Best 22 Round 1 2022

[Roadrunner]

On the basis that I like him. He is young, and raw and not perfect, but I like him.

Who would you change him for?

BR, we can all like him but the issue is he had quite a few chances last year, and he didn’t deliver. He ma
get a few more games this year but he has clearly slipped in the pecking order and now I would rather see some of our new recruits before selecting him. He needs to find form in the resssies and knock the door down first. Sorry, it’s a tough business!

[TheBloods]

BR, we can all like him but the issue is he had quite a few chances last year, and he didn’t deliver. He ma
get a few more games this year but he has clearly slipped in the pecking order and now I would rather see some of our new recruits before selecting him. He needs to find form in the resssies and knock the door down first. Sorry, it’s a tough business!

Hes nothing special but is very reliable in his role . Doesn 't need to be a star , just does his job , no complaints

[Bangalore Swans]

Time for him to step up because papley is out ! Was n't bagging him

TheBloods is a big supporter of Wicks.

I’m just about the only poster on Red and White who has expressed reservations about Wicks.

With Papley out, Wicks is in my starting 22.

[Roadrunner]

Hes nothing special but is very reliable in his role . Doesn 't need to be a star , just does his job , no complaints

With all due respect TB, we need better than that if we are to be to top 4 or challenge for the flag. Sure, not every player needs to be a star ( but would be great if that were possible!) however we need a much higher level of contribution than James has been able to deliver. This is also my reservation regarding young Wicks, though I acknowledge that he applies forward pressure that helps our other forwards. To challenge or win a flag, which is our goal, all 6 forwards need to be constant goal threats. This means they all need to apply pressure, not just one player.

But this is just my opinion and many on here may disagree and that’s fine! I trust Horse and the coaching staff to make the best decisions, but they can and do make mistakes from time to time!????

[TheBloods]

With all due respect TB, we need better than that if we are to be to top 4 or challenge for the flag. Sure, not every player needs to be a star ( but would be great if that were possible!) however we need a much higher level of contribution than James has been able to deliver. This is also my reservation regarding young Wicks, though I acknowledge that he applies forward pressure that helps our other forwards. To challenge or win a flag, which is our goal, all 6 forwards need to be constant goal threats. This means they all need to apply pressure, not just one player.

But this is just my opinion and many on here may disagree and that’s fine! I trust Horse and the coaching staff to make the best decisions, but they can and do make mistakes from time to time!????

I didn 't say Bell should be one of our 6 fwds , just reckon he has a place on our list and unfairly cops it when he only plays a few games every yr and does an ok job

[graemed]

My best mate went to training during the week and was concerned about Ladhams training form. He said that Ladhans looked off the pace compared to similar size players like Amartey and McDonald.

Can other people who watch training confirm this account?

I may need to switch Amartey for Ladhams if this feedback is confirmed by multiple training spectators.

While training form is not necessarily playing form, I am basing my opinion on his Port Adelaide appearances. His is very effective as a marking forward and as we saw in the Albury game can kick accurately. My concerns especially compared to some of his direct competition (i.e. Reid, McLean and Amartey, in that order) is that he is either unwilling or unable to apply defensive pressure. It was one of the reasons for his lack of consistent selection last year and I'm sure it influenced their decision to trade him.

With Wicks, Papley, Hayward, Gulden, Bell, Parker, et al and even Franklin we have a defensive six that is able to maintain the positive turnovers required to win matches. Ladhams is likely to be exploited by opposition coaches and enable them to waltz the ball cleanly away after a switch to his opponent.

[Blood Relative]

BR, we can all like him but the issue is he had quite a few chances last year, and he didn’t deliver. He ma
get a few more games this year but he has clearly slipped in the pecking order and now I would rather see some of our new recruits before selecting him. He needs to find form in the resssies and knock the door down first. Sorry, it’s a tough business!

No need to say sorry, RR. It's all part of a healthy debate. Opinions are like noses, everyone has one!

[Ralph Dawg]

In the immediate aftermath, here's my R1 22
B Cunningham Rampe TMac
HB Blakey PMac Lloyd
C JMac Mills Florent
HF Heeney LMac Gulden
F McLean Franklin Hayward
Foll Hickey Parker Rowbottom
Int Warner JPK Stephens Campbell

Contentious spots:
McLean v Ladhams: McLean for me as he works harder. Btw Logan addressed any concerns I had about his workrate today. He was great.
Wicks v Campbell: Wicks was very fumbly. Also didn't look threatening around goals
Campbell was okay, with a few impressive trademark passes. He looks stronger overall and can cover positions right around the park.

[Aprilbr]

In the immediate aftermath, here's my R1 22
B Cunningham Rampe TMac
HB Blakey PMac Lloyd
C JMac Mills Florent
HF Heeney LMac Gulden
F McLean Franklin Hayward
Foll Hickey Parker Rowbottom
Int Warner JPK Stephens Campbell

Contentious spots:
McLean v Ladhams: McLean for me as he works harder. Btw Logan addressed any concerns I had about his workrate today. He was great.
Wicks v Campbell: Wicks was very fumbly. Also didn't look threatening around goals
Campbell was okay, with a few impressive trademark passes. He looks stronger overall and can cover positions right around the park.

