Ins and outs?
- Thread starter Mead
- Start date
- Tagged users None
While we're at it, why not:
Butler for Judd?
I say, swap Green for Hunter if he's fit, and leave the rest of the side the same.. Except for 'Super rubberband man' Daniel Kerr swapped with Banners.. GET WELL SOON BANNERS!
(Only DK4 will know that nickname, but i think some of you will be smart enough to figure it out)
Butler for Judd?
I say, swap Green for Hunter if he's fit, and leave the rest of the side the same.. Except for 'Super rubberband man' Daniel Kerr swapped with Banners.. GET WELL SOON BANNERS!
(Only DK4 will know that nickname, but i think some of you will be smart enough to figure it out)
Originally posted by juddy03
While we're at it, why not:
Butler for Judd?
I don't think Judds form was that bad this week and Butlers wasn't that good. Woosha is on the record as saying he will reward good form in the WAFL. Johnson and Waters both showed good form and Green, Staker and Humm showed poor form in my opinion. I don't give a fat rats clacker about what you think of my opinion, so making petty comments means nothing to me.
Kerr for Banfield
Hunter for Green
Johnson for Staker, maybe
McDougall at CHF (drop him if he doesn't put in a reasonable performance)
Johnson at FF
Jakovich at the back if possible
Lynch on Tredrea, with Hunter as backup
Chick to stay in the side and monster Dew
Have never seen Waters play so have no opinion as to whether he is ready or not. There's a big gap from WAFL to AFL - if there wasn't, Troy Longmuir would be a legend.
Hunter for Green
Johnson for Staker, maybe
McDougall at CHF (drop him if he doesn't put in a reasonable performance)
Johnson at FF
Jakovich at the back if possible
Lynch on Tredrea, with Hunter as backup
Chick to stay in the side and monster Dew
Have never seen Waters play so have no opinion as to whether he is ready or not. There's a big gap from WAFL to AFL - if there wasn't, Troy Longmuir would be a legend.
- Mar 25, 2003
- 35,681
- 28,336
Well Kerr is a certain inclusion.
And Banfield is a certain exclusion.
I'd like to see get a bit of muscle into the team as well, because Port are a rough and tumble style of team.
As much as i like Staker, he seems out of form, and he's not the worlds strongest lad, so i'd bring in Johnson for him.
And i I'd like to bring two rough and tumble guys into the backline in Hunter and Waters, but not entirely sure he gets the boot. I'd give Green a bit of WAFL time as he seems to be a tad out of form. And i guess it would be from Humm, Adkins (unfortunately) or perhaps rest Jakovich.....
Nicoski looks a likely type, but i wouldn't throw him in for his debut against Port Adelaide. he's not big enough.
So I'd say In - Kerr, Johnson, Waters, Hunter. Out: Banfield, Staker, Green and Humm.
Match ups:
- Lynch to play on Tredrea.
- Chick to start on Drew, but I'd like to see Waters given that job at some stage. (I would've said throw Waters in the deep end and start him on Dew and see what happens, but Dew is coming off a six goal option, so i'd take the safer option)
- I'd tinker with really stretching Port early and start with McDougall and Gardiner/Cox in the goal square. Matera at their feet. And have Johnson and Jakovich floating around CHF with Sampi at their feet. But i wouldn't do that for too long. more as a shock tactic to try and send their coaching box into a bit of dissaray for the first 5-10 minutes.
- Hunter to play on Chad Cornes.
- possibly stick Rowan Jones no Josh Carr??
What do Port do with their resting ruckman (Brogan and Lade)?? Do they normally send them into their forward line, or stick them on the bench?? or a combination??
We may need to play one of Gardiner, Cox, Johnson, Jakovich or Doogs in defence at some point if they're throwing up forward with Tredrea and Chad Cornes. Jakovich could go with Lade, but not Brogan.
And Banfield is a certain exclusion.
I'd like to see get a bit of muscle into the team as well, because Port are a rough and tumble style of team.
As much as i like Staker, he seems out of form, and he's not the worlds strongest lad, so i'd bring in Johnson for him.
And i I'd like to bring two rough and tumble guys into the backline in Hunter and Waters, but not entirely sure he gets the boot. I'd give Green a bit of WAFL time as he seems to be a tad out of form. And i guess it would be from Humm, Adkins (unfortunately) or perhaps rest Jakovich.....
Nicoski looks a likely type, but i wouldn't throw him in for his debut against Port Adelaide. he's not big enough.
