News Bomber says "Stokes deserves to play"

[vinum coupe]

Seriously, wtf is that??? I can't believe they would select a team based on such a bullshit reason

The only reason he should come in is if someone else is unfit or in worse form. Neither is true

Well you would have to assume he wouldn't have been dropped if he didn't own up to not being right.
And after the 08 GF they would probably be rapt he put the team first.

So the question is, assuming both Rooke and SJ were coming in, and Stokes was not going out, who WAS going out.

And i agree with you BTW

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Re: Bomber says "Stokes will play"

The thread title was 'Bomber says "Stokes will play".

Bomber Thompson did not say that. So don't tell me to settle down.

Stokes could very well play and Bomber can indicate all the **** he wants that he possibly could play bet there is no evidence that anyone has provided that proves bomber said 'Stokes will play'.

Fair point. Poor choice of words on my part.

What I was trying to point out though is that even if Bomber didn't say Stokes will play, he did say enough for any reasonable person to interpret that it's at the least possible and more so likely. Therefore you can't really be too critical of anyone who had that interpretation.

As I said....the way Bomber talked at the presser precisely will ensure this speculation continues until thursday. However, far be it from me to tell our staff how to do their jobs. While I think we should go unchanged, like Stokesy said yesterday (Blake could learn a lot from his attitude) I won't spit my dummy either way, and I shall support whichever decision the club makes.

GO THE MIGHTY CATS!

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Well you would have to assume he wouldn't have been dropped if he didn't own up to not being right.
And after the 08 GF they would probably be rapt he put the team first.

So the question is, assuming both Rooke and SJ were coming in, and Stokes was not going out, who WAS going out.

And i agree with you BTW

Probably would have been Wojo, but he played too well on Sat for it to happen again.

My personal opinion is that what falls against Stokes is the only three players whose spots he could take (Wojo, Varcoe, Byrnes) are three of the speediest players we have, which is precisely what we need against the Lyon flood.

 

[Hinkley29]

Well you would have to assume he wouldn't have been dropped if he didn't own up to not being right.
And after the 08 GF they would probably be rapt he put the team first.

So the question is, assuming both Rooke and SJ were coming in, and Stokes was not going out, who WAS going out.

And i agree with you BTW

I wouldn't assume this at all. IMO, injured or not, he would not have played in the prelim.

 

[mwt5150]

it's simple. Stokes has not been in form - Varcoe, Byrnes and Wojak all are (atleast better form than Stokes). you don't flirt with form. no change.

This. If he'd been killing it before going out for a while injured of course he would come into calculations, but he has not. No change. Any changes after what I saw in the 2nd half last week are not only unnecessary, they would be dangerous.

 

[fpm84]

I wouldn't assume this at all. IMO, injured or not, he would not have played in the prelim.

I actually thought Stokes was excellent in the qualifying final and would have kept his place for the prelim. It wasn't just that he kicked two goals, it was that he held Harbrow to very few possessions. Harbrow killed the Saints last week, proving how important he is to the Dogs. The fact that Stokes completely shut him down went a huge way to us winning that game.

But, as Pure_Ownage said, the three guys Stokes is competing with for a place this week are Varcoe, Byrnes and Wojcinski. As the likes of the Dogs and Essendon have proven this year, the best way to beat the Saints flood/zone is by having pace. I can't see one of our three quickest guys being dropped for a slower player in Stokes. On top of that, Stokes played on Gilbert in round 14 (Gilbert 27 disposals and one of their best, Stokes 18 disposals and one goal) and his performance that day probably won't help his cause this week.

 

[OldStyle2007]

This. If he'd been killing it before going out for a while injured of course he would come into calculations, but he has not. No change. Any changes after what I saw in the 2nd half last week are not only unnecessary, they would be dangerous.

Yeah, my biggest fear is that they drop Stokes for Wojo or Varcoe

Stokes then comes in, we lose speed coming out of our back half and the wings, and the little guy runs into all the choice spots in the forward line and generally gets in the way of the gun forwards, gets easily spoilt, goes to ground and takes 60 seconds to pick himself up while the play continues around him

Last Saturday night I thought our forward line worked the best it ever has since Nablett left. And there was no coincidence this happened with Stokes out of the side

 

[Rahingo]

Stokes has been in average to poor form for the last 8 games he has played. I hope bomber doesn’t play him.

It’s a bit harsh, but that’s the reality in professional sport. With a premiership on the line, the best players and the fittest players have to be in the 22.

