Author Topic: Teams for Round 1  (Read 6778 times)

Offline yellowandback

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4025
Re: Teams for Round 1
« Reply #15 on: March 24, 2010, 07:38:02 PM »
I hope we dont lose either vickery or simmonds to injury, we'll be faaaaaaaaarkt!
It's that simple Spud
"I discussed (it) with my three daughters, my wife and my 82-year-old mum, because it has really affected me … If those comments … were made about one of my daughters, it would make the hairs on the back of my neck stand up. I would not have liked it at all.”

Offline one-eyed

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 97542
    • One-Eyed Richmond
Re: Teams for Round 1
« Reply #16 on: March 24, 2010, 07:50:13 PM »
Healy on 3aw tonight said David King doesn't think Cousins should play.

Offline yellowandback

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4025
Re: Teams for Round 1
« Reply #17 on: March 24, 2010, 07:54:24 PM »
Healy on 3aw tonight said David King doesn't think Cousins should play.

and he is sooooo credible.
It's that simple Spud
"I discussed (it) with my three daughters, my wife and my 82-year-old mum, because it has really affected me … If those comments … were made about one of my daughters, it would make the hairs on the back of my neck stand up. I would not have liked it at all.”

Offline wayne

  • Fame of Hall
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 8458
  • In Absentia
Re: Teams for Round 1
« Reply #18 on: March 24, 2010, 08:02:36 PM »
Who's David King?
And you may not think I care for you
When you know down inside that I really do

Offline Stripes

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4261
Re: Teams for Round 1
« Reply #19 on: March 24, 2010, 08:30:38 PM »
I'm amazed Polak is an omission after all preseason structuring up with him taking the FF position. Judging on our size I can only draw the conclusion that we are aiming to out pace them and beat them for elusiveness.

If Simmonds can show Warnock up it will force Kruezer back into the middle and weaken then up forward. Game will be won or lost in the midfield as always.

Stripes

Offline RollsRoyce

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1296
Re: Teams for Round 1
« Reply #20 on: March 24, 2010, 08:53:01 PM »
So,let me get this straight, we have to cover a resting ruckman whose 200cm, plus two more forwards of 199cm and 196cm respectively, with Thursfield (192cm and a beanpole) McGuane (192cm and a stick insect) and Moore(190cm).
Meanwhile up forward, we have one tall marking option and basically five crumbers. :help




So your solution?



My solution? Structure up the side properly. We can't afford to play three undersized key defenders on giants.Instead of Moore,bring in say Post,or Rance. Why isn't Post even in the squad? If Carlton are going to have a resting ruckman at full-forward,then bring in Browne or Graham to sit in the hole and block off his supply. With the height mis-matches we have down back tomorrow on a dry night, this has the potential to get really ugly again.
Up forward, well we'll see how they set up. I'm hoping that Vickery starts on the ground, and spends a lot of time up forward.  I can't see Jack and five crumbers working. I would have liked a third tall marking option. I was at training today, and Astbury did the full session. I was disappointed he didn't make the cut. But if not him, then even Polak just as a decoy tall as mooted. Isn't that why he was added off the rookie list ahead of Gourdis? (who also could've helped our key defensive structure).
The bottom line is, they are obviously trying to beat Carlton for pace. I hope it works, and I'll happily take the flak if it does. But I think they are taking a HUGE risk by going in with such a small team, when there were other options available.      

Offline RollsRoyce

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1296
Re: Teams for Round 1
« Reply #21 on: March 24, 2010, 08:55:01 PM »
So,let me get this straight, we have to cover a resting ruckman whose 200cm, plus two more forwards of 199cm and 196cm respectively, with Thursfield (192cm and a beanpole) McGuane (192cm and a stick insect) and Moore(190cm).
Meanwhile up forward, we have one tall marking option and basically five crumbers. :help


So your solution?



Offline WA Tiger

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 14257
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Teams for Round 1
« Reply #22 on: March 24, 2010, 09:19:32 PM »
So,let me get this straight, we have to cover a resting ruckman whose 200cm, plus two more forwards of 199cm and 196cm respectively, with Thursfield (192cm and a beanpole) McGuane (192cm and a stick insect) and Moore(190cm).
Meanwhile up forward, we have one tall marking option and basically five crumbers. :help




So your solution?



