 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
roar
Joined: 01 Sep 2004
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
Bobby: I'm glad Marsh is back, and Williams has been poo for a while now so good changes for mine.
_________________
kill for collingwood! |
|
|
|
 |
Jezza 
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 06 Sep 2010
Location: Ponsford End
|
| Post subject: | |
|
A lot of changes for one match, so that cannot be good for stability and continuity in some respects. Although, I'm happy to see Adams, Fasolo and Marsh return and White is deserving of his spot in the senior side after an impressive performance in the reserves.
I'm very skeptical as to what Macaffer can provide for the team apart from playing a tagging role. I don't think he'll play for us in 2017 so it's somewhat a surprising inclusion for mine.
Surprised that Greenwood is being rested, but I understand the logic for the club to do such a thing, but I hope it doesn't backfire. Cox has been a revelation considering the small expectations that many had on him but he really struggled to impact the game last week. Goldsack is very stiff to be dropped.
Only a shower or two is being forecasted for Saturday's game according to BOM so I don't think the wet weather will impact the game the way many initially anticipated.
I don't expect us to win this week, but giving a good account of ourselves and playing competitive hard football will leave me content about our prospects in the short-term.
_________________
| 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | |
|
|
|
|
Cam 
Nick's BB Member #166
Joined: 10 May 2002
Location: Springvale
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Bob Sugar wrote: | | So we drop 2 defenders again, this is why this $£$%^%%$ clown has to go, has a chance to get a bit of stability in the backline and he doesn't take it. |
...by reinstating one of the guys who was in our best, in the backline, just a game before in Marsh, and the other, Adams, who was killing it there earlier in the year when he has been on the park. Methinks you are protesting over not much given Sack has permafumbles and towelled up a first gamer, and Marley whilst elite evasiveness is not showing competent target hitting.
Greenwood is the one that will hurt, and we will also miss Cox but to be honest the big guy probably needed a rest/demotion for a few weeks now. Surely McCaffer perhaps is going to be a Greenwood impersonator, can't think of any other reason to pick him.
_________________
Get back on top. |
|
|
|
|
Stevo75
Joined: 15 Sep 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Would ideally still prefer Cox in that team over White. The rest of the changes are deserved on recent form and only make the team stronger. Anyone who disagrees with that really doesn't understand footy. |
|
|
|
|
qldmagpie67
Joined: 18 Dec 2008
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I think the weather conditions played a factor in all changes
Cox would be to slow and sensibly shut down if it's wet like predicted.
Williams can't kick when the conditions are good so needs a break to get his skill level up
White will be a hard match up for his speed doesn't go down much in sodden conditions
Adams was a no brainer
Fasalo makes sense we need goals kickers
Marsh is a no brainer as much as Sack was good last week he's slow and Marsh offers much more skill wise
If Greenwood has a issue at all in his legs resting him is totally logical no point in having him breakdowns do be a player down
I think the side is far stronger this week than last but doesn't mean we can win
I hope we can but it's going to be tough but the conditions might actually help us (ok maybe I'm clutching at straws but I want to win !)
Pies by 8 |
|
|
|
|
CarringbushCigar
Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Location: wherever I lay my beanie
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Were Goldy and Levi in a punch-on? |
|
|
|
|
Raw Hammer
Joined: 11 Sep 2008
Location: The Gutter
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| piedys wrote: | | Raw Hammer wrote: | | Wow, that back 6 is seriously a revolving door. Have 6 played together at the sometime for more than a week??? |
I'd argue many players have performed well below the standard that Goldsack met last week, in most games this season, yet still retained their spots for the following game. Oh, what would I know... |
I'm not criticising the changes. Marsh had to come back in after his Freo game, and Williams has been struggling. I'm just stating the obvious when looking at the team on paper...the back 6 is yet to be settled. Having said that, could prob say the same about every line.
_________________
Est. 2002 |
|
|
|
|
Bkash
Joined: 25 Sep 2015
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Pies to keep under 20 points. Tight game
Prediction bog: greenwood, Howe and Ried
_________________
2 b or not 2 b |
|
|
|
|
Magpietothemax
magpietothemax
Joined: 28 Apr 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Bkash wrote: | Pies to keep under 20 points. Tight game
Prediction bog: greenwood, Howe and Ried |
Greenwood isn't playing |
|
|
|
|
Bkash
Joined: 25 Sep 2015
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Shite
_________________
2 b or not 2 b |
|
|
|
|
thompsoc
Joined: 21 Sep 2009
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Weird just weird is the selection policy.
