kickthething
Brownlow Medallist
There is no need to name him at all.To be fair, who else do we bring in?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LIVE: Richmond v Melbourne - 7:25PM Wed
Squiggle tips Demons at 77% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
There is no need to name him at all.To be fair, who else do we bring in?
They obviously think his upside is good enough to be patient with him. I suspect he'll be dropped this week anyway, but I'm okay with them trying him in the backline to try to get the football in his hands.
Which of Lynch, Riewoldt, Dusty and Chol/Soldo would you have him on?*cough* Wicks *cough*
Against a forward line which contains the players I listed above? Who would you have take each of those players?There is no need to name him at all.
That's a bummer. We seem to have a bunch of "almost" ready talls. Do you know why Brand didn't get up ? I'd prefer McLean ruck with someone like Fox as backup, leaving Aliir in defence. Trouble is Aliir works best without an opponent and often struggles in a one on one. Brand and Melican out is a lot of pressure on Rampe and Mills. Dawson needs to step up this week. I thought it was worth a gamble to try him forward but we can't afford it this week.Damn, spewing about Brand not getting up
His first time playing there. There's no point playing him there for one week and dropping him if that's the approach they elect to take. Maybe playing in the backline over a month or so will increase his defensive pressure when he's playing in the forward line.He was tried there last week. How did that go ? Sorry he has either lost all confidence, has got to far ahead of himself or mysteriously lost his huge ability he showed in his first year.
Unless carrying an injury & they can say he didn't come up.Could be right
The back six named plus Allir, its all about team defence not match ups. I just cant see Fox adding anything to the rotation. McInerney will give you a better defensive effort than Fox. I cant see any reason to name him. Lynch is carrying an injury and Reiwoldt is out of touch as well so the order is not as tall as normal. Richmond are not rating us much given their ins and outs. Dusty ...it doesn't matter who lines up on Dusty, lets be frank, he will burn whoever that is (maybe that's where Fox fits!!)Which of Lynch, Riewoldt, Dusty and Chol/Soldo would you have him on?
Against a forward line which contains the players I listed above? Who would you have take each of those players?
Yep, he has been solid to date and we need solid!! Assume he will be cherry ripe for next game?Damn, spewing about Brand not getting up
Richmond's outs are all due to injury and players staying in Melbourne for family reasons. Let's say, hypothetically, Rampe takes Riewoldt, Mills takes a crippled Lynch, and Aliir takes the resting ruckman. Martin is far too strong for Lloyd or O'Riordan, and we can't afford to lose Dawson's rebounding by putting him on Martin. Fox seems like the most logical option out of the players we have available to go to him, even if it is far from ideal.The back six named plus Allir, its all about team defence not match ups. I just cant see Fox adding anything to the rotation. McInerney will give you a better defensive effort than Fox. I cant see any reason to name him. Lynch is carrying an injury and Reiwoldt is out of touch as well so the order is not as tall as normal. Richmond are not rating us much given their ins and outs. Dusty ...it doesn't matter who lines up on Dusty, lets be frank, he will burn whoever that is (maybe that's where Fox fits!!)
So its kinda my point, why name him if he is going to simply be a sacrificial lamb. I would prefer Hewett plays a tag on Martin and you throw Clarke in the middle rather than play Fox.Richmond's outs are all due to injury and players staying in Melbourne for family reasons. Let's say, hypothetically, Rampe takes Riewoldt, Mills takes a crippled Lynch, and Aliir takes the resting ruckman. Martin is far too strong for Lloyd or O'Riordan, and we can't afford to lose Dawson's rebounding by putting him on Martin. Fox seems like the most logical option out of the players we have available to go to him, even if it is far from ideal.
We may field our smallest team for quiet some time.Looks like it’s gonna be an absolute slog fest
I'd rather Hewett in the midfield and forward of centre. Playing on Martin is already difficult enough. I don't want him playing on Martin out of position. "Sacrificial lamb" is also a pessimistic way of looking at it. The best way to have a functional team defence is to have suitable match-ups. Fox is the most suitable match-up for Martin of our remaining defenders IMO.So its kinda my point, why name him if he is going to simply be a sacrificial lamb. I would prefer Hewett plays a tag on Martin and you throw Clarke in the middle rather than play Fox.
I'd rather Hewett in the midfield and forward of centre. Playing on Martin is already difficult enough. I don't want him playing on Martin out of position. "Sacrificial lamb" is also a pessimistic way of looking at it. The best way to have a functional team defence is to have suitable match-ups. Fox is the most suitable match-up for Martin of our remaining defenders IMO.
Who would you have on him?fox on Martin? no thanks
Who would you have on him?
It's probably the kind of challenge & matchup he would thrive on. He has a good game when least expected & then disappoints the next game when he drops his concentration.fox on Martin? no thanks
It's probably the kind of challenge & matchup he would thrive on. He has a good game when least expected & then disappoints the next game when he drops his concentration.
Not many like Martin playing the game.when has fox played on and thrived v someone like Martin though?