Changes for Rnd 18 V The Doggies

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • ernie koala
    Senior Player
    • May 2007
    • 3251

    #16
    Originally posted by CJK
    Dare I ask - Mummy for Seabs?
    I agree, Mummy has been ordinary the since coming back,.
    Seaby mightn't be as physical but he has been in better form and is more versatile.

    Outs : Kennelly; ( that 50mt was the last straw, no matter how bad the umpiring was he held on to the pill far too long)
    White ; (unfortunately his papers are now stamped, and any compensation will be the bare minimum). IMO, should of been tried in defence but it's too late now.
    Mumford ; has given little around the ground except for frees against.
    Jetta ; Needs to get some confidence and game time in the 2's

    Ins : Bolton
    Seaby
    Gordon
    TDL
    Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect... MT

    Comment

    • GongSwan
      Senior Player
      • Jan 2009
      • 1362

      #17
      I'd have to leave Mummy in, he needs the match fitness and should improve. Bolton comes in for White. If we drop irish we need to move Shaw back to a HBF, and stop his run with role which means we would still need Bird. Parks stays and rotates thru the forward line and mid, along with Bolton. If its wet drop Jetta and bring in?????????? where's Rohan at? is there any more speed we can bring in, the Bullies will be looking to run us ragged
      You can't argue with a sick mind - Joe Walsh

      Comment

      • Plugger46
        Senior Player
        • Apr 2003
        • 3674

        #18
        Mumford is a far better footballer than Seaby. Will not get dropped and shouldn't get dropped.
        Bloods

        "Lockett is the best of all time" - Robert Harvey, Darrel Baldock, Nathan Burke, Kevin Bartlett, Bob Skilton

        Comment

        • Captain
          Captain of the Side
          • Feb 2004
          • 3602

          #19
          Its bull@@@@ that they both can't play in the same team. One of them can then be subbed off in the 3rd qtr so we have more run in the last.

          Comment

          • ernie koala
            Senior Player
            • May 2007
            • 3251

            #20
            Originally posted by Plugger46
            Mumford is a far better footballer than Seaby. Will not get dropped and shouldn't get dropped.
            They are different type of ruckman. But if we judge them on recent form...Mumford is not better.
            I'm a big Mummy fan, but his form at the moment is ordinary, particularly around the ground in general play.
            I still have that uncontested mark he dropped against Collingwood, when the game was in the balance, imprinted in my mind.
            Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect... MT

            Comment

            • Melbourne_Blood
              Senior Player
              • May 2010
              • 3312

              #21
              Mummy's best footy is near All australian, thats without him taking grabs or impacting the score board ( which he doesnt do a lot of). Thats pure ruckwork, pressure, clearance work. When he is firing, he is another midfielder. He hasnt been anywhere near that since he first went out of the side this year, but to say he's no better than Seaby, sheesh, some people must have a short memory.

              That being said, Seaby's form this year has been really very good and i'm one of the " Seaby and Mummy can play together " band wagoners. It was tried, what, once and didnt work. Oh, i guess that settles it then.

              Comment

              • MattW
                Veterans List
                • May 2011
                • 4220

                #22
                Mummy is absolutely better than Seaby. He's one of our most important players. We've missed him. We should be giving him as much game time as we can. It's certainly not the time to muck around with pushing him out of the team.

                OUT: White, Kennelly
                IN: Spangher (if fit), Bolton

                If Spangher isn't fit then either TDL or maybe even Seaby.

                Comment

                • BSA5
                  Senior Player
                  • Feb 2008
                  • 2522

                  #23
                  Mumford had 52 hitouts and 6 tackles FFS. There is no way in hell he should be dropped. If Seaby comes in, it's for White.
                  Officially on the Reid and Sumner bandwagon!

                  Comment

                  • Dan
                    Warming the Bench
                    • Oct 2010
                    • 338

                    #24
                    The only way Mumford will be out is if the MRP finds him guilty, then Seaby comes in. If McGlynn is suspended I would like Nipper Gordon to come in.
                    I See It But I Don't Believe It!!!!

                    Comment

                    • SwansFan1972
                      On the Rookie List
                      • Nov 2008
                      • 621

                      #25
                      Originally posted by stellation


                      Would the AFL dare send any of the field umpires from this week back to the SCG so soon?
                      Well, they are always in the right, so probably!

                      More likely they'll send our other favourite (S McInerney) instead ....

                      Comment

                      • SwansFan1972
                        On the Rookie List
                        • Nov 2008
                        • 621

                        #26
                        Originally posted by Captain
                        Its bull@@@@ that they both can't play in the same team. One of them can then be subbed off in the 3rd qtr so we have more run in the last.
                        Interesting idea, but I think they are still scarred from trying just that earlier this year (Melbourne game and maybe only one other time I think)?.

                        Would be interested (genuinely, not being a smart arse) in your views on how bringing a fresh ruckman on would provide more run. I think the conventional wisdom across the league under these new arrangements has been to sub on a speedster mid. With only 2/3 of a season under everyone's belt, the ideal use of the sub rule has probably not been figured out yet.

                        Comment

                        • Panttz
                          Warming the Bench
                          • May 2011
                          • 231

                          #27
                          He means subbing one of the 2 ruckman (that were chosen in the initial team) out for a running mid. So we lose a tall and gain some speed.

                          Comment

                          • Captain
                            Captain of the Side
                            • Feb 2004
                            • 3602

                            #28
                            Originally posted by SwansFan1972
                            Interesting idea, but I think they are still scarred from trying just that earlier this year (Melbourne game and maybe only one other time I think)?.

                            Would be interested (genuinely, not being a smart arse) in your views on how bringing a fresh ruckman on would provide more run. I think the conventional wisdom across the league under these new arrangements has been to sub on a speedster mid. With only 2/3 of a season under everyone's belt, the ideal use of the sub rule has probably not been figured out yet.
                            At the moment we play 2 tall forwards, a ruckman and a forward/ruckman. I'm simply suggesting playing 2 tall forwards and 2 genuine ruckman - swapping a tall for a tall and therefore not limiting our run. Sub off one of the ruckmen for a mid in the 3rd qtr will give us fresh legs and more run in the last.

                            Comment

                            • SwansFan1972
                              On the Rookie List
                              • Nov 2008
                              • 621

                              #29
                              Originally posted by Captain
                              At the moment we play 2 tall forwards, a ruckman and a forward/ruckman. I'm simply suggesting playing 2 tall forwards and 2 genuine ruckman - swapping a tall for a tall and therefore not limiting our run. Sub off one of the ruckmen for a mid in the 3rd qtr will give us fresh legs and more run in the last.
                              Gotcha. Thanks! Pretty obvious actually - I must have been having a blonde moment (apologies to all blondes)!

                              Comment

                              • Plugger46
                                Senior Player
                                • Apr 2003
                                • 3674

                                #30
                                Originally posted by Captain
                                Its bull@@@@ that they both can't play in the same team. One of them can then be subbed off in the 3rd qtr so we have more run in the last.
                                Seaby's yet to prove he can have an impact as that 2nd ruckman/forward role. I think the Carlton game proved that we can't play both.
                                Bloods

                                "Lockett is the best of all time" - Robert Harvey, Darrel Baldock, Nathan Burke, Kevin Bartlett, Bob Skilton

                                Comment

                                Working...