Preview Rd 1 Geelong V Collingwood Fri March 17 2023 740 pm @ MCG

Predicted winner & margin


  • Total voters
    82
  • Poll closed .

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Feeling more confident with that line up. Any chance of a late change?
Great on paper.
Hawk is very underdone.
Holmes had a hammy, we are told.
Hoping no calls for the midwife tomorrow.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Parfitt sub as i predicted not great signs for his spot long term (although no doubt he plays next week with a 6 day break as we will rest guys) but probably the right call-not enough midfield gametime for him.

Big game for sav need him to stand up under pressure.

Im still not convinced hawkins will play it would be unlike us to risk him imo.
I've said since the start with this type of foot issue post-surgery it's really not a matter of how cautious to manage it. He'll either pass all the tests or not, all dependent on recovery which (so far) has exceeded expectations. If you recover a month quicker you don't sit out just because initially you were anticipating a round 4 return.
 
Great on paper.
Hawk is very underdone.
Holmes had a hammy, we are told.
Hoping no calls for the midwife tomorrow.
Hawkins has carried niggles or had limited pre seasons many a time. Very, very rarely doesn't perform well. The attention he draws helps all of the others anyway.

Nothing official from the club on Holmes, we got a whisper from the side.

Would be remarkably unlucky so not worth worrying about unless he gets the call.

Things are looking good.
 
Fairly confident we’ll win, I suspect a very high pressure contest but we have more firepower than the Pies and that will hold us in good stead. Watch for 50k peanuts booing the crap out of Ollie, I hope he kicks 5 and shuts them up.
 
I just don't understand how you can have O'Connor in the backline, 2E banned in the centre, and Parfitt as an emergency/sub... Here's to another year of being constantly perplexed by O'Connor's inclusion, the man has been carried to some serious success.
 
I just don't understand how you can have O'Connor in the backline, 2E banned in the centre, and Parfitt as an emergency/sub... Here's to another year of being constantly perplexed by O'Connor's inclusion, the man has been carried to some serious success.
There's always a couple of these blokes. Trent West in 2011. Byrnes/Blake in 2009. Our depth last year was not near our other Premiership years.

I do think O'Connor has played some good shut-down footy in his time, which has freed up blokes like C Guthrie to play a more offensively impactful game etc. The one thing I like about him as a fringe player is that he hardly ever produces 'howler' clangers. Low-possession footy is also more forgivable in the backline, hence O'Connor kept his role when other guys like Esava got cut. That's probably why he's stayed in the side, where other blokes have dropped away somewhat.
 
Sort of i think its more they decided to hold him over for next week as we have a 6 day break to carlton better to bring him in fresh than 2 games in a short time.

CS said ..Bowes will play next week.


The Collingwood forwardline is not the Bulldogs.. are we a little tall?


Who will be the sub ? GF again. Parfitt or maybe Whyte ? id prefer a debutant not as a sub


Late change? Almost a CS special.
 
I just don't understand how you can have O'Connor in the backline, 2E banned in the centre, and Parfitt as an emergency/sub... Here's to another year of being constantly perplexed by O'Connor's inclusion, the man has been carried to some serious success.
Last year you also didn't understand Scott's "obsolete game plan", Parfitt's exclusion and the use of "slow utility types" in Blicavs, Kolo, Smith, Duncan, Zuthrie, Touhy, Henry and Stewart. Also that Ceglar had gone past Stanley.

MOC's form has been patchy but your record is pretty bad as far as determining what works for our brand of footy.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Fairly confident we’ll win, I suspect a very high pressure contest but we have more firepower than the Pies and that will hold us in good stead. Watch for 50k peanuts booing the crap out of Ollie, I hope he kicks 5 and shuts them up.

Hopefully most of them would've headed towards the exits halfway through the 3rd quarter.
 
Tanner Bruhn named in the middle where the old Captain would've been, what an honor for that young fella. Fantastic trading by Mackie there.

... which side has him in the middle? The afl website has TB on the bench ... not that I think where they are named is accurate really. He has done well to jump others to be in the best 22


Screenshot 2023-03-17 at 7.05.30 am.png
 
Great on paper.
Hawk is very underdone.
Holmes had a hammy, we are told.
Hoping no calls for the midwife tomorrow.

The Hawkins selection doesn't sit well with me. Such a long season etc etc. Would we have played Danger or Joel of his prep last year? Im not sure we would.

More than anything ..it just seems to resonate we have no backup for him ... and Hawk is the oldest player on our list. All good if it works out but if he is not ready and we lose him mid season or something .. then not great.


I might be just Nervy nelly but it seems like they do not want to play ..with no Hawk.. and maybe no Cameron if he gets a call.
 
The Hawkins selection doesn't sit well with me. Such a long season etc etc. Would we have played Danger or Joel of his prep last year? Im not sure we would.

More than anything ..it just seems to resonate we have no backup for him ... and Hawk is the oldest player on our list. All good if it works out but if he is not ready and we lose him mid season or something .. then not great.


I might be just Nervy nelly but it seems like they do not want to play ..with no Hawk.. and maybe no Cameron if he gets a call.

The GF for me settles the debate on the coaches making the hard calls. I have absolutely no doubt that unless Hawkins has ticked all the boxes theres no way he is in the team. If Hawk gave them even 0.001% doubt he would be on ice.
 
The GF for me settles the debate on the coaches making the hard calls. I have absolutely no doubt that unless Hawkins has ticked all the boxes theres no way he is in the team. If Hawk gave them even 0.001% doubt he would be on ice.
This. Doubting the medicos at this point is kinda pointless. There's just no reason anybody would risk him in the first round, so the only reasonable explanation is that he's not in a position of risk. I could even imagine with someone like Hawk that the coaches advise him before the game something along the lines of "Getting K's into your foot is the best thing, but you don't need to overdo it etc".
 
The Hawkins selection doesn't sit well with me. Such a long season etc etc. Would we have played Danger or Joel of his prep last year? Im not sure we would.

More than anything ..it just seems to resonate we have no backup for him ... and Hawk is the oldest player on our list. All good if it works out but if he is not ready and we lose him mid season or something .. then not great.


I might be just Nervy nelly but it seems like they do not want to play ..with no Hawk.. and maybe no Cameron if he gets a call.
We have no idea what level he is training at what capacity the foot is at. They'll only play him if it's 100% safe to do so and there is no benefit to a further week or two of rest. They clearly managed the workloads of the older boys last season as they went on according to the numbers and how they pulled up. If Hawkins plays, he's ready. If he's a late out, he didn't pass the tests. Simple as that.
 
This. Doubting the medicos at this point is kinda pointless. There's just no reason anybody would risk him in the first round, so the only reasonable explanation is that he's not in a position of risk. I could even imagine with someone like Hawk that the coaches advise him before the game something along the lines of "Getting K's into your foot is the best thing, but you don't need to overdo it etc".
Exactly. And there is still a chance that for whatever reason today in his last minute tests he pulls up lame (but hasn't so far). But he'll only not be played if there is a red flag of that variety. They aren't sitting there going "hmm I think he's 80% good to go" and Scotty goes "okay let's risk it". It's ridiculous to think this is how people view the medical staff/MC relationship. Pointless to take the role of armchair experts on injuries where we know 5% of the detail at best.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top