Passengers without 2005 credits

[jenky28]

Originally posted by TheHood
That would be me.

I have been on his case since Round 1 and apart from the hit out fuss after the North game, Jols has been ho hum in all areas but particularly coasting outside of the stoppages.

When you consider the output from:

Cox (Seaby looks more likely than our boys)
Biglands (old Clarke has more spark)
Everitt (even Campbell has time and style going for him)
White (knows how to sink a team, just ask Sydney)
Lade (Brogan is their second stringer for heaven's sake!)

All of those blokes give their team height advantage at vital points of the game (outside of stoppages) and what have we got from Jolly and Chambers in 2006.

On Saturday night, Nathan Buckley outsmarted both of our ruckmen to directly set up goals from centre clearances.

Sorry to say, but Everitt for Jolly would have been the better option!

Give the poor guy a break! Our accuracy cost us alot on saturday nite. Jolly does ok! If we drop Jolly we will go even worse than we already are!

[dendol]

Originally posted by jenky28
Give the poor guy a break! Our accuracy cost us alot on saturday nite. Jolly does ok! If we drop Jolly we will go even worse than we already are!

Sorry, but he doesn't go ok. He does what is neccessary in the ruck (gives a good contest) but he doesn't provide ANYTHING at all around the ground. When you see other ruckmen constantly taking goal-saving marks deep in the backline or providing matchup headaches up forward, you'll see that Jolly is not the Number 1 ruckman we need.

Im not asking for him to be dropped because unfortunately we just don't have anyone else.

His ineffectiveness is also a reason why Everitt is still linked with the Swans next season.

[jenky28]

Originally posted by dendol
Sorry, but he doesn't go ok. He does what is neccessary in the ruck (gives a good contest) but he doesn't provide ANYTHING at all around the ground. When you see other ruckmen constantly taking goal-saving marks deep in the backline or providing matchup headaches up forward, you'll see that Jolly is not the Number 1 ruckman we need.

Im not asking for him to be dropped because unfortunately we just don't have anyone else.

His ineffectiveness is also a reason why Everitt is still linked with the Swans next season.

Well i dunno i definately cant see doyle or chambers filling the role down back either lol chambers fumbles hes give em the ball constantly!
Jolly will improve he just need more help thats all!

[giant]

Did anyone else think the Crouch-Didak match-up an unlikely one, even more so as the game went on? Not letting Crouch off the hook for an ordinary game but from almost minute 1 it looked like a poor fit.

[NMWBloods]

Didak was too strong, quick and clever for Crouch on Saturday. It looked that way right from the start.

[giant]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Didak was too strong, quick and clever for Crouch on Saturday. It looked that way right from the start.

agreed, and if you'd asked me before the game I might have guessed that would be the case. So why did the coaching staff have Crouch still on Didak at minute 100 (as far as I could tell) while taller defenders like Taidhg & B2 were left to stand "lesser" forwards?

Didak was always going to be a potential game-breaker for them as ROK might have been for us if he'd kicked straight. Strange call I think.

[deadan]

So, after an ordinary game you guys are giving up on a quarter of the team ?
These are the guys who got us to the halfway stage at 7-5, and admittedly they have been playing below par for most of the year but still managed to win a few. Are you the same fans who gave the team crap after the poor start ? And if we had have replaced the players you've mentioned I doubt we would have then won 6 in a row. Give them a break...

We should really be working on our discipline. we give away far too many free kicks, some undeserved, but most are there. The Collingwood players were ready for the turnovers and had 2 free players on the opposite wing each time. I could see it from section 628, row 3, so why couldnt the players and coaching staff see it ?

[NMWBloods]

No one is giving up on a "quarter of the team" but there is no reason why there should not be some changes made.

[giant]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by NMWBloods
No one is giving up on a "quarter of the team" but there is no reason why there should not be some changes made. [/QUOTE

Mathews
Crouch
Kirk
Ted
Nog
Chambers
Jolly

Closer to a third.

[NMWBloods]

Okay, so maybe we are challenging over a quarter of the team, some of which need to go. But the teams needs some refreshing and some changes need to be made.

[swannieserin]

I wouldn't agree with all of those listed - while it might equate to a third of the team I doubt anyone here would agree with all of them. For me its Mathews, Willo and Richards for the Freo game.

We could maybe try a change in the ruck, but is that such a great idea coming up against Fremantle? I don't think we'll see a change there until the Richmond game at least, barring injury.

[Tuesday]

Originally posted by swannieserin
We could maybe try a change in the ruck, but is that such a great idea coming up against Fremantle? I don't think we'll see a change there until the Richmond game at least, barring injury.

But isn't Sandilands still injured?
Perfect opportunity.

[swannieserin]

Originally posted by Tuesday
But isn't Sandilands still injured?
Perfect opportunity.

If you are right then YES! Give Shaw a game as a 2nd ruckman.

[ugg]

Originally posted by Tuesday
But isn't Sandilands still injured?
Perfect opportunity.

No, he's been back for a few weeks now. But they only played with one ruckman (Sandilands) against Geelong. They even dropped their pseudo-second ruckman Polak.

[Jeffers1984]

Chambers 196cm Vs Sandilands 213 cm....i shudder at the thought.