Who makes way for Spida and Fossy?

[Bloody Hell]

One thing's for sure, with the emergence of the young players there are entrenched senior players who are going to have to make the transition from gameday regulars to depth players.

Is Davis the first?

[ernie koala]

One thing's for sure, with the emergence of the young players there are entrenched senior players who are going to have to make the transition from gameday regulars to depth players.

Is Davis the first?

No...Mathews is the first, Crouch is the second.
Hopefully Davis will replace Grundy or Bevan

[NMWBloods]

Ablett? No, no, no. Ablett is a really great player. Sure, his disposal isn't all that flash, but he is a brilliant tagger. He isn't quick, but he isn't slow enough that it really disadvantages him. He has a great tank. And, he is a tough nut, with a booming kick. He is very important to our side. Without him doing his job week in, week out, we would be eaten alive by any decent midfield.

IMO he's neither a really great player nor a brilliant tagger. Take that down a couple of levels and you'd be right. If we had players who could get the ball and dispose of it well, then we would be a decent midfield!

[barry]

Bird will go for Fosdike.

Grundy will go for Spida.

J. Bolton should go for Davis.

I'd be suprised if J.Bolton gets dropped. He's a protected species (from Roos).

While there is talk of Davis coming back this week, I'm not sure who would make way. Depends on matchups I guess.

[NMWBloods]

Hence "should" rather than "will".

The only one that could go for Davis is Bird. At some point Bird will be dropped, it's just a matter of when.

[Pace To Burn]

Hence "should" rather than "will".

The only one that could go for Davis is Bird. At some point Bird will be dropped, it's just a matter of when.

I dont think he should go if he keeps up what hes been doing. Has def showed enough and has been getting enough of the ball himself as well as holding his opponents possesions to a minimum.

[NMWBloods]

Being such a young player I think he will get an extended rest at some point through the season.

[Plugger46]

Ablett? No, no, no. Ablett is a really great player. Sure, his disposal isn't all that flash, but he is a brilliant tagger. He isn't quick, but he isn't slow enough that it really disadvantages him. He has a great tank. And, he is a tough nut, with a booming kick. He is very important to our side. Without him doing his job week in, week out, we would be eaten alive by any decent midfield. He is one player who always flies under the radar because he isn't flashy, but there is a reason he gets picked every week. If he was in for his ball use, speed and possession-getting ability, then Roos would be mad. But he's not. He is a tagger who consistently does his job, and does his job well, and if we're lucky, picks up a few possessions himself, and sends a couple of booming kicks inside 50. Unless he's injured, or his game really takes a turn for the worse, the day he is dropped is the day I hunt down Roos and give him a piece of my mind face to face.

I don't think he's usless. Reasonable player, and a reasonable tagger but not a really great player or a brilliant tagger in my opinion.

I just think Fosdike's record in big games, and what he gives us from an attacking point of view is more important than what Ablett or Bolton give us.

[BSA5]

IMO he's neither a really great player nor a brilliant tagger. Take that down a couple of levels and you'd be right. If we had players who could get the ball and dispose of it well, then we would be a decent midfield!

He's a brilliant tagger, but doesn't have much going for him in the other departments, unlike Kirk, who is a superstar because he is not only a brilliant tagger, but a really great ballwinner and decision maker (even if his disposal is also suspect). So Ablett isn't a brilliant player, but he is still very good at his one job, to be the negating workhorse of our midfield.

[BSA5]

I don't think he's usless. Reasonable player, and a reasonable tagger but not a really great player or a brilliant tagger in my opinion.

I just think Fosdike's record in big games, and what he gives us from an attacking point of view is more important than what Ablett or Bolton give us.

If we were to lost Ablett, we would lose a lot of defensive capability through the midfield, and you NEED that. Look at Carlton; not a single decent tagger in their side, and their all-star midfield, with Judd, Stevens, Murphy, Gibbs, Carrazzo, etc, is getting massacred every week, because they just don't have the shutting-down ability needed. In the past, the Swans have gone overboard with taggers. Now, with Matthews out of the side, Bevan being thrust forward on occasions and McVeigh being allowed to ignore his man completely, I think the balance is just about right. If we lose Ablett, we start heading Carlton's way. Bolton isn't a defensive midfielder really; he's a hard-ball winner who likes to tackle, but with Bird, Jack and Moore in the side now, I think we have enough of these. Unless he pulls some good form out of his arse, he should be the one making way for Fosdike. To lose Ablett would be taking TOO offensive a mindset, and we would end up like Carlton; heaps of attacking midfielders who get massacred every time the opposition win the ball.

