Changes for next week.

[liz]

If White goes into the ruck then it's time for Dennis-Lane to debut.

From the games I have seen, TDL's performance in the twos have been very underwhelming so far, apart from the final quarter of one game a couple of weeks ago. That said, it could very well be that he is the kind of player (and plays the kind of role) who will perform better in a more structured side and with more consistently good quality players around him. Given he was flying during the pre-season, you'd think he's had enough time back to regain any fitness lost from a relatively short time out with his injury.

Depending on what they choose to do with the ruck situation, and whether Hanners is ready to return, it is possible that Vez could get a chance this week, though I've not been overly impressed by the last couple of reserves games of his that I have seen.

[UglyDuckling]

ill go pretty conservative

IN: Hanners, LRT, McGlynn (All in our best 22 if fit imo) Currie (we need 2 ruckman because pyke cant ruck 70%-80% of the game alone at this stage. he's deserving of a debut, in the best of the 2's almost every week)

OUT: Barlow (obvious), Mummy (suspended), Moore (injured), Smith (working on the last in first out policy he would be next cab off the rank to get dropped) OR Mattner (if we keep smith in to play a lockdown small defender Mattner would be out for team balance) OR Rohan (didnt have a great game last week but i would rather see him play a couple in a row to get some confidence)

[Old Royboy]

One thing that has been very obvious (to me at least) in the ressies this year is that Currie has been a far better ruckmen than Pyke. While Pyke just bangs his taps anywhere Crusher actually looks and taps to advantage. Crusher also has far more idea where to go in general play. The doubt is whether he will actually get his hands on it at the top level. I know I am biased, but I think he should get a go. A pity he had a bad one two weeks ago, but they named among the best of an apparently bad lot last week. In any case, the club has already shown that form in the ressies is not a criteria for elevation, exhibits A and B being Turnover Ted and the Cheese.

[Bloody Hell]

ill go pretty conservative

IN: Hanners, LRT, McGlynn (All in our best 22 if fit imo) Currie (we need 2 ruckman because pyke cant ruck 70%-80% of the game alone at this stage. he's deserving of a debut, in the best of the 2's almost every week)

OUT: Barlow (obvious), Mummy (suspended), Moore (injured), Smith (working on the last in first out policy he would be next cab off the rank to get dropped) OR Mattner (if we keep smith in to play a lockdown small defender Mattner would be out for team balance) OR Rohan (didnt have a great game last week but i would rather see him play a couple in a row to get some confidence)

Mattner or Smith will NOT be dropped, and working on a last in, first out policy wouldn't Rohan be the next cab off the rank.

[ugg]

Paul Bevan, as much as everyone wants to conveniently 'forget' about him:
1. He was an emergency last week
2. He would slot into Moore's small/defensive forward position.

[Triple B]

Just like a swear filter, we need a preposterous post filter, where posters who post preposterous posts (try saying that 3 times quickly) get locked out until 5pm thursdays when teams are announced.

This week we start with anybody who suggests Nick Smith should be dropped.

[chalbilto]

If he gets selected I hope that he will play as a forward and not in he backs.

[ugg]

ill go pretty conservative

IN: Hanners, LRT, McGlynn (All in our best 22 if fit imo) Currie (we need 2 ruckman because pyke cant ruck 70%-80% of the game alone at this stage. he's deserving of a debut, in the best of the 2's almost every week)

OUT: Barlow (obvious), Mummy (suspended), Moore (injured), Smith (working on the last in first out policy he would be next cab off the rank to get dropped) OR Mattner (if we keep smith in to play a lockdown small defender Mattner would be out for team balance) OR Rohan (didnt have a great game last week but i would rather see him play a couple in a row to get some confidence)

Last in first out would be Richards. Not that I'm a subscriber to that theory.

[Bloody Hell]

Rohan?!?

Last in first out would be Richards. Not that I'm a subscriber to that theory.

[ugg]

Rohan?!?

Now who's being preposterous!

Good pick up.

[hot potato]

Just like a swear filter, we need a preposterous post filter, where posters who post preposterous posts (try saying that 3 times quickly) get locked out until 5pm thursdays when teams are announced.

This week we start with anybody who suggests Nick Smith should be dropped.

Your preposterousness is a bit paranoid BBB, but i understand your profound point.
hp

[Bloody Hell]

Now who's being preposterous!

Good pick up.

Post #154...bad miss

[Jewels]

Just like a swear filter, we need a preposterous post filter, where posters who post preposterous posts (try saying that 3 times quickly) get locked out until 5pm thursdays when teams are announced.

This week we start with anybody who suggests Nick Smith should be dropped.

Yep, I'll second that motion!
We're all pretty hyped after being screwed over by the AFL once again, but boy, some of the things on here are from the twilight zone!
Last in, first out - WHAT!!!! That's a joke surely! Using this theory, if CBolts (for example), is fit to come back in four weeks, that means Mummy will have been the last one back in two weeks prior, so we drop Mummy for CBolts! RIGHT!!!!!!

[Peace]

swans to strike if mumford doesnt get let off.

[digital]

A very sensible suggestion Peace, a little drastic, but would set the cat among the pigeons.