Thread starter
#1
Not just a NAblett thread
Scott Gullan makes a good point that NAblett was the perfect foil for Mooney and that Hawkins is not a dovetailed replacement in that position
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/1,9191,23020436-11088,00.html
Should we have kept Playfair or Charlie as insurance for the mobile CHF position?
Who will now play in the mobile CHF position? I don't think Hawkins will be up to it as he is more suited to staying within the 50m zone
Do we even need a mobile CHF? In my opinion we do because the best thing Nathan did was continually present for contests and create a mark / an option / at least a spilt ball
Scott Gullan makes a good point that NAblett was the perfect foil for Mooney and that Hawkins is not a dovetailed replacement in that position
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/1,9191,23020436-11088,00.html
Should we have kept Playfair or Charlie as insurance for the mobile CHF position?
Who will now play in the mobile CHF position? I don't think Hawkins will be up to it as he is more suited to staying within the 50m zone
Do we even need a mobile CHF? In my opinion we do because the best thing Nathan did was continually present for contests and create a mark / an option / at least a spilt ball