[NMWBloods]

He's a brilliant tagger, but doesn't have much going for him in the other departments, unlike Kirk, who is a superstar because he is not only a brilliant tagger, but a really great ballwinner and decision maker (even if his disposal is also suspect). So Ablett isn't a brilliant player, but he is still very good at his one job, to be the negating workhorse of our midfield.

I don't think he's a brilliant tagger. Reasonably good.

A brilliant tagger is Kirk or Rawlings or Cornes.
Ablett is a couple of notches below them (on the tagging side, not to mention the offensive side).

As I said if we could get better midfielders, who could do what midfielders are meant to do, which is get the ball and deliver it forward, then perhaps we could focus less on tagging. I look forward to that day.

[NMWBloods]

If we were to lost Ablett, we would lose a lot of defensive capability through the midfield, and you NEED that. Look at Carlton; not a single decent tagger in their side, and their all-star midfield, with Judd, Stevens, Murphy, Gibbs, Carrazzo, etc, is getting massacred every week, because they just don't have the shutting-down ability needed.

Carlton are struggling because of lack of discipline in the midfield and most particularly because of a poor backline.

In the past, the Swans have gone overboard with taggers. Now, with Matthews out of the side, Bevan being thrust forward on occasions and McVeigh being allowed to ignore his man completely, I think the balance is just about right. If we lose Ablett, we start heading Carlton's way.

We'd be nowhere near Carlton. Most teams have one or two taggers only. We have Kirk and now we also have Jack. Both of these can give something offensively too. Most effective teams rely on their midfields to be able to both get the ball and apply pressure to their opponents, without needing to overly rely on taggers, particularly the one-dimensional type.

[BSA5]

Carlton are struggling because of lack of discipline in the midfield and most particularly because of a poor backline.

We'd be nowhere near Carlton. Most teams have one or two taggers only. We have Kirk and now we also have Jack. Both of these can give something offensively too. Most effective teams rely on their midfields to be able to both get the ball and apply pressure to their opponents, without needing to overly rely on taggers, particularly the one-dimensional type.

I said "heading Carlton's way". I agree, we wouldn't be anywhere near them yet, but we don't want to be heading down that road.

I'm sorry, but I'm not willing to rely on Jack as a tagger, at least not yet. Play him in the occasional tagging role, especially when facing an all-star midfield like that of the Lions, but I'd rather see him playing primarily an attacking role early in his career. By the time Kirk retires, we'll have him ready to take full-time tagging jobs, but at the moment, he is a work-in-progress in that regard.

[liz]

I'm sorry, but I'm not willing to rely on Jack as a tagger, at least not yet. Play him in the occasional tagging role, especially when facing an all-star midfield like that of the Lions, but I'd rather see him playing primarily an attacking role early in his career. By the time Kirk retires, we'll have him ready to take full-time tagging jobs, but at the moment, he is a work-in-progress in that regard.

Most tagger-types travel in the opposite direction - ie they start out as taggers before progressing to becoming more offensive players. There is reason in that. It is thought - with justification - that playing on the best ballwinners early in your career helps a young player learn where to run to get the ball without relying on them having to read the play, as well as witness first hand some of the tricks of the best midfielders. The very best then progress to winning substantial possessions of their own - ala Kirk, Ling, Cornes, Rawlings, Sewell. The very very best - and those five are probably the best exponents at the moment - retain the ability to completely shut out an opponent while winning loads of it themselves at the same time.

For someone like Jack, who doesn't have the elite junior background of some of his more celebrated peers, it seems like a pretty sensible way to develop him. And as we've seen, he possesses the skills to make something out of those possessions he's able to win now.

[reigning premier]

as for the 2005 GF, I know he got 26 possies, but hardly any of them were damaging. He was left free because he was the least danger to the Eagles, (IMO)

Considering Roos rated him as our best on the day, either the coach or yourself have got it wrong. I'll back Roos on that one.

We all know that LRT was BOG in the 05 GF so let's not crack that old chestnut again.....