Ben Mathews=Trade Bait

[Captain]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: you're kidding

Originally posted by NMWBloods
I can't see a matchup for LRT at all.

Loose man in defence or play him up forward.

[NMWBloods]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: you're kidding

Originally posted by Captain
Loose man in defence or play him up forward.

I don't know if he has the nous to play loose man and we don't need him in the forward line.

[Captain]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: you're kidding

Originally posted by NMWBloods
I don't know if he has the nous to play loose man and we don't need him in the forward line.

He has played this role (loose man in defence) in stints during games before quiet effectively. He virtually played loose in the first half of the grand final!! I agree his football nous isn't anywhere near the Chad Cornes/Joel Bowden zone, however it would be a good learning experience for him and would be useful to get in the way of Johnson, Robbins and co.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: you're kidding

Originally posted by Captain
Loose man in defence or play him up forward.

I've been a fan of the lads for some time but even I'm laughing at the mere thought of him sweeping across the half-back line.

[Dpw]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: you're kidding

Originally posted by NMWBloods
I can't see a matchup for LRT at all.

What about dropping Chambers and using him as a 2nd ruckman? just for this game.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: you're kidding

Originally posted by Dpw
What about dropping Chambers and using him as a 2nd ruckman? just for this game.

A possibility given the Dogs much claimed lack of height (with Grant and Harris it doesn't extend down back).

[big bear]

We could use him as bait, but what would we catch. I wonder if West Coast would swap him for Cox. I just woke up and realize I was dreaming. Stuck with him I'm afraid.

[goswannie14]

Originally posted by big bear
We could use him as bait, but what would we catch. I wonder if West Coast would swap him for Cox. I just woke up and realize I was dreaming. Stuck with him I'm afraid.

He can go to Hawthorn for Spida.

[Schneiderman]

Re: Re: micky

Originally posted by Guzzitza
Look, Roos has proved time and again that he plays favourites. Benny will sadly come in for a younger more exciting player such as McVeigh, and Dempster will again be left out.. Its similar to premiership credits deal.. Benny was there and considered by Roos to be important, so the moment hes fit he'll be in the side.

Well the favouritism bit is simply crap. Roos is more competitive than probably any single poster on these forums, so I doubt he would do anything that would truly jeopardise a win.

I am firmly in favour of the new kids, and dont appreciate Benny much either. But then I wasn't the one who coached this team from 12th on the ladder and disintegrating, right up to a flag in just 3.5years. So if Roosy thinks we need him in the side, then I trust his judgement. He may get it wrong, but its hardly fair to blame our recent good form on Benny's absence (even if it is extremely amusing to do so).

[BigBadBarryNo1]

There is no questioning that he probably is a tagger and gets less on the stats sheet that the "prettier" players like Hally et al ... or that we would like him to step up a notch.

That said, the cold hard facts would be at this point in time is that on form, trading him for Spida + maybe.. Chambers *snickers* would be worth the pain.

I say lets give him a chance to step up.. remember how Fossie was playing before he got injured? Suddenly I noticed Fossies cleaner hands, kicks and runs straight after he came back on.

Also, do you really think that Benny would have enjoyed being on the sidelines when we had that MASSIVE win on the weekend?

Let's back him guys.. we're SWANS fans here, and we're supposed to back who we have, not back who we possibly can have.. get your noses out of the dirt.. sheesh!

[RogueSwan]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: you're kidding

Originally posted by NMWBloods
I can't see a matchup for LRT at all.

Who is going to take Chris Grant? Too big for Leapin', he would just give away too many frees.

[NMWBloods]

Grant spends most of his time at CHB now. If he does go forward, then C Bolton can pick him up.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Grant spends most of his time at CHB now. If he does go forward, then C Bolton can pick him up.

Grants an interesting problem, he at least begins just about every game as you say in the backline but gets shifted up forward for a bit during during most games (against Port for example he started at CHB but kicked 2).
When he does go forward he causes a match up problem because the Dogs forward line consists of no-one above6ft2.
So while I reckon LRT would be a great matchup for Grant (he played very well on him in the Wizard cup last year) I'm not sure he has the pace for Hahn or Murphy or Johnson which is who he would be left minding when the 'dogs forward line is Grantless. What do you think?

[hammo]

We probably do need a bit more pace this week.

Dempster and/or Spriggs could be inclusions with either LRT or Chambers missing out.

Goodes can handle ruck when Jolly needs a rest.

[liz]

Originally posted by Ruckman

When he does go forward he causes a match up problem because the Dogs forward line consists of no-one above6ft2.
So while I reckon LRT would be a great matchup for Grant (he played very well on him in the Wizard cup last year) I'm not sure he has the pace for Hahn or Murphy or Johnson which is who he would be left minding when the 'dogs forward line is Grantless. What do you think?

We could just stick LRT at FF!