My solution? Structure up the side properly. We can't afford to play three undersized key defenders on giants.Instead of Moore,bring in say Post,or Rance. Why isn't Post even in the squad? If Carlton are going to have a resting ruckman at full-forward,then bring in Browne or Graham to sit in the hole and block off his supply. With the height mis-matches we have down back tomorrow on a dry night, this has the potential to get really ugly again.
Up forward, well we'll see how they set up. I'm hoping that Vickery starts on the ground, and spends a lot of time up forward.  I can't see Jack and five crumbers working. I would have liked a third tall marking option. I was at training today, and Astbury did the full session. I was disappointed he didn't make the cut. But if not him, then even Polak just as a decoy tall as mooted. Isn't that why he was added off the rookie list ahead of Gourdis? (who also could've helped our key defensive structure).
The bottom line is, they are obviously trying to beat Carlton for pace. I hope it works, and I'll happily take the flak if it does. But I think they are taking a HUGE risk by going in with such a small team, when there were other options available.      


100% agree RR, I am also not sure why the hell we would elevate Polak and then NOT select him in round one. If we are not selecting Polak for round one why didn't we wait on the second Rookie elevation until someone else can put their hand up.. ???
DIMMA - You will be held ACCOUNTABLE...

“We are really excited about what we have brought in. We have got great depth of players that can take us where we need to go. We are just putting some cream on the top at the moment,” he said.

"Rucks:
Shaun Hampson is the No.1 man"

Offline Rodgerramjet

  • OER - CONTRIBUTOR
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 2001
  • Never cast pearls before swine.
Re: Teams for Round 1
« Reply #23 on: March 24, 2010, 09:29:35 PM »
I like the team that has been picked. I think it has been picked on merit and that to me is the way to reward your players that are putting in. I'm not surprised to see the ommission of Polak, towards the end of the pre season he tappered of and wasn't playing well. Yes we are trying to win this game and se will be trying to win every game we play, but remember there will be alot of R&D (Research and Discovery) regarding the capability and potential capability of the players on our list in positions known and otherwise, this is a process that will be ongoing every week of this season. Somethings may look crazy and absurd to you but remember there is method in the madness. Hardwick has picked this side on merit, good start.
The lips of Wisdom are closed, except to the ears of Understanding.

Hellenic Tiger

  • Guest
Re: Teams for Round 1
« Reply #24 on: March 24, 2010, 09:33:57 PM »
I too and tending to sway as to why there is no Post in the side also.

I really like the look of our midfield with Martin coming off one wing.
How good is it to have Cotchin in for round one? :thumbsup

I'm expecting one change by game time tomorrow.

Offline Chuck17

  • The Shaun Grugg of OER
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 13280
Re: Teams for Round 1
« Reply #25 on: March 24, 2010, 09:34:59 PM »
I probably have to agree with the selection of a team of merit being a good thing.

Alternatives so far have canvassed Graham, Polak, Rance, Brownes just for the sake of structure and height.  I think a key point missing in these names is firstly form and second ability.

In the end I don't think it will matter though as we have a crap side and what matters if it moves slightly crappier or slightly less crappy.

Gigantor

  • Guest
Re: Teams for Round 1
« Reply #26 on: March 24, 2010, 09:39:07 PM »
This team is going to evolve as the season progresses.I have no problem with any of the selections...lets give our coaches time to stamp their style on this team.
As if we really have a choice

Offline big tone

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4404
Re: Teams for Round 1
« Reply #27 on: March 24, 2010, 09:46:50 PM »


However I am Gobsmacked :gobdrop that Jayden Post is not in the team.

I have to say I am not surprised he hasn't been picked

If they picked on form over the entire pre-season then it aint no great surprise - his pre-season was nothing great  ;D

How has Thompson's pre-season been? Have not really heard his name to much? Massive surprise for mine him being in the side.
Hope he proves me wrong because i think he is a DUD!

Offline WA Tiger

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 14257
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Teams for Round 1
« Reply #28 on: March 24, 2010, 09:58:08 PM »
Sorry I don't agree with the posters saying that this team has been selected on merit, please explain how Edwards has deserved a spot based on merit over Tuck??
DIMMA - You will be held ACCOUNTABLE...

“We are really excited about what we have brought in. We have got great depth of players that can take us where we need to go. We are just putting some cream on the top at the moment,” he said.

"Rucks:
Shaun Hampson is the No.1 man"

Offline WilliamPowell

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 40114
  • Better to ignore a fool than encourage one
    • One Eyed Richmond
Re: Teams for Round 1
« Reply #29 on: March 24, 2010, 10:01:01 PM »
How has Thompson's pre-season been? Have not really heard his name to much? Massive surprise for mine him being in the side.
Hope he proves me wrong because i think he is a DUD!

big tone - I saw 3 out of the 4 pre-season games.

I thought Thomson was Ok in Tassie, very good in Yea and crap in Morwell. I wouldn't have picked him but at the same time I am not surprised he's in the side

Dan Connors is one that I'm surprised made the team  
"Oh yes I am a dreamer, I still see us flying high!"

from the song "Don't Walk Away" by Pat Benatar 1988 (Wide Awake In Dreamland)