Kind-of... don't forget that ruckmen are usually consider to be a six-year project, Grundy turned out to be a freak.If we dont take mcintosh i reckon we take grundy.
Big Simpson was starting to look the goods at the time, too.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Kind-of... don't forget that ruckmen are usually consider to be a six-year project, Grundy turned out to be a freak.If we dont take mcintosh i reckon we take grundy.
He won't replace Atkins. Clarke.He was better than i thought he would be but he is going to be straight out for atkins because he cant play any position except inside mid. But if he plays like that he might be on a list next year (it could get him a deal elsewhere even if it isnt with us).
He won't replace Atkins. Clarke.
Our coaching demands ruckmen run either end of the ground, 2nd, 3rd attempts. Run, run, run. That's why Stanley and Blicavs are the last men standing. We would have killed Grundy and most other decent tap ruckmen with what we expect from them.I know what he means though a big reason why we didnt take grundy is because we had traded in mcintosh weeks earlier (its also why we delisted stephenson then because we had few list spots and we thought we had too many rucks). If we dont take mcintosh i reckon we take grundy.
Turns out all the other rucks we had (simpson vardy west etc right then through to abbott fort smith et al) were either too injured or not good enough. Stanley has been the best of a bad lot but we easily win another couple of flags in the last 10 years if we had grundy on the list.
He might drop back to the VFL for a week or three, he's not winning much of the footy at the moment and so a few games in the VFL to get his hands on it won't hurt him.No one's replacing Clarke
Considering Parfitt was only called up & flew over to Adelaide after doubts emerged over Atkins availability, it would seem the MC may only see room for one of those two in the 23
Grundy is famously one of the fittest ruckmen in the league.We would have killed Grundy and most other decent tap ruckmen with what we expect from them.
Our coaching demands ruckmen run either end of the ground, 2nd, 3rd attempts. Run, run, run. That's why Stanley and Blicavs are the last men standing. We would have killed Grundy and most other decent tap ruckmen with what we expect from them.
Does Frank have a plane?Private jet to get there?
His training would have been different at Geelong to develop Grundy into that role. Blitz is a freak athlete. Our rucks do lots of running. I read, a while ago, Stanley lifted the heaviest bench press at Geelong, 150kg. Grundy lifted 130kg. Grundy is an elite athlete, I reckon he could have played our ruck style.Our coaching demands ruckmen run either end of the ground, 2nd, 3rd attempts. Run, run, run. That's why Stanley and Blicavs are the last men standing. We would have killed Grundy and most other decent tap ruckmen with what we expect from them.
It hasn't been mentioned, but to be honest I find this a bit silly. Conway would be well within his rights to leave if he's stuck behind an ageing Stanley in the VFL all year, and to be frank, his around-the-ground work seems pretty ok to me. Blicavs is 33yo in a week, Hawkins is old enough to have played FF for Jerusalem, the current ruck setup with different ruckmen in different zones isn't a long-term solution.Apologies if it's been mentioned, but with regards to the rucks, there was discussion after the game when Cornes got stuck into Stanley's game and wondered why Conway wasn't getting a go. Whateley basically said intel from the club was that the current game-plan wouldn't work with him. They're aware of Conway's potential greatness, but as an old-school 100% tap ruckman, they'll persist with Stanley (and Blicks) until it all needs to change.
If you want to re-start 12 year debates, please use accurate details to ignite the fire.Would have saved 10 years of ruck problems if we just picked up Grundy in the 2012 draft instead of McIntosh
No one's replacing Clarke
Considering Parfitt was only called up & flew over to Adelaide after doubts emerged over Atkins availability, it would seem the MC may only see room for one of those two in the 23
Would be terribly unfair on Parfitt if he was dropped after that performance. Assuming all of Atkins, Bruhn and Duncan are available then I'd be dropping Knevitt and Mullin. Rest Tuohy who was serviceable but can make way.
Weird that neither he or Knevitt were already over there. Either Bruhn went over so Mullin was initially the carry over emergency or we only took 23 with us.
Bruhn travelled over with the squad, as did Axe and Duncan. Tanner didn't get through their jog around Thursday at the ground and their must have obviously been worries over Atkins so Parf and Knev flew over Thursday night... And then obviously Mitch was a late call to get home Friday arvo.Don't forget that Bruhn wasn't named in the 23, so surely he didn't fly unnecessarily
I was thinking we may have taken Knevitt as the carry over due to his potential versatility should a late change be needed - or has it been mentioned he was also a late traveler?
AgreeNo one's replacing Clarke
Considering Parfitt was only called up & flew over to Adelaide after doubts emerged over Atkins availability, it would seem the MC may only see room for one of those two in the 23
Our coaching demands ruckmen run either end of the ground, 2nd, 3rd attempts. Run, run, run. That's why Stanley and Blicavs are the last men standing. We would have killed Grundy and most other decent tap ruckmen with what we expect from them.
Atkins was a late out with an adductor issue - it doesn't sound like it was a planned rest in anyway, so wonder if he'll miss another week rather than risk a potential aggravation this early in the season
I think we see him that way eventually but early in his career we’ll have him learn defence first and gradually develop from there.I also thought Mullin was going to he a line breaker however in an interview with 2E, 2E said that he was a lock down player in Ireland. 2E said he got burned by teammates a couple of times when he was overlapping. Saturday morning on SEN
Sent from my SM-S928B using Tapatalk
It hasn't been mentioned, but to be honest I find this a bit silly. Conway would be well within his rights to leave if he's stuck behind an ageing Stanley in the VFL all year, and to be frank, his around-the-ground work seems pretty ok to me. Blicavs is 33yo in a week, Hawkins is old enough to have played FF for Jerusalem, the current ruck setup with different ruckmen in different zones isn't a long-term solution.
I'd argue he's done more than enough to force his way past Stanley, it's just up to the MC.Counterpoint- If he can't force his way into the team past Stanley then we shouldn't be playing him.
Got that one wrongWe won the free kick count last weekend at home - and there were definitely some iffy ones that didn’t get called that the Saints should have gotten.
Seeing as there’s no preview thread.
Surely we look past this week and have our midfield cherry ripe for the Dogs who’ll present a much sterner test. Give Parfitt another run, throw Mannagh in the guts, Conway to give Stanley a rest or maybe show that he can take on English. Stick with Mullin to go to Watson and stick Knevitt on a wing in the expanses of the G.
It is an ordinary Hawthorn after all.