Pre match. Pies v. Swans - All comments please

[HAL]

Yuck that movie sucked.

[Dangles]

[RudeBoy]

We are going to smash the living daylights out of the Swans on friday night. If you don't believe me, here's what Bucks reckons:

http://www.collingwoodfc.com.au/video/2015-08-11/bucks-we-will-not-be-swayed

[mattys123]

How are the players in doubt coming along, as in Cloke and Adams?

We can't win unless both of them play I reckon.

And it would be nice if Buddy doesn't show up either.

We are in terrible form, shocking really, even the win over Carlton was poor.

But we will put out on the park a very strong 22, no reason why we can't play a lot better then we have been.

[TimetoFly]

Providing all fit

In white Cloke karnezis
Out Moore Toovey Sinclair

Marsh brown Williams

Langdon frost sharenberg

Varcoe swan Sidebottom

Karnezis Cloke fasolo

Elliot Reid white

Foll: Grundy greenwood Pendlebury

Inter: Adams Crisp Maynard Blair

[Yarra Falls End]

In Goldsack, Cloke or White, Karnezis
Out Maynard, Moore,Marsh or Sharenberg

Only chance of finals is winning all remaining games and against Swans we need as much experience as we can get.Goldsack generally plays well against Swans and Maynard needs a rest .Cloke if fit, otherwise White.
Karnezis to get deserved chance however might be the sub.Sharenberg or Marsh to make away for team balance and experience.

[Cuthbert Collingwood]

Love to see some experience back in, but not at the expense of Marsh.

2/3 Ins from Cloke, White, Witts, Goldy and Young, Karnezis at a stretch
Outs from Schazza, Moore, Maynard, Toovs and Grundles.

My outs are less form and more for having a rest

[SwansWay]

Buddy hasn't been sighted in the first half hour of training this morning.

[melliot]

I think our ruck conundrum is an interesting one.

1) Witts + White (or other as the part timer for 10% ruck duties)
2) Grundy+ White (or other as the part timer for 10% ruck duties)
3) Witts + Grundy (where one or both have to play 50% forward)

You can also add Cox to that mix, but I don't think that would change the mix up greatly IMO.

Clearly this year playing option 3 has not worked on the basis that neither play the forward role well enough and simply don't take enough contested marks or compete heavily enough in that area. Thus allowing the smaller/faster/agile opposition back line to whisk the ball away with relative ease. Until wiits or Grundy can clunk some contested marks in the F50, or possibly the sub is abolished, we can't play both with the view that we have the most competitive selected balance on the field.

So that leaves option 1 OR 2. Neither is a clear difference in advantage IMO. Grundy is better around the ground and with the crash and bash. Witts is better in the tapwork. But both do well as the No.1 ruck regardless and show plenty of room for improvement.

And here is my point...........

Why do we have to stick with one OR the other?

The Ruck is a battle weary position. So why not rotate them. One week in, one week out. Keep them fresh for each game. Share the load of the season. Why commit to one set up only, when rotating both could be the best outcome/performance for the team overall.

Other sports such as NBA and Soccer have rosters to share the heavy schedule of games rather than wearing the best team into the ground. Why not consider a similar approach for singular positions/roles where we have two or more adequate players?

[RudeBoy]

In: Cloke, Karnezis, White

Out: Moore, Marsh, Scharenberg

We will absolutely smash the Swans.

[MagpiesTheGreat]

In: Cloke
Out: Scharenberg

It would be a draw

[MagpieMad]

mattys123′s Match Preview Round 20 – Collingwood vs Sydney is up on the site:

http://www.magpies.net/nick/?p=1646


Cheers Matt

[roar]

Can someone explain the Scharenberg out calls?

[AN_Inkling]

in: Cloke, De Goey (if both are ready)
out: Moore, Maynard

With Marsh as sub.

De Goey and Scharenberg have both shown the temperament for big games and I think have the capacity to step up. Maynard has mostly been good but has made one or two awful mistakes each game, you can't afford that against a good team. Marsh is exciting but too raw when our season's on the line, either plays as sub or is replaced.

If De Goey's not ready then Goldsack in for Maynard or Moore to defense depending on how many talls the Swans play.

I suspect De Goey was rested with this game in mind and think he'll play.

[GoWoodsmen]

For mine, Cloke aside, this has to be one of the toughest weeks from a selection point of view. If you look at last week's game statistically, really, Grundy aside (and maybe Greenwood), everyone supposedly used the ball well (60% and above). In fact add only Crisp, Sinclair and Williams and everyone was above 70%.

But sitting there on the day something is off. It's the decision making and something else which I can't put my finger on. Perhaps it's merely confidence but sadly I don't think we got even an ounce of confidence our of last Saturday's game.

Marsh looks like a rippa so I can't see him being dropped. Shazza had a tough gig coming in as the sub but again was very very composed. Maynard has 18 disposals at 83%+ so I didn't see him do much wrong.

Moore is probably the one if we're serious about making finals who has to make way for Cloke and/or White (or only applies if Cloke is not fit). I'd love to see Patty K get a go for the last 4 weeks so we can work out if he can cut it at the top level. He's clearly a level above VFL.

Melliot, you mentioned the Rucks. It must be killing the coaching staff at the moment. Witts is clearly the better ruckman at rucking, while Grundy offers more (some would say offers something full stop) around the ground but butchered the ball badly last weekend. Do we give Cox a run? Not sure. Either way I'm finding it incredibly frustrating knowing that they both have so much potential but aren't quite fitting the bill - but I do agree that they shouldn't play together - not yet!

Go Pies.

For mine...

In: Cloke/White
Out: Moore