Changes for next week's game against the Roos?

[Owl]

Tuck for Batch or White maybe the only change if we have any at all.

Bring in tuck, so he can amass 40 disposals and put em straight in boomers hands   

That's ok we will just give him another chicken wing, he can cry to the umps about that

[Yeahright]

which of the roo's forwards do you envisage Tuck lining up on?

Don't be silly, its obviously Petrie.
But seriously even you must know he doesn't mean Tuck in the backline although I am curious who he expects to play the 3rd tall back?

Dead right....it's just al being a smart ass again. Do we need a 3rd tall back?? Wouldn't even be surprised if A Edawards did a bit there just like he did across half back last week...could be anyone though.

Probably considering they use 3 tall forwards, or did when I last saw them. A Edwards didn't have a man in the back 50 he was just working his ass off the HF line. Would need another "tall" back

[Loui Tufga]

Sounds like Tuck will spend another week in the Magoo's. The Petrie
match up will have to wait....

[one-eyed]

Richmond young gun Nick Vlastuin appears set to return for the Tigers on Saturday.

While ruckman Ivan Maric will miss his second consecutive game with a groin problem, Richmond coach Damien Hardwick expected Vlastuin, who missed the Tigers win over St Kilda with a shin injury but trained with the main group today, to put his hand up for selection.

"He quite possibly could have played last week but being a first year player we sort of took it easy with him," Hardwick said.

"He'll certainly put his hand up. He's a very good player to come back into the side. The unfortunate thing is one of our players has to miss out who played probably well last week."

http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/teams-collingwood-is-expected-to-name-darren-jolly-while-hawthorns-cyril-rioli-remains-in-contention/story-fndv7pj3-1226674313901

[Jackstar is back!!!]

Arnott out ? Vlastuin in

[Siberian]

tough on Arnot but seems most likely

[Penelope]

watching the interview Arnott understands and accepts that. will just go back to the seconds and continue working hard until the next opportunity arises.

thats the sort of character you want your players to have

[WA Tiger]

which of the roo's forwards do you envisage Tuck lining up on?

Don't be silly, its obviously Petrie.
But seriously even you must know he doesn't mean Tuck in the backline although I am curious who he expects to play the 3rd tall back?

Dead right....it's just al being a smart ass again. Do we need a 3rd tall back?? Wouldn't even be surprised if A Edawards did a bit there just like he did across half back last week...could be anyone though.

Interesting now my comments after the Suns game and Hardwicks comments about Edwards down back.....

[Judge Roughneck]

Was pretty average there

Would rather griffiths height

[Penelope]

did he play on talls?

[WA Tiger]

did he play on talls?

Did the job that he was asked to do, could of done the same against the Roos!!

[Penelope]

bullplop.
the discussion about the roos was him replacing a tall defender, ie to play on a tall.
morris does his job down back, but he wouldnt line up on KPF.

I think you'll find he played on mid sized forwards, but if you reckon that means he could have curbed one of the tall North forwards that our taller defenders struggled against then good for you.

[WA Tiger]

bullplop.
the discussion about the roos was him replacing a tall defender, ie to play on a tall.
morris does his job down back, but he wouldnt line up on KPF.

I think you'll find he played on mid sized forwards, but if you reckon that means he could have curbed one of the tall North forwards that our taller defenders struggled against then good for you.

My discussion was bringing Tuck in for Batch and playing Edwards in the backline, nothing about Edwards playing on a tall defender, they didn't have 6 tall forwards!!!!

Just another example of you not liking it when I make a good call..

[Penelope]

  a good call.
edwards was of the extra men hardwick put back when we had the wind against us. In the last quarter when we didnt need the extra men back he subbed edwards off.

Batchelor had been playing the third tall role, and often was found out due to lack of height,(amonst other things) and subsequently was again against north and their tall forward line,yet you wanted to replace him with a bloke 4cm shorter. so if he wasnt going to play on the third tall for north, who was?

Now when that bloke plays a role acroos half back when we stack the backline kicking into a strong breeze you somehow think it justifies your odd, ill thought out theory to have him replace batchelor against north.

LMAO @  I dont like it when you get a  call right. why would i be upset at the law of averages unfolding?

Its a little bit like the 1000 monkeys theory....

The main difference is the monkeys wouldn't proclaim to the world they actually knew what they doing afterwards.

[WA Tiger]

a good call.
edwards was of the extra men hardwick put back when we had the wind against us. In the last quarter when we didnt need the extra men back he subbed edwards off.

Batchelor had been playing the third tall role, and often was found out due to lack of height,(amonst other things) and subsequently was again against north and their tall forward line,yet you wanted to replace him with a bloke 4cm shorter. so if he wasnt going to play on the third tall for north, who was?

Now when that bloke plays a role acroos half back when we stack the backline kicking into a strong breeze you somehow think it justifies your odd, ill thought out theory to have him replace batchelor against north.

LMAO @  I dont like it when you get a  call right. why would i be upset at the law of averages unfolding?

Its a little bit like the 1000 monkeys theory....

The main difference is the monkeys wouldn't proclaim to the world they actually knew what they doing afterwards.

He took him off because they didn't need another man forward...not back, go read his article.!!

4cm....pft....honestly...4cm, what a load of crock, do you really think the coaching panel give a flying stuff about 4cm....

BTW, the law of averages is working more in my favour than yours lately..