So I'd say In - Kerr, Johnson, Waters, Hunter. Out: Banfield, Staker, Green and Humm.
Match ups:
- Lynch to play on Tredrea.
- Chick to start on Drew, but I'd like to see Waters given that job at some stage. (I would've said throw Waters in the deep end and start him on Dew and see what happens, but Dew is coming off a six goal option, so i'd take the safer option)
- I'd tinker with really stretching Port early and start with McDougall and Gardiner/Cox in the goal square. Matera at their feet. And have Johnson and Jakovich floating around CHF with Sampi at their feet. But i wouldn't do that for too long. more as a shock tactic to try and send their coaching box into a bit of dissaray for the first 5-10 minutes.
- Hunter to play on Chad Cornes.
- possibly stick Rowan Jones no Josh Carr??
What do Port do with their resting ruckman (Brogan and Lade)?? Do they normally send them into their forward line, or stick them on the bench?? or a combination??
We may need to play one of Gardiner, Cox, Johnson, Jakovich or Doogs in defence at some point if they're throwing up forward with Tredrea and Chad Cornes. Jakovich could go with Lade, but not Brogan.
And I would agree.
They rested Brogan in a forward pocket. You also have to consider that Primus could be available this week and that is why I think we need to have Johnson in the side.
I would play Jako out of a back pocket similar to the game he played against Adelaide when he was named amongst our best.
thegur
Team Captain
I think I'm the only person on this board who still has faith in his abilities, when fit ... forget last season, he had ankle surgery about six weeks before the seaosn and never got on track, and then this injury came at the worse possible time for him this year, on the eve of the real stuff.
He still has a valuable role in this team as my poor man's Guy McKenna, especially given the form of Kasey Green.
thegur
- Thread starter
- #33
If Humm has faults, its certainly not his ability to handle physical pressure- on that basis I think he is one of the best qualified players for the game against Port- he can handle it rough and tough, far more so than most of our team- on that basis alone, he should be selected in the team next week.
As for Cooney, no I don't think he beat Humm, not by any stretch of the imagination. It might really just come down to personal opinion but all I can say is that having gone through the replay again, I'm still pretty happy with Humm's game- incidentally Morrison played most of the game of the HBF with the occasional spell i nthe midfield. Late in the game when in the midfield he played ahead of the ball, but certainly he spent more time back than forward.
As for Waters, I'm as excited about him as the next fan, but really on what basis do you think he offers us more than Humm at this stage? Because he played one good WAFL game? He certainly didn't cover himself in glory in the intraclubs he played...In any case, the biggest issue I have with a Humm/Waters swap is that Waters has done nothing to suggest he can play in the back pocket- his draft report, his intraclub gametime, and his impressive WAFL effort last week all suggest he is more of a HBF, mainly because of a perceived lack of acceleration over short distances suggests he'd have trouble with livewire forward pockets. If he does get a game, I'd imagine it would be as a Kasey Greenish HB flanker, which is all well and good but would do nothing to replace Humm deeper in defence. Furthermore, I'm skeptical how well a rookie will do if thrown into a lacklustre defence against a red hot team and expected to perform- whatever Waters' reputation for toughness, its a pretty dirty trick to give a rookie a first up assignment of the sort he would be likely to experience this weekend.
I suppose everyone's mileage may vary on this issue, but personally I think we'd be making a big mistake to drop Humm for this game- I guess we'll see what the coaching staff makes of all of this later in the week.
Your not the only one, i still definately think he is valuable hence why i chose him as my player for the year. I would love to see him in the side, definately ahead of carroll.
- Banned
- #35
I don't think Humm should be dropped, but if any thinks he had a good game last week is kidding themselves. In one particular instance Scott West had the ball 15m out directly in front. Humm could have tackled him as he was right next to him, but chose to follow his man allowing West to run into an open goal (He missed IICR). Credit for manning up, but there are some occasions where you have to do the team thing, take the risk of your man recieving the handball and kicking a goal, and go for the man with the ball.
Do we risk bringing in 'fresh meat' (Nicoski, Waters) against a usually aggressive Port Adelaide? I guess you have to give them game time at some stage in the year (preferably early), so throwing them into the deep end could be a good idea.
Waters still might play although, even though hes my player, it might not be best to start him in a bruising encounter. Yes hes a tough nut but AFL and WAFL/VFL/SANFY tough is very different and the pace could catch him out.
Similar threads