 

[Zeroman]

Last Saturday night I thought our forward line worked the best it ever has since Nablett left. And there was no coincidence this happened with Stokes out of the side

I'd like to see the side unchanged, unless for injury.

 

[catempire]

On top of that, Stokes played on Gilbert in round 14 (Gilbert 27 disposals and one of their best, Stokes 18 disposals and one goal) and his performance that day probably won't help his cause this week.

On the contrary, just watching the Round 14 replay last night, it was apperent just how important Stokes was in getting us back into that game. It might be why he is even being considered.

 

[Cheshire Cat]

I'm yet to see one person call for Stokes' inclusion. And I am no different.

I think Bomber needs to forget the fact that Stokes was supposed to play last Sat. nite. He may have been considered in the 22 then, but he shouldnt be now, given how his alternatives Byrnes and Varcoe performed.

I am getting really scared for Wojo. Would be gut-wrenching for him to dropped again, and a massive mistake, again.

 

[cat in sydney]

Bomber has not in any way suggested that Stokes is likely to play.
In fact, he has said EXACTLY the same thing about Gamble and Hogan as he has about Stokes
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/85176/default.aspx

"We've got Mathew Stokes, who's fit and available to play, and we've got Ryan Gamble and Simon Hogan who probably deserve a game too."

Some people are assuming that because Bomber said Stokes deserves to play, that he'll be getting a game. Well, who's gonna go out for Gamble and Hogan then?

 

[fpm84]

On the contrary, just watching the Round 14 replay last night, it was apperent just how important Stokes was in getting us back into that game. It might be why he is even being considered.

Fair enough - must confess I've never seen a replay of that match, and was only going by the stat sheet and my recollection of being at the match that he was quiet.

I don't doubt that if Stokes plays, he has the ability to take a few marks and kick a couple of telling goals. What I'm worried about is the opposition playing through his man (such as Gilbert last time), which teams have a tendency to do. Some of Stokes' defensive efforts this year have been very good - Rhyce Shaw after quarter time in round 20, Harbrow in QF - but some haven't been. And when he's not kicking goals and his man's getting plenty of the ball himself, well....

Of course, the other factor in this is that we'll have Stevie J this time around and there's a good chance they will send Gilbert to him. Gilbert would have to sacrifice a lot of his run just to keep SJ in check. SJ has a good recent record v Saints - five goals and 40 possessions in our two matches in 2008.

I am a big fan of Stokes and if we were playing virtually any other team aside from St Kilda or Hawthorn this week - both of whom employ a watertight zone - I'd advocate Byrnes or Wojcinski being dropped. But Bomber's admitted in hindsight that we lacked the pace in last year's GF needed to break through the zone, and I don't think he'll make the same mistake.

There'll be heartbreak for whoever doesn't make the cut. Judging from Stokes' comments the other day, I think he's already preparing himself for the worst.

 

[Cohzee]

SEN basically saying that Stokes will play. Not sure where they got that from. ****ing SEN.

 

[Dangerwooodlett]

no matter who gets picked, our team will still be bloody strong!

 

[Cattery]

Not a lot of support for Stokes apparently, and while he hasn't had the greatest of years he still has the runs on the board and is a proven goal kicker, which could be very handy in what's shaping as a fairly low scoring affair on Saturday.

While I'm not necessarily advocating for him to come in I wouldn't be that upset if he did, on the proviso the player who makes way for him is Varcoe.

Can't understand why nearly everyone assumes it will be Byrnes or Wojcinski who will be the unlucky one and that Varcoe is more or less a lock in to play, when his last three games before getting injured were poor, as were his two since returning, the Qualifying and Preliminary finals, add to this the fact that with the exception of last years Prelim' his finals record overall is pretty dismal and, as I said, I fail to see where all the supports coming from.

 

[cats2rise]

SEN basically saying that Stokes will play. Not sure where they got that from. ****ing SEN.

Dont trust SEN with anything... but I reckon Stokes will be recalled

 

[Vdubs]

Not a lot of support for Stokes apparently, and while he hasn't had the greatest of years he still has the runs on the board and is a proven goal kicker, which could be very handy in what's shaping as a fairly low scoring affair on Saturday.

While I'm not necessarily advocating for him to come in I wouldn't be that upset if he did, on the proviso the player who makes way for him is Varcoe.

