

Fisher can dare his opponent to run forward, go with them, beat them, and leave an opening for someone else to go forward and create a mismatch (this is where I am thinking Goddard).

So, in conclusion (fora anyone still with me... )
IN: McEvoy
OUT: Reiwoldt.

Such anticlimactic selections seem so Ross to me, that I'd almost bet on it!

[bergholt]

Reiwoldt's spot is much harder to fill (I hear you all saying "duuuuuh!" ) it requires someone to do the hard running, contest the ball, create a target when the opposition does slow our ball movement - not a terribly difficult task.

yeah, but you've missed the most important of riewoldt's roles.

he's the outlet from defence. he's the one they kick at from an under pressure situation inside defensive 50 to the wing, in the knowledge that it's unlikely to be turned over. this is the role which it's important for his replacement to fill, because this is the one that makes the difference between pressure in our forward line and pressure in their forward line.

even concussed, sam fisher presented on the wing a couple of times on friday night, so i reckon he could do a pretty good job at this. stanley - who knows? mcevoy - maybe? someone like cahill or lynch is much closer to this role than either of them are.

[Bernard Shakey]

Raph and Stanley in.

Roo and Zac out.

Zac aint getting dropped. If you want those 2 in you need another dropped IMO.

I take it that you think Zac has earned his spot this year.

In my opinion he has been woeful and needs to find form at Sandy.

Zac has been average at best this year but RL is huge on structure and Zac IMo is important to structure.

Not much good to the structure, when all he does is watch his opponent and get beaten at every contest.

[starsign]

i'm as perplexed as anyone one this weeks selection line-up And like others am not happy about pulling the back half apart to bolster the front ....Having said that though , and with Fisher and BJ being thrown about as possible forwards I'm thinking what about Blakey???
Has performed OK down there in the past, and I know he is a steady rock in defence and the 1st picked each week blah, blah ...but just pondering .. could he be a suprize turn up down forward??