But Blair is never dropped.
I see Poppy from the Hawks has 27 goals this season.
My mate Blair has 10 for this year.
2 managed after a 2 week break 2 weeks ago!
Give me a break please!!!!
_________________
we don't eat our own at collingwood we just allow them to foul our nest. |
|
|
|
|
Magpietothemax
magpietothemax
Joined: 28 Apr 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| thompsoc wrote: | Weird just weird is the selection policy.
But Blair is never dropped.
I see Poppy from the Hawks has 27 goals this season.
My mate Blair has 10 for this year.
2 managed after a 2 week break 2 weeks ago!
Give me a break please!!!! |
Look, to be honest, I hardly think it is fair to compare Blair's figures with Puopolo's. Triple P, or whatever, benefits from slightly superior delivery and slightly more opportunity than Blair. Blair's actions are hard to pick up on TV, you have to watch very closely to appreciate all his tap ons, shepherds, and of course his tackling energy. I understand Blair's position in our team...he is our Puopulo type of high pressure small forward, and there is no point in demanding that he be dropped until we have a like for like replacement, because this type of small forward is crucial in the modern game. |
|
|
|
|
piedys
Heeeeeeere's Dyso!!!
Joined: 04 Sep 2003
Location: Resident Forum Psychopath since 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Raw Hammer wrote: | | piedys wrote: | | Raw Hammer wrote: | | Wow, that back 6 is seriously a revolving door. Have 6 played together at the sometime for more than a week??? |
I'd argue many players have performed well below the standard that Goldsack met last week, in most games this season, yet still retained their spots for the following game. Oh, what would I know... |
I'm not criticising the changes. Marsh had to come back in after his Freo game, and Williams has been struggling. I'm just stating the obvious when looking at the team on paper...the back 6 is yet to be settled. Having said that, could prob say the same about every line. |
Well, i'm okay with 4 of the 5 changes anyhow.
Sorry to crap on about Goldsack, but he has played some games in years past, well below his effort against Carlton last week, and again selected the following week. I'm struggling to follow the logic in this instance.
Oh, and f*ck me sideways - we've fluked it for Stevic this week too....
_________________
M I L L A N E 4 2 forever |
|
|
|
|
Magpietothemax
magpietothemax
Joined: 28 Apr 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| piedys wrote: | | Raw Hammer wrote: | | piedys wrote: | | Raw Hammer wrote: | | Wow, that back 6 is seriously a revolving door. Have 6 played together at the sometime for more than a week??? |
I'd argue many players have performed well below the standard that Goldsack met last week, in most games this season, yet still retained their spots for the following game. Oh, what would I know... |
I'm not criticising the changes. Marsh had to come back in after his Freo game, and Williams has been struggling. I'm just stating the obvious when looking at the team on paper...the back 6 is yet to be settled. Having said that, could prob say the same about every line. |
Well, i'm okay with 4 of the 5 changes anyhow.
Sorry to crap on about Goldsack, but he has played some games in years past, well below his effort against Carlton last week, and again selected the following week. I'm struggling to follow the logic in this instance.
Oh, and f*ck me sideways - we've fluked it for Stevic this week too.... |
Goldsack was only brought in to replace Marsh (if Marsh had been fit, Goldsack would not have played), In order to retain his position vis-a-vis Marsh, he would have had to play demonstrably better than Marsh did against Freo. Clearly it was judged that he did not. Also, there might be considerations due to the pace of GWS...Marsh might have been selected because of his extra pace. These are two reasons which would provide a basis to me for accepting the decision. |
|
|
|
|
Magpietothemax
magpietothemax
Joined: 28 Apr 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Stevo75 wrote: | | Would ideally still prefer Cox in that team over White. The rest of the changes are deserved on recent form and only make the team stronger. Anyone who disagrees with that really doesn't understand footy. |
Yep, i like the changes too. I also like the change of White for Cox. Think this will give our forward line some added dynamism and unpredictability, with Fasolo in there as well. Cox will benefit from more confidence boosting in the Reserves and a rest for a game or two. White is playing better now than at any time before. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