I think that's a good team but I question 3 big guys on the forward line at once (Buddy, McLean, McDonald). But I guess one of them may be on the bench at any point in time. I feel Ladhams may be given the nod for Rd 1 over McLean but would need to perform to hold his spot.

[Ralph Dawg]

I think that's a good team but I question 3 big guys on the forward line at once (Buddy, McLean, McDonald). But I guess one of them may be on the bench at any point in time. I feel Ladhams may be given the nod for Rd 1 over McLean but would need to perform to hold his spot.

We often seem to be undersized in our forward line when we play GWS. Davis, Taylor, Haynes and Keefe (all pushing or over 200cm) are likely to play and then guys like Ash and Cummings are both 185cm plus. I think we will definitely take a 3rd tall forward. There's enough flexibility in our squad to field a smaller forward line throughout the game if required.

Forgot to mention JPK off half back. I thought he was ok. Certainly tall and strong enough to play defence and that short "chiseler" kick is the best in the business - good tool to hit a target when coming back into the corridor.

[i'm-uninformed2]

In the immediate aftermath, here's my R1 22
B Cunningham Rampe TMac
HB Blakey PMac Lloyd
C JMac Mills Florent
HF Heeney LMac Gulden
F McLean Franklin Hayward
Foll Hickey Parker Rowbottom
Int Warner JPK Stephens Campbell

Contentious spots:
McLean v Ladhams: McLean for me as he works harder. Btw Logan addressed any concerns I had about his workrate today. He was great.
Wicks v Campbell: Wicks was very fumbly. Also didn't look threatening around goals
Campbell was okay, with a few impressive trademark passes. He looks stronger overall and can cover positions right around the park.

I think this is a pretty good stab at things. Though I wonder with Campbell playing back today, the competition for the spot up front is between Wicks and Hayward, particularly if Heeney might need to spend a little more time forward during Paps absence.

[AB Swannie]

Given all the positive chat around the pre-season I thought I'd refresh this thread. The main reason being as a reminder of how difficult it actually is to fit everyone in to a 22.

My current team if forced to pick Round 1 would be:

FB: Cunningham, T. McCartin, Blakey
HB: Lloyd, Rampe, McInerney
C: Florent, Kennedy, Heeney
HF: Hayward, McDonald, Gulden
F: Papley, Franklin, Ch Warner
Foll: Hickey, Parker, Mills
Int: Campbell, Rowbottom, Stephens, Ladhams
Sub: Wicks

Update from my 30 Jan team:

FB: Cunningham, T. McCartin, Rampe
HB: Lloyd, P. McCartin, McInerney
C: Florent, Ch Warner, Stephens
HF: Heeney, McDonald, Gulden
F: Hayward, Franklin, Ladhams
Foll: Hickey, Parker, Mills
Int: Blakey, Campbell, Rowbottom, JPK
Sub: Wicks

Toss of a coin between Hayward and Wicks.

[Auntie.Gerald]

agree AB.
that looks pretty close to the 22 depending who we play and match ups.
will be exciting to watch the development of Paddy as a Key Defender as we very much need a mobile 195cm key def

[mcs]

Update from my 30 Jan team:

FB: Cunningham, T. McCartin, Rampe
HB: Lloyd, P. McCartin, McInerney
C: Florent, Ch Warner, Stephens
HF: Heeney, McDonald, Gulden
F: Hayward, Franklin, Ladhams
Foll: Hickey, Parker, Mills
Int: Blakey, Campbell, Rowbottom, JPK
Sub: Wicks

Toss of a coin between Hayward and Wicks.

Pretty close AB, but I think McLean might get the nod over Ladhams perhaps. But hard to know given it sounds like they sent Ladhams back to get a full game in rucking yesterday (I assume as much for match practice/conditioning as anything) and doesn't seem to be much/any intel coming out of that game at this point to have much idea how he went. Going to be an interesting call.

Hayward v Wicks is another one. I think Wicks will play, but I'm not sure it is Hayward that will out if he does. Maybe Campbell v Wicks for the last spot. Great to see the depth really starting to build in the list that makes it hard to see clearly what our best 22 will be.

[Bangalore Swans]

Update from my 30 Jan team:

FB: Cunningham, T. McCartin, Rampe
HB: Lloyd, P. McCartin, McInerney
C: Florent, Ch Warner, Stephens
HF: Heeney, McDonald, Gulden
F: Hayward, Franklin, Ladhams
Foll: Hickey, Parker, Mills
Int: Blakey, Campbell, Rowbottom, JPK
Sub: Wicks

Toss of a coin between Hayward and Wicks.

Like that team. I would have Lloyd on the bench and Blakey starting off half back.

Imagine the extra ball moving capability we now have with Paddy playing key defence. There were many opportunities for Melican to switch the ball last year that he wouldn’t take because he was an inferior kick to Paddy. Now Paddy can switch the ball flat at 55m distance and Blakey, Campbell and J-Mac are going to run opposing teams ragged out of defence.

With Paddy their will be less kicks down the line and more entertaining football. “You Beauty “.

When Papley is ready I think Rowbotttom goes to sub.