- Joined
- Jul 4, 2001
- Posts
- 3,544
- Reaction score
- 2
- Location
- Beach on Indian Ocean
- Other Teams
- West Coast Eagles
Frodo
Scary thought.
I'd prefer to keep both Cox and Gardiner and play them flexibly ie where the match-up looks best on a given day. I thought (although I wasn't really concentrating on it) that Cox did better in the ruck against Burton on Sunday, while, for example, Gardy might go better against a Primus or a White. This may change over time. Despite what people have said about the influence of the ruck declining (and the bounce situation also affects this), I think it's ok to retain the big guys as long as they're strong and mobile.
Gardy looks pretty damn good to me as a forward option (in lots of positions up there as he is mobile, can lead, mark AND kick straight). I don't yet know where Cox will develop his second-string to the ruck position - forward or back.
As for the midfield, I agree, although I think Humm may well develop into a very useful "in and under" player.
Scary thought.
I'd prefer to keep both Cox and Gardiner and play them flexibly ie where the match-up looks best on a given day. I thought (although I wasn't really concentrating on it) that Cox did better in the ruck against Burton on Sunday, while, for example, Gardy might go better against a Primus or a White. This may change over time. Despite what people have said about the influence of the ruck declining (and the bounce situation also affects this), I think it's ok to retain the big guys as long as they're strong and mobile.
Gardy looks pretty damn good to me as a forward option (in lots of positions up there as he is mobile, can lead, mark AND kick straight). I don't yet know where Cox will develop his second-string to the ruck position - forward or back.
As for the midfield, I agree, although I think Humm may well develop into a very useful "in and under" player.



