McStay-out, who comes in?

[Gerry Cooper]

Noble has a pretty poor record of negating goal kicking small forwards and with Brisbane having one of the best in the business in the form of Charlie Cameron, who has kicked 17.1 against us in his last four outings. We can't afford to let Cameron off the leash one bit. Oleg does a much better job shutting down that sort of player, so I dont see a role for Noble in the team at present.

[stui magpie]

Having read a few different opinions, we need a tall replacement to keep Harris Andrews in check. If we go small, we need to be precise with our forward entries, hard to do in the pressure of a GF, cos any bombs will be picked off by Andrews.

I'd consider playing Frampton in a negating role on Andrews, spoil and bring the ball to ground and let Billy, Bobby, Ginni and Beau feast on scraps.

[swoop42]

On a day predicted to be the fourth hottest grand final on record giving ourselves the best chance of running out the game is preferable than replacing McStay with a tall not as good IMO.

It's predicted to be 28 in the SHADE meaning it'll be over 30 out on the G in the sun and that's bloody hot for a 2hr game considered a winter sport.

If people don't think that favours Brisbane after we've just lived through 3 months of a Victorian winter and we don't need to plan around it then go right ahead.

Me I already see the headlines being written of how it was our downfall.

Bring in the extra runner, use those within last weeks 23 to cover for McStay and hope like hell we can last longer than Brisbane on a very warm September day.

[Piethagoras' Theorem]

It'll be dry heat, nothing like theirs

[Ronnie McKeowns boots]

Gotta bring Noble is as the sub, by the time he comes on the heat will have come out of the game and into the afternoon air, so his run will be critical

[Damien]

Having read a few different opinions, we need a tall replacement to keep Harris Andrews in check. If we go small, we need to be precise with our forward entries, hard to do in the pressure of a GF, cos any bombs will be picked off by Andrews.

I'd consider playing Frampton in a negating role on Andrews, spoil and bring the ball to ground and let Billy, Bobby, Ginni and Beau feast on scraps.

Jamie Elliot may be small in stature but he’s a leading forward, not a crumber. He will relish DMacs absence and get back to his leading best. Predicting a big one for him.

[warburton lad]

I like the thought of Elliott or Hoskin-Elliott leading out of the square.

Both have very good forward knowhow.

Go Pies.

[pietillidie]

Having read a few different opinions, we need a tall replacement to keep Harris Andrews in check. If we go small, we need to be precise with our forward entries, hard to do in the pressure of a GF, cos any bombs will be picked off by Andrews.

I'd consider playing Frampton in a negating role on Andrews, spoil and bring the ball to ground and let Billy, Bobby, Ginni and Beau feast on scraps.

Jamie Elliot may be small in stature but he’s a leading forward, not a crumber. He will relish DMacs absence and get back to his leading best. Predicting a big one for him.

I'm with Stui on this. You cant risk relying on easy ball in and Jamie kicking a bag. You can hope it happens, but it's too easy to shut down if that's the main avenue to goal. As posted in the Lippa thread:

On talls, I defo don't want to go into a big final in dry weather without a tall other than our rucks next to Checkers. Not only does smart tall work in the 50m arc bring the smalls into play, but it also clears space for Jamie on the lead, and offers more outs along the line if need be.

The rucks will have their work cut out as rucks on a dry day as it is, so we can't expect them to add too much forward, as much as I envisage Coxy clunking a few.

Going too short could also gift their backline confidence in a game where kicks are likely to come in under pressure and their tall backs need to be kept honest. There's nothing more dispiriting than being lorded over by big backs, and it simply can't happen.

As others have said, Frampers also provides cover should we lose a tall anywhere on the park, which is not a small risk in a granny. It also makes Howe an option forward if Plan A and B don't work.

Meanwhile, we can always sub a small for a tall if it pans out that we're too tall. But you don't want to let tall backs grow in confidence and dominate from the get go such that they can rebound at will.

So, assuming we go with Frampton both structurally up forward and as cover, that means we likely need Lippa's legs. Even more so given Ginni is not the swiftest, and none of our small forwards can play midfield.

While it would be great to have Adams' muscle over the ball, I reckon Pendles, Sidey and Mitchell will be up for going all out for another premiership, and Jordy and Crispy are in top form, so they will be ferocious, particularly given our break and full seven days. So, we trust them accordingly, with Nicky Boy a weapon up our sleeve should we need him in the middle.

In sum, I reckon Frampton comes in and Lippa stays.

