We don't really know the dynamics that existed last year and how Charlie and his teammates ended up. I suspect there are still a few friendships there but sometimes when a player switches clubs a few on the old team may go out with the intention of sending a bit of a message. One thing they have to be careful of is to not to try and get to him with an overly aggressive approach. The last thing we want are cheap free kicks and I suspect the umpires will be watchful.
I suspect that players couldn't give a fat rat's clacker about Charlie leaving. As Weiters said, mateships forged over ten years don't disappear because a player gets a clearance, but that doesn't mean that there won't be a few players looking to give Charlie a bit of curry ... and vice versa. I think Charlie has been rehearsing his opening lines to Weiters for a couple of weeks
Swans played three talls with Curnow, Amartey and McDonald up forward vs GWS in their last practice game so Id be expecting them to lineup the same with Papley, Rosas and Heeney as their smaller/medium forwards. With Derksen and Dean with zero games between them and Weitering nursing sore rib/s Id be thinking Lewis Young will be in the team as cover and would more than likely be a starter imo. Heeney will be an interesting cover given his marking ability, maybe Florent might get his old teammate but there isnt an obvious matchup, Id be starting Lord on Gulden.....dont care if Lord gets zero possessions I just dont want Gulden getting more than 15-20...
While Derksen and Dean have zero games, they both know what it’s like to play against AFL standard players. That’s not to say that they won’t be overawed by the occasion. I reckon Young will be one of the first defenders named.
I think that some supporters may be judging Cooper Lord harshly. He may not be getting as much of the ball as his fellow midfielders but he’s doing a great job of shutting down an opponent. George Hewett is still putting a lot of work into opposition midfielders but Coops would have to be first choice to play on Gulden.
I'm not sure that the second quarter was that bad.
We had 13 inside 50s with four kicks marked by defenders (one ball was tapped inside 50 and led to several possessions and a missed snap by Williams). We took two marks inside 50 (three with Smith's "not 15") and kept possession or forced a stoppage from seven inside 50s. Where we fell down was our goalkicking with two shots falling short (one from outside 50), two set shots missed from 35m and two gettable snaps missing. We probably should have kicked three for the quarter and one of Geelong's two was gifted to Martin.
Our ball use and decision making was good but our finishing let us down and we really can't afford to miss set shots from inside 50.
And that's the issue, just like recent years we got it into forward 50 plenty of times in the 2nd qtr but finishing let us down... again. BUT, it was corrected in the 3rd and final.
The difference is that our forward 50 entries in the second quarter were much better than what we often dished up last season. Our forward 50 entries were generally deep and well executed and Geelong only taking four defensive marks (Stewart only got one!) and only two spoils (neither of which killed the ball) reflected that. We dropped some marks, didn't crumb as well as we should have and our kicking for goal was atrocious. We really should have scored three-four goals from the opportunities we had, and won the quarter by a couple of goals (more if the umpires were fair dinkum) but bad kicking (for goal) is bad football.
I'm not sure that the second quarter was that bad.
We had 13 inside 50s with four kicks marked by defenders (one ball was tapped inside 50 and led to several possessions and a missed snap by Williams). We took two marks inside 50 (three with Smith's "not 15") and kept possession or forced a stoppage from seven inside 50s. Where we fell down was our goalkicking with two shots falling short (one from outside 50), two set shots missed from 35m and two gettable snaps missing. We probably should have kicked three for the quarter and one of Geelong's two was gifted to Martin.
Our ball use and decision making was good but our finishing let us down and we really can't afford to miss set shots from inside 50.
And that's the issue, just like recent years we got it into forward 50 plenty of times in the 2nd qtr but finishing let us down... again. BUT, it was corrected in the 3rd and final.
The difference is that our forward 50 entries in the second quarter were much better than what we often dished up last season. We dropped some marks, didn't crumb as a well as we should have and our kicking for goal was atrocious. Our forward 50 entries were generally deep and well executed and Geelong only taking four defensive marks and only two spoils (neither of which killed the ball) reflected that. We really should have scored three goals from the looks we got, and won the quarter by a goal (two if the umpires were fair dinkum) but bad kicking (for goal) is bad football.