Can't understand why nearly everyone assumes it will be Byrnes or Wojcinski who will be the unlucky one and that Varcoe is more or less a lock in to play, when his last three games before getting injured were poor, as were his two since returning, the Qualifying and Preliminary finals, add to this the fact that with the exception of last years Prelim' his finals record overall is pretty dismal and, as I said, I fail to see where all the supports coming from.

Sorry for you. Varcoe is the X factor, absolutely vital in our makeup this year and don't quote 08 GF as a reason for him not to play as Stokes should not even be in the team on that performance. Varcoe has innate talent, does things that scares opposition coaches and has genuine leg speed and essential pace to exploit Saints' relative lack of. I don't hate Stokes, but it is his turn to miss. 07 Varcoe out, 08 Byrnes out, 09 Stokes. His form also has been iffy and he is too short! I see Varcoe having a bigger impact this week. Ditto Wojo. Byrnes is possibly in the same catergory.NO CHANGE PLEASE

 

[Cattery]

Sorry for you. Varcoe is the X factor, absolutely vital in our makeup this year and don't quote 08 GF as a reason for him not to play as Stokes should not even be in the team on that performance. Varcoe has innate talent, does things that scares opposition coaches and has genuine leg speed and essential pace to exploit Saints' relative lack of. I don't hate Stokes, but it is his turn to miss. 07 Varcoe out, 08 Byrnes out, 09 Stokes. His form also has been iffy and he is too short! I see Varcoe having a bigger impact this week. Ditto Wojo. Byrnes is possibly in the same catergory.NO CHANGE PLEASE

The "X" factor?

You mean like a lot of Geelong supporters say about Gamble?

It's not just the 08 GF but like I said, five finals and one good one, last years PF, is hardly anything to indicate any X factor to me.

How can a bloke who's consistantly in our bottom six performers, including both this years finals, be "absolutely vital" to our makeup, and if he scares opposition coaches they must be having nightmares about the rest of the team.

 

[maryjames]

My gut says Wojo out Stokes in.

 

[bulletproof]

I will be bitterly disappointed if they drop Wojcinski. If Stokes is playing it can only be him.

They might think, Byrnes, Varcoe and Wojcinksi are a bit similar and Stokes is a little different and more a goal scoring threat. Byrnes and Varcoe won’t be dropped.

 

[fpm84]

Interesting little piece about Wojac in today's Herald Sun.

He was sitting up in the stands half an hour before last year's GF when he was told to get down in the rooms as he may replace Chapman, Varcoe or Stokes. Ultimately there was no late change but it shows how many injuries we carried into that match and how touch and go those guys were.

Hopefully we're in a much better place this year injury wise.

 

[catempire]

Can't understand why nearly everyone assumes it will be Byrnes or Wojcinski who will be the unlucky one and that Varcoe is more or less a lock in to play, when his last three games before getting injured were poor, as were his two since returning, the Qualifying and Preliminary finals, add to this the fact that with the exception of last years Prelim' his finals record overall is pretty dismal and, as I said, I fail to see where all the supports coming from.

Can I withdraw my nomination for Cattery for poster of the year?

The bolded is junk. Varcoe was very good against the Bulldogs and good against Collingwood.

He won't be dropped. Nor will anyone. The only way Stokes will play is if there is an injury we don't know about.

five finals and one good one

I would call it 3 out of 5 good, including two very good.

 

[Claude Balls]

One of the things I noticed about our preliminary final performance was that the team looked balanced; more balanced than than it had looked in about 15 rounds.

If Stokes comes in for Wojak, we'll have one less defender and one extra forward, thereby reducing our pace in the backline, and increasing our sameness in the forward line to the tune of 3 small forwards.... It just doesn't make sense at all, and for this reason, I reckon if Stokes comes in, it will be at the expense of Varcoe.

Still can't see it happening.

 

[fpm84]

One of the things I noticed about our preliminary final performance was that the team looked balanced; more balanced than than it had looked in about 15 rounds.

If Stokes comes in for Wojak, we'll have one less defender and one extra forward, thereby reducing our pace in the backline, and increasing our sameness in the forward line to the tune of 3 small forwards.... It just doesn't make sense at all, and for this reason, I reckon if Stokes comes in, it will be at the expense of Varcoe.

Still can't see it happening.

I think there'll be no change named tonight with Mumford, Stokes and Hogan the emergencies.

If it's absolutely bucketing down pre-match on Saturday, I think there's a slim chance Stokes could be recalled for Varcoe. Varcoe's assets aren't suited to wet weather.