Change to team vs Brisbane

[Piobaireachd]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Right... so Roos was playing games with the Lions by pretending Mathews was out, but really planned to play him all along, but wanted to keep it such a surprise he didn't even name him as an emergency? Wow - masterstroke there. Can see that made all the difference and must have really had the Lions' coaching box scratching their heads...

correct.

no conspiracy theory really. I'm just passing time. But my theories hold true in that what the coaching staff know, and what we know is millenia apart. You know NOTHING, I know NOTHING, we can SPECULATE all we like but I'd bet that they know more than we do for the reasons of selecting who they select. And I'd also bet that the selection is NOT based on playing favourites, but based football knowledge.

It really is a simple universe I live in. why do u not conform?

edit: there are those that are in the know, and those that think they know. Which one are you? (rhetorical question, not directed at you NMW but to be answered by all and sundry on these boards.)

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Piobaireachd
correct.

no conspiracy theory really. I'm just passing time. But my theories hold true in that what the coaching staff know, and what we know is millenia apart. You know NOTHING, I know NOTHING, we can SPECULATE all we like but I'd bet that they know more than we do for the reasons of selecting who they select. And I'd also bet that the selection is NOT based on playing favourites, but based football knowledge.

It really is a simple universe I live in. why do u not conform?

edit: there are those that are in the know, and those that think they know. Which one are you? (rhetorical question, not directed at you NMW but to be answered by all and sundry on these boards.)

Nothing you've said addresses my query. If Mathews wasn't ready why play him in the seniors? If he was ready to play in the seniors why say he's not ready and name him in the reserves. It makes no sense.

[ugg]

The only reason Mathews played instead of Schmidt or Vogels was that he had to replace the Ablett in the role he was earmarked for - tagging Luke Power.

[ugg]

O'Keefe probably deserves the 3 but Goodes will get it because his play is very noticeable. Whereas ROK works his butt off around the ground, Goodes's possessions are just simply breathtaking and would attract the umpires' attention.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by ugg
The only reason Mathews played instead of Schmidt or Vogels was that he had to replace the Ablett in the role he was earmarked for - tagging Luke Power.

Fair point, but if Mathews really needed a run in the reserves, I'm sure we could have covered Power.

We seem overly obsessed with shutting down the opposition. We play most of the game like this when we could have blown them away.

[Piobaireachd]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Nothing you've said addresses my query. If Mathews wasn't ready why play him in the seniors? If he was ready to play in the seniors why say he's not ready and name him in the reserves. It makes no sense.

Mate, it does address your query. You know nothing about the team and the whyfors and whatnots. Neither do I. but I can speculate this... Matthew was brought into the team as a ready made, experienced seniors player to play a role on probably one of the lion's most decorated players. How simple is that??? Beggars belief your line of questioning.

edit: and don't bother trying to extrapulate any more "reasons" for my beliefs from me. That's what I think and you can just live with disagreeing. ok?

[JudesaGun]

So how did Matthews actually do? Better than Davis?

[swantastic]

Originally posted by ugg
Mathews to replace Ablett in the role he was earmarked for - tagging Luke Power.

I thought Benny did a good job.

[Piobaireachd]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Fair point, but if Mathews really needed a run in the reserves, I'm sure we could have covered Power.

We seem overly obsessed with shutting down the opposition. We play most of the game like this when we could have blown them away.

We did blow them away. 50 odd points is nothing to sneeze at in my books. On the other hand some people are just never happy.

[ugg]

Yes, amazingly Benny is very good at stopping jobs as long as he doesn't have to touch the ball. The inclusion that I was unhappy about was Bevan ahead of Schmidt.

[Piobaireachd]

Originally posted by JudesaGun
So how did Matthews actually do? Better than Davis?

I think both played their respective roles. Matthews probably addressed his role better, but thats just from the perspective of looking at the whole match and not the individual performances.

[Piobaireachd]

Originally posted by ugg
Yes, amazingly Benny is very good at stopping jobs as long as he doesn't have to touch the ball. The inclusion that I was unhappy about was Bevan ahead of Schmidt.

Look bevan is a fringe player at best, but at this stage of the year, I don't think schmidt would have offered anymore in terms of short term value. ie looking towards finals.

edit: don't take that "Look" bit as condescending. Iwas in a sighing "yeah I agree with you but" kind of mood.

hell this thread is has got the most out of me in my whole time on RWO. generally I don't feel obliged to share my thoughts

[ugg]

If Bevan was there to do a job on someone that it would be understandable. To me it seemed he wasn't assigned to anyone in particular and played mostly in the midfield, a position I think Schmidt would have offered much more.

[swantastic]

Originally posted by ugg
The inclusion that I was unhappy about was Bevan ahead of Schmidt.

I wasnt,i thought Bevan did a pretty good job last night his best IMO.

[nomae]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
We play most of the game like this when we could have blown them away.

57 points seems like a 'blowing away' to me...