Who does Stokesy replace?

[SJ]

But you said you were dropping Hawkins for Simpson?

I agree Stokes is a must-in, but there is no way Stokes can come in for Hawkins either. A sole key forward is almost suicide.

 

[stevie20]

We'll just have to wait for Thursady night then won't we

 

[The Casey Cat]

We'll just have to wait for Thursday night then won't we

We will and there is no way Simpson will come in so stop being ridiculous.

Ever seen Mackey in a contest? The answer must be no, or you do in fact know nothing, therefore I'm wasting my time.

He is no worse in a contest than Hunt is. I'd also say Mackie sticks closer to his opponent and is better at reading the play/knowing when to break away. And enough with the 'you don't know anything' because you don't agree with me stuff. Is ignorant garbage.

 

[Cattery]

Ever seen Mackey in a contest?

Errrrr, yep, you ever seen Hunt in a contest, I mean without your Josh Hunt glasses on?

The answer must be no, or you do in fact know nothing, therefore I'm wasting my time.

Suggesting that everyone who has a different opinion to yourself knows nothing is becoming a tad boring, well to be quite honest it's been boring for quite a while.

Stokes is flashy and looks great (therefore loved by the average fan).

Now if I wanted to be rude I'd say that anyone who would write this doesn't know what they're talking about, as Stokes is anything but flashy, more solid and workmanlike really, and that the reason he's loved by the average fan is because he's a bloody good player and has nothing to do with him being "flashy" ........... but I don't like to be rude so I'm not gonna say that.

 

[djlowz]

I would like to see Stokes, Gamble and Rooke all in ahead of Hunt and Mackie but that is just me. If I was a selector -

In - Stokes
Out - Mackie

 

[Copernicus]

Maybe we should just try and go in with a squad of 23 to avoid these pesky selection dilemmas.

Whoever missed would be pretty stiff, I'd say. I'm gonna say that it'll be Vegas or Rooke - Vegas gets the nod due to lack of seniority but he'd be a bit hard done by all the same.

 

[chapmanmagic35]

Why does Hawkins need a week in the VFL?

No idea.

Hawkins has to stay in.

 

[DanA]

The other possibility is that Steve Johnson is rested. He didn't look fit last week a could maybe use a weeks break.

 

[Ricketts]

In: Stokes, Simpson
Out: Hunt, Hawkins

Well yes actually. I go to both the VFL and AFL evey week and think Hawkins needs a week in the VFL. Simpson would be the logical replacement as Longergan is just as bad

 

[Cohzee]

Would be stupid to drop anyone but Gamble for Stokes. Logical replacement. Dropping Mackie when he is starting to find his form again would be moronic.

It's hard on Gamble, but he will have more opportunities.

 

[cats2rise]

It would also be moronic to drop Gamble, who was one of our best last week, and is showing more every week.

Does anyone have any idea how Ling pulled up with that dodgy ankle? Might be a replacement for him if he hasnt got over it....

I guess we will find out what they have decided in an hour or so.

 

[year of the cat]

It would also be moronic to drop Gamble, who was one of our best last week, and is showing more every week.

Does anyone have any idea how Ling pulled up with that dodgy ankle? Might be a replacement for him if he hasnt got over it....

I guess we will find out what they have decided in an hour or so.

Don't you mean 25 hours or so? Or do you have the inside word?!!

 

[JUBJUB]

Would be stupid to drop anyone but Gamble for Stokes. Logical replacement.

You do realise Stokes and Vegas have played 6 games in the same side this year don't you ?
The only 2 games they haven't played together have been due to suspension.

 

[michy]

according to gfc.com.au

Vice captain Cameron Ling and running defender Andrew Mackie are in doubt after sustaining leg injuries in last week's win over Richmond.

 

[cats2rise]

Don't you mean 25 hours or so? Or do you have the inside word?!!

I thought today was Thursday

 

[year of the cat]

I thought today was Thursday

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news..

 

[Cohzee]

You do realise Stokes and Vegas have played 6 games in the same side this year don't you ?
The only 2 games they haven't played together have been due to suspension.

And we were missing other players. I just can't see anyone else getting 'dropped' for Stokes.

Now that we have some apparent injury concerns, its simple.

 

[TheCattery2007]

In: Stokes
Out: Gamble

Agreed.

Stokes is fast becoming one of the better players in the competition. I reckon this was recognised, in part, by his selection in the Dreamteam side. Consider that the side effectively had a couple of forward pocket positions available and Stokes got one of those spots, it's no mean feat to be selected in that side. I'd rate Stokes in our top 10.

Gamble has been fantastic this season. Not put a foot wrong (apart from being suspended) but I think Bomber will be reluctant to drop a premiership player for Gamble. The only player likely to be dropped is Gamble. I doubt a backman will be omitted (team balance issues).

I think Rooke, Hunt and Mackie are all safe for a while. Tomahawk safe for the season unless his form dropped heaps. Mackie is particularly safe after missing a few games this season and needing to run into form a little. Rooke and Hunt are hard nuts and Bomber seems to love their impact on the opposition. Even by AFL standards, Hunt and Rooke are big bodies and would hurt like hell crashing into their opponent.

 

[Cohzee]

Agreed.

Stokes is fast becoming one of the better players in the competition. I reckon this was recognised, in part, by his selection in the Dreamteam side. Consider that the side effectively had a couple of forward pocket positions available and Stokes got one of those spots, it's no mean feat to be selected in that side. I'd rate Stokes in our top 10.

Gamble has been fantastic this season. Not put a foot wrong (apart