Changes for Rnd 3 v Port Power

[ShockOfHair]

I agree it is a danger game. Port are a much better team this year and they're angry at having let Essendon go last week. THey should have Robbie Gray and maybe Butcher back.

Bad news about Smith, but I doubt Armstrong will get the call. He's only played one game. Hannebery will go into the 21 and maybe Harry or Nipper will be the sub.

[Auntie.Gerald]

i agree

my guess is:

Smith out and Harry or Nipper in.......Nipper for me based on ressies last week

Seabs out and Mummy in

LRT out and White in

Hannes to midfield for shaw's midfield run with role and Shaw back to HBF for Smithy and McGlynn getting more in minutes tagging and Nipper playing some upfront time when he comes on

White has the experience of the role LRT plays but Walsh, Pyke and or Seabs are not to far off in the near future

[Big Al]

-Mummy in for LRT
-Harry in for Smooch

Armstrong needs more match fitness and Nippers performance last week wasn't great.

Port were pretty good against the aints in Rd1 so we need to be on our game otherwise we could get a surprise.

[longmile]

Teams are up: Seaby, Smith and LRT out.
Mumford back in, with White given another chance and Everitt.
I'm starting to wonder about Longmire's mental health. Everitt? Seriously?! He's easily the worst player in that 22. TDL, Lamb, Armstrong or Nipper should surely get a run over this lethargic excuse for a player

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Not easily the worst, but I don't see how Everitt = Smith in any sense without really changing the structure. To be honest, Everitt is generally smarter around the ground than White, but I'm happy to see J-Dub back.

[Triple B]

I'm starting to wonder about Longmire's mental health. Everitt? Seriously?! He's easily the worst player in that 22. TDL, Lamb, Armstrong or Nipper should surely get a run over this lethargic excuse for a player

Settle down, you can be guaranteed Everitt will be the sub, which he is actually quite suited to because although he aint great, he IS versatile. The others, especially Armstrong, are better served playing full games in the 2's.

[longmile]

Settle down, you can be guaranteed Everitt will be the sub, which he is actually quite suited to because although he aint great, he IS versatile. The others, especially Armstrong, are better served playing full games in the 2's.

It would be good to see the players who have been working hard and performing well in the reserves get a break over players who have been repeatedly tried and just aren't up to scratch.

[Big Al]

It would be good to see the players who have been working hard and performing well in the reserves get a break over players who have been repeatedly tried and just aren't up to scratch.

Armstrong needs match fitness, I love Nipper but he was poor last week and TDL is a forward and isn't versatile as a sub. At least Everitt can cover other positions as the sub.

[lwjoyner]

agree with comments re Everitt that is those saying he shouldnt be played. Irregardless of sub Gords appears to be the best from reserves last week so why not him. AE was worse than hopeless in the first game and it was only against the Giants.

[Triple B]

It would be good to see the players who have been working hard and performing well in the reserves get a break over players who have been repeatedly tried and just aren't up to scratch.

I don't disagree with you at all, but imo, there has been nobody absolutely banging down the door in the seconds demanding selection. If there was, methinks they would be on the plane to Adelaide and Everitt would probably be Canberra bound.

[Big Al]

Please Please Jesse take this chance with both hands.

[Triple B]

Irregardless of sub Gords appears to be the best from reserves last week so why not him..

As I said in a thread earlier in the week, I really can't see how Nipper was named in the bests. I thought it was the worst game he has played in 12 months.

[ShockOfHair]

If you're named in the starting 18 doesn't that rule you out as sub?

Or have I just made up that rule?

[Triple B]

If you're named in the starting 18 doesn't that rule you out as sub?

Or have I just made up that rule?

It's not a rule, but I believe in all matches last year for Sydney, that was the case.

I have a suspicion though that Hanners was named in the starting 18 last week. Anybody confirm? (My record is downstairs but I'm too lazy to run down and get it.....shutup Al)...

[JudesaGun]

Surely Everitt will start as sub and Longmire will look to replace White late in the game? In effect, allowing both to compete for probably only one spot that is available moving forward? Not a bad move IMO.