If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
yeah, i felt a little uncomfortable for them (and doyle, fixter, vogels etc) but i suppose he's referring to the squad that has essentially been established and winning over the last 15 rounds.
then again, i think it would be worth trying 15-16 players on field so what would i know
I didn't read it that way. 'the 25 we would most want to play'....I'd want players that have had no injuries and are match fit ahead of those with little match fitness. That's just the way I read it.
I read it as selecting 25 out of those who played for the Swans and the Swans reserves last week.
So it wasn't intended to encompass long-term injured like Maxfield or Doyle. But it does seem to indicate that Saddo, Vogels and McVeigh, even if fit, are well and truly on the outer at the moment.
Out of our younger players, I know that people that will say (with some justification) that Moore and Malceski are more deserving of a spot, but for some reason I feel sorriest for McVeigh. He's been an automatic selection for a pretty sizeable part of the last 2 years, and in the longer term he's (in my view) an indispensable part of our plans. We need him to be the next Willo, i.e. a fast outside midfielder with good disposal skills. I just hope that missing out isn't too dispiriting for him.
Originally posted by SimonH
Out of our younger players, I know that people that will say (with some justification) that Moore and Malceski are more deserving of a spot, but for some reason I feel sorriest for McVeigh.
I look forward to the time when we will see all of them performing in the firsts regularly - I think they all have the goods.
He reminds him of the guys, close-set, slow, and never rattled, who were play-makers on the team. (John Updike, seeing Josh Kennedy in a crystal ball)
Comment