No WAFL for Gardi

[Eagles4Ever]

I for one was pleased to see this news last night on 9 news. Personally i dont think he, or the Eagles would gain much out of playing 1 game, and I feel he would have more to lose than gain from it.
So long as he has been training and is fit, i would rather see him suit up in the gold and blue, and if by any chance he was going to get injured (((heaven forbid))), i would feel a lot worse if it happend in the WAFL against some hack than playing AFL.
What does everyone else think?

 

[theorangeapple]

yeh i agree. he was only going to play half a game so it wasnt worth the travel to rushton park. plus i think there is a query on the surface their, as the dorkers didnt play any players with knee/ankle injuries last week ie Longmuir.

 

[eagleskickass]

Looks likes Seabs could make his debut come Round 1 going with what Woosha said when talking about this. Sweet

Glad to see we are resting Gardy, he wouldnt gain much really i dont think by playing WAFL

 

[Jabber]

Disagree.

Match fitness is match fitness. I'd rather give his hammy a test in half a WAFL game than have him go down early against the doggies leaving us a ruckman short.
If it's considered too much of a risk, then he's not ready for round 1 anyway.

 

[masai]

Originally posted by Jabber
Disagree.

Match fitness is match fitness. I'd rather give his hammy a test in half a WAFL game than have him go down early against the doggies leaving us a ruckman short.
If it's considered too much of a risk, then he's not ready for round 1 anyway.

Agree with your line of reasoning, Jab.

 

[Ripper]

I'll be surprised if you see him before round 7 going on previous injuries.

 

[Au_Blue#24]

who's got the aeroguard ??

 

[mick ryan]

Originally posted by RIPPER_46
I'll be surprised if you see him before round 7 going on previous injuries.

That's obviously a stir but unfortunately there could be a bit of truth in it. He is not playing for Claremont simply because he is not right and he would have to be odds on not to play in Round 1.

 

[Ripper]

Not a stir this time as there is no

I hope for your sakes I am wrong but you must admit there is previous on this one.

 

[Ripper]

Having said that IMO they should wait until he is 100% right and not rush him back.

*not a stir*

 

[Mead]

Originally posted by mick ryan
That's obviously a stir but unfortunately there could be a bit of truth in it. He is not playing for Claremont simply because he is not right and he would have to be odds on not to play in Round 1.

I don't think that isl true.

He's training as per usual, I think the big sticking point this week was that they are unwilling to play him in the ruck, even at WAFL level, because if they're not 100% confident as to whether he can handle ruck duels atm.

Giving him a single solitary run as a WAFL forward really wouldn't prove much or do anything for his match fitness, so it makes good sense to not expose him to any risk at all.

I'd say he'll probably play the first 6-8 weeks of the season mainly in a forward role, and slowly build up his fitness and confidence to the point where he can shoulder more of the rucking burden, but I would be very, very surprised if he doesn't play in round 1.

 

[Eagles4Ever]

He was never going to be ready for rucking in round 1, but i still think he is a strong chance to play forward for us against the Dogs. From what i hear, the surface at Rushton is hard as a goats track, so there is more chance of getting an injury there, and setting him back another 7 weeks, than playing a game off the bench in the forward line against the dogs.

 

[Pheret]

It's all good

All good news IMO. I like the idea of keeping him in cotton wool far better than keeping his jersey in mothballs because of a season ending injury should he tweak that hammy or screw his knee up again. Against Peel, it wouldn't be any benefit anyway since there's no opposition. There's no hidden conspiracy theory behind this, they just want to keep him safe from harm, and he'll suit up at the Dome Sunday week. Woosha and his crew have got the right idea concerning him...they've indicated they'll only start playing him in the ruck midway through the season, probably playing him sporadically between up forward and the ruck during the first half. Only good can come of this, since it'll give Seabs a run early in the season and will keep Gardi ripe and fresh for his assault on the home stretch. The match committee are going about it exactly the right way.

 

[eagleskickass]

Originally posted by Jabber
Disagree.

Match fitness is match fitness. I'd rather give his hammy a test in half a WAFL game than have him go down early against the doggies leaving us a ruckman short.
If it's considered too much of a risk, then he's not ready for round 1 anyway.

Cept he wont be rucking round 1 so he wont leave us a ruckman short if he does happen to get injured.

I didnt realise they were schedueled to play Peel, adds even more reason to not bother playing him, Rushton is a hard ground and Peel isnt going to do much i wouldnt expect. Rest him, cotton wool boy!

 

[Ripper]

I would have thought that Rushton park would have a better surface than Telstra Dome.

 

[eagleskickass]

Difference is - Play at Rushton park in a meaningless match
- Play at TD in a meaningful match

 

[Mr Q]

Originally posted by RIPPER_46
I would have thought that Rushton park would have a better surface than Telstra Dome.

The brick paved courtyard out the back of my place has a softer surface than Docklands.

 

[mick ryan]

Originally posted by RIPPER_46
I would have thought that Rushton park would have a better surface than Telstra Dome.

Particularly seeing as it was given the ok after in depth testing by the AFL for last weekends DockersvRoos practice match.

 

[ah_19]

it is a very convenient injury dont you think, he doesnt play pre season games to get worn out, he will build up throughout the season and peak towards the end rather than the start when hes really needed, maybe woosha gave him a kick in the hammy intentionally

 

[Jabber]

Originally posted by eagleskickass
Cept he wont be rucking round 1 so he wont leave us a ruckman short if he does happen to get injured...

A ruckman short or tall forward short, will end up being the same difference in our case.

While the intention may be not to play him in the ruck, if Darcy gets on top of Cox, Woosha won't have much choice. Primus in round 2 is also something to think about, Cox has struggled against him previously.

If there is nothing wrong with Gardy, he should be playing this weekend.

 

[Streaker]

Originally posted by Jabber
A ruckman short or tall forward short, will end up being the same difference in our case.

While the intention may be not to play him in the ruck, if Darcy gets on top of Cox, Woosha won't have much choice. Primus in round 2 is also something to think about, Cox has struggled against him previously.

If there is nothing wrong with Gardy, he should be playing this weekend.

I think we will be able to cover their talls even if Gardi gets injured in the game. If we have Jako on the bench it would just be a matter of reshuffling to get the right match ups.

Cox is a different proposition to what he was last year. I would now consider him one of the top 10 ruckmen in the game. His improvement this year will help us to sustain our midfield dominance throughout the the whole game rather than us just being dominant when we had Gardi in the ruck.

Bulldogs fans are suggesting this as their forward and ruck set ups for Round 1

Harrison Rawlings Cooney
Bowden Croft Giansiracusa

Darcy Hahn Johnson

i/c Street Morgon Garlick Power

Cox would be too strong for Street and Seaby would probably be the equal of Street so they would have to play Darcy in the Ruck.
Darcy hasn't been playing much in the ruck as he is coming back from injury and therefore I don't think he will be fully match fit as a ruckman for round 1.