Only one change?

[DST]

Now we can turn ourselves to the game this week and the line-up of the side.

While it would be strange to make a change to a winning side, I am thinking we could use the pace and kicking skills of Malceski for Bevan.

The only issue with this way of thinking is that Malceski would be making his finals debut in such a pressured game, where at least Bevan has played a number of finals.

But I can't stop thinking we could use that little extra pace and kicking skills on what is going to be a hard, fast and dry pitch this week at the "G".

DST

[originalswan]

I agree I think Bevan has been given a chance albeit two quarters on Friday for 3 possesions. He did lay 6 tackles.
Malceski could be a good swap, although Bevan could be a match up for one of the Eagles midfielders.

[DST]

Originally posted by originalswan
I agree I think Bevan has been given a chance albeit two quarters on Friday for 3 possesions. He did lay 6 tackles.
Malceski could be a good swap, although Bevan could be a match up for one of the Eagles midfielders.

With Bruan to miss, I reckon we can cover them for defensive lock down jobes with Ablett, Matthews, Dempster and even Fosdike.

Just reckon he could add that x factor into the midfield and catch them by surprise.

DST

[tantrum]

I would be happy either way, but if I were in an attacking/risky frame of mind, I'd go Malceski.

[Go Swannies]

After being there today, I think there might be a surprise inclusion.

[dendol]

Originally posted by originalswan
I agree I think Bevan has been given a chance albeit two quarters on Friday for 3 possesions. He did lay 6 tackles.
Malceski could be a good swap, although Bevan could be a match up for one of the Eagles midfielders.

They will probably stick with Bevan as a defensive option; Malceski's finals debut in a GF is pretty damn risky, especially when asked to face the likes of Judd, Cousins, Kerr et al.

[Xie Shan]

Originally posted by tantrum
I would be happy either way, but if I were in an attacking/risky frame of mind, I'd go Malceski.

Me too - but is Paul Roos likely to be in an attacking/risky frame of mind?

[timbo]

bring in spriggsy with his pace

[DST]

Originally posted by dendol
They will probably stick with Bevan as a defensive option; Malceski's finals debut in a GF is pretty damn risky, especially when asked to face the likes of Judd, Cousins, Kerr et al.

Judd, Cousins Kerr et al will face the likes of Krik, Bolton (J), Williams, Ablett, Dempster etc.

What you are looking to do with Malceski is to play him on the number 6, 7 or 8 midfielder and hope you can manufacture an attacking win from an unlikely source. I can't see us getting that option through Bevan.

Shane Ellen form Adelaide is a classic example of this.

DST

[punter257]

yeah i agree about malceski playing but i just dont think its gonna happen. bevan is safe IMO

[gazza]

after seeing malceski in the 2s gf.i think he is good enough to play in place of bevan.
don't think it would be a risk,but he was carrying an injury after the gf,have to see how he comes up

[Jeffers1984]

Roos sort of hinted that he may make a change from the interview he gave yesterday.

I wouldn't be suprised if Malceski comes in to give us that extra polish in the midfield.

[TheHood]

I don't think Bevo has been given enough game time in the finals to have had a strategic impact in any case.

I would be leaning toward Mal in case we do need to score points fast.

I would be devestated for either to miss the team though. I really feel this has been more than a 1 year campaign, more like a 3 year one. Bevo was terrific in 04 and would be as desperate as anyone on the MCG on Saturday.

I don't envy the coaching staff's role when it comes to leaving a player out for the big one.

[Syd Swan]

I think if Vogels is fit he should be come in at the expense of Bevan.

[hammo]

I would like to see Malcleski play. He would offer the side more than Bevan and is clearly in a rich vein of form.