And a lot of water has flowed under the bridge since then. Motlop is a definite out, and Cowan, Acres, Haynes, Cerra and Newman are unlikely to be available. Ainsworth has shown why we were keen to bring him onboard and we've added Lij Hollands and Derksen, both of whom have done well in the practice matches.
I'm not sure that the second quarter was that bad.
We had 13 inside 50s with four kicks marked by defenders (one ball was tapped inside 50 and led to several possessions and a missed snap by Williams). We took two marks inside 50 (three with Smith's "not 15") and kept possession or forced a stoppage from seven inside 50s. Where we fell down was our goalkicking with two shots falling short (one from outside 50), two set shots missed from 35m and two gettable snaps missing. We probably should have kicked three for the quarter and one of Geelong's two was gifted to Martin.
Our ball use and decision making was good but our finishing let us down and we really can't afford to miss set shots from inside 50.
One thing that bugs me - and did so last night - is when our players go to "outside 5" when an opposition player has a mark or free near the 50. We effectively turn a low percentage scoring shot or kick to the hot spot into a gettable shot at goal or short pass opportunity.
Weiters reckons he's going to be good to play and is looking forward to matching up against his mate Charlie. I saw an interview with Charlie a while back where he spoke about playing against Weiters.
If we can fit Derksen in the 23 with Weiters back, I'd start him on Charlie with Dean primed to leap over Charlie at every opportunity.
Obviously Weiters knows Charlie's game as well as he knows his own but his value is in intercepting and setting up transition from defence. Derksen is more of an old-fashioned close-checking defender and I think he'd do OK on Charlie ... with some help.
Not sure why Byrne was spending a fair bit of time in the backline at one stage of the game but it's not where we need him.
Lewis Young is a strange one. He has the tools to play the game, but is pretty indecisive at times and slow to react. He's very much a confidence player.
Just on the Ruck contests...without looking at the stats Pittonet seemed to be dominating them and continued to do so around the ground. He also seems to be picking up quite a few disposals After they started getting pinged both him and Reidy seemed to be hesitant in their approach to the contest at centre 'Throw-Ups'. Confusion reigned.
Byrne helping out in defence is part of the small forward's role. He covers the ground well and seems to have the endurance necessary for end to end running.
I thought that Young was good again last night. I don't think that he is as indecisive as the look on his face suggests
Pitto and Reidy smashed the Geelong rucks, even with the dodgy frees. What was interesting was that the Cats used De Koning as their athletic, leaping ruckman at centre ball ups and he managed just three hitouts for the game. I think that we'll go with the two rucks next week. Working in tandem seems to suit Pitto and Reidy more than it did Pitto and TDK.
The AFL got the ruck rules wrong starting two years back when Scott complained about TDK, it was wrong again last year and instead of admitting a mistake it has doubled down.
And as I have been warning, that could easily have been BigH hobbling off instead of Neale.
No, Harry knows what he’s doing at ruck contests and has been taught how to look after himself. Neale would have benefited from sessions with Matty K.
I probably should have mentioned Cooper Lord before. He’s your quintessential blue collar worker whose efforts lead to chains of possessions and disrupt opposition plays.
He’s a player who is easily overlooked and/or undervalued.
Not sure what to make of that. Both teams were concentrating on managing players but getting the W was still front of mind.
While we didn’t put all of our eggs in the Jagga basket, the eggs we did put in were well worth it. He adds a different dimension to our midfield and will make life easier for Cripps, Walsh, Hewett and whoever else gets a midfield gig.
Harry Dean is a ripper and Wade Derksen showed tonight that he can do a job on key forwards and shifty bastards like Danger.
The Hollands brothers were great and Lij’s ability to play different roles was impressive.
Kempy’s growth as a key forward is evident and his willingness to get up the ground to provide a marking target or help out in defence is a positive.
The player who surprised me tonight was Campbell Chesser. He got plenty of the ball, defended well, and kicked a classy goal. I had him pencilled in as a depth player but I suspect that he’ll play more AFL games than VFL games.