[Pies2016]

I can’t see a scenario where we set up our front six with only one tall forward on a dry day ( Miochek and hes hardly tall ). Last time that happened and was successful was probably the 2017 G F.
Obviously we could rotate between Cox and Cameron as the second tall forward but that also goes against recent game trends where Cox and Cameron generally interchange as ruckman ( maybe with the exception of short spells in the forward line ) Neither player has spent more than 75 % of the game on the ground in the last two finals and that break off the ground seems to have helped Cox in particular, to be a strong performer.
No one has really mentioned McInnes in this conversation and possibly for good reason but he was at least in good kicking form ( better than Krueger ) in the VFL before his shoulder injury. He is supposedly ok to go once again.

[Magpietothemax]

I can’t see a scenario where we set up our front six with only one tall forward on a dry day ( Miochek and hes hardly tall ). Last time that happened and was successful was probably the 2017 G F.
Obviously we could rotate between Cox and Cameron as the second tall forward but that also goes against recent game trends where Cox and Cameron generally interchange as ruckman ( maybe with the exception of short spells in the forward line ) Neither player has spent more than 75 % of the game on the ground in the last two finals and that break off the ground seems to have helped Cox in particular, to be a strong performer.
No one has really mentioned McInnes in this conversation and possibly for good reason but he was at least in good kicking form ( better than Krueger ) in the VFL before his shoulder injury. He is supposedly ok to go once again.

I did think of McInnes (though I cannot claim any evidence for doing so as I didn't post it), but immediately rejected it in my mind for the same reason I would reject the concept of Finn McCrae playing: not enough AFL exposure during the year. McInnes has had more than Finn, but I guess I thought that because he did not seem to perform at the required level when he had the chance, he wasn't in contention for a GF. However, from his VFL form it is clear that he does know how to play forward and kick goals; clearly Brisbane would assign HarrisAndrews to Checkers, so McInnes would have the second defender. I think both Frampton and Kreuger would be inferior choices to McInnes because Frampton is not a forward and Kreuger, as you say, was not playing as well in the VFL as McInnes. Then Cox/Cameron can float forward, with the two tall defenders occupied by their immediate opponents. Maybe our coaches can assign a clear, simple role for McInnes to follow, allowing for the maximum possiblity for the ball to hit the ground in our F50.

[eddiesmith]

I can’t see a scenario where we set up our front six with only one tall forward on a dry day ( Miochek and hes hardly tall ). Last time that happened and was successful was probably the 2017 G F.
Obviously we could rotate between Cox and Cameron as the second tall forward but that also goes against recent game trends where Cox and Cameron generally interchange as ruckman ( maybe with the exception of short spells in the forward line ) Neither player has spent more than 75 % of the game on the ground in the last two finals and that break off the ground seems to have helped Cox in particular, to be a strong performer.
No one has really mentioned McInnes in this conversation and possibly for good reason but he was at least in good kicking form ( better than Krueger ) in the VFL before his shoulder injury. He is supposedly ok to go once again.

It would be complete madness to think the best tactic when it’s hot and players can’t run is to have more runners instead of tall players who can hold a mark, especially when the midgets are too tired to jump…

Frampton gives us flexibility, he can go back or he can go forward or ruck. Ideally you’d play Cameron 80% forward with Frampton covering the ruck with Cox or if Daniher gets away he goes back.

[David]

[Meredith1965]

[Magpietothemax]

Frampton was in when Cox and Cameron were both unavailable, generally.
The proficiency he demonstrated was only in the ruck and in defence. When he was trialled as a forward, he was unable to prove any capacity to do so at AFL level.
We don't need another tall defender, as Brisbane only have two tall threats, and above all else it should be pretty non-negotiable: this defence must stay untouched because it is the best in the AFL.
The only possibility I can see for Frampton to play is as a (back up) back up ruck. So Cameron/Cox could rotate constantly through F50, while Frampton gives Cox/Cameron rests by rotating through the ruck.
We would then constantly have either Cox or Cameron as a second tall in F50.
That is the only way I can see Frampton being deployed.
Is that worth an independent position in the team? I am not sure.

[warburton lad]

I like what Magpietothemax has suggested.

Cox or Cameron as the second tall forward.

Frampton plays ruck to give these boys a spell when either Cox or Cameron comes to the bench.

First quarter may look as follows:

Cox in the centre square- Cameron out of the goal square- Frampton on the bench.

Ten minutes in- Frampton into the ruck, Cox to the goal square, Cameron to the bench

Twenty minutes in- Cameron into the ruck- Cox stays in the goal square- Frampton to the bench