Tweet
Ins. McGlynn?
Outs. Hmmm this is a hard one. It would have to be Towers or Goodes or Laidler and Rohan goes back.
Sub Heeney.
Outs. Hmmm this is a hard one. It would have to be Towers or Goodes or Laidler and Rohan goes back.
Sub Heeney.
-
-
Hate to say it but McGlynn for Goodes.
Heeney as sub to give him a rest to be ready for Subiaco the following week.
Based on the last 2 games Laidler & Towers offered more.Chillin' with the strange Quarks -
Heeney sub? Do you even supercoach?
Mcglynn in for towers for me, Towers played well but Mcglynn is obviously better.
Can't afford to lose pace, have to keep Rohan in.Comment
-
Changes for Rnd 3 V GWS = none!
---end of thread---"Fortunately, this is the internet, so knowing nothing is no obstacle to having an opinion!." Beerman 18-07-2017Comment
-
Has to be Goodes out for McGlynn. It was perhaps the first game I've seen where they could have gotten away without activating the sub at all, other than to give Rohan's legs a rest. Goodes unfortunately had limited impact?and by the time he got on the ground, there was little left to be done. He looked as keen as ever?perhaps too keen, overbaking a handful of disposals?but I wonder whether the team has developed to the point that a post-Goodes world is not nearly as bleak as we might have once suspected.
Towers deserves his place. His chase and forward pressure was fantastic, as was Rohan's. When Rohan sticks a few more tackles, his game will be first class. His run was amazing, as was a great deal of his kicking. His combination with Buddy is developing both along the wing and inside 50. Good to see McVeigh, Shaw and Pyke flying the flag a bit against Port, too.Comment
-
Agree with others....Unfortunately, it's blindingly obvious...
OUT : Goodes
IN : McGlynn
I suppose Mitchell (listed as our best in the 2's) will have to bide his time for now.
Allthough, if Horse wants to keep every one on their toes....Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect... MTComment
-
The only change that could possibly contemplated after that performance, if the list is healthy, would be either Goodes into the 21 or into the reserves to get some game time. Can't judge Goode's performance on the few minutes that he had so perhaps it will be one of the other players to the bench as the only change (Heeney would be sensible, don't want to burn him out).
McGlynn, Mitchell and BJ will have to wait.We have them where we want them, everything is going according to plan!Comment
-
Rohan's tackling and enthusiasm were good but was he responsible for Pittard? I'm not Jasper's biggest fan and he didn't really hurt us but gee he got a lot of the footy.
McGlynn in for Towers for if it was my choice but I'm expecting no change. Not a hope in hell Goodes will be running around in the NEAFL.Bloods
"Lockett is the best of all time" - Robert Harvey, Darrel Baldock, Nathan Burke, Kevin Bartlett, Bob SkiltonComment
-
I have to agree with out for Goodes. He looked lost when he came on the ground. Did not know what to do. The great Jude Bolton keeps saying he has gone one to many.Comment
-
Not sure about the sub, but I reluctantly agree with you on the 'out', if McGlynn is to come in. On form, Goodes has to go, but this would be awkward, and I'm not sure that Horse could do it at this early stage in the season, and might see playing the GWS as a good time to let Goodes get decent game time. If this is the case, who goes out becomes a very tough question.Comment
-
The important question is... What is the weather going to be??Comment
-
I think your being a bit harsh on Towers. Looks better than the great man at the moment. It's a harsh truth, but one we all knew was coming this season........I agree with Jude, he has probably gone one season too long. We all suspected this would be the case when he announced he was playing on, sadly it's coming to fruition.Comment
-
Comment
-
McGlynn has a history of hamstring injuries, so I'd give him another week in the ressies to get up to speed before bringing him in.
I think Mitchell is the one that should be given a crack this week, probably as the sub in place of Goodes. He was the first named in the best player list in the reserves and we know he can play.
We have to face the reality that Goodes is unlikely to improve enough to be truly in our best 22. If we want to honour Goodes, we should name a pavilion after him, but we if we want to challenge for a premiership, then we have to develop our younger players. I don't want to find ourselves in a situation where Mitchell or Jones want to be traded for lack of opportunity when we are 'gifting' games to a player on reputation rather than contribution. We need to separate our respect for Adam, and I have the very highest respect for him, from playing performance. And if there is doubt about who to select, especially early in the season, I would go with youth.
Rohan an Towers are making decent contributions. They haven't played that much football and both are showing improvement from last year. As long a they continue to improve, I'd be keeping them in the side. Both have made multiple contributions to our scoring.
We shouldn't forget the Cunningham played 26 consecutive games before being dropped. He ain't bad, but seems a bit out of form and has to go harder in the contest; he should be challenging for his spot very soon.
So we are going to be confronted with a 'drop Goodes' scenario all season, unless he miraculously recovers his abilities of yesteryear.Last edited by Ludwig; 13 April 2015, 12:22 PM.Comment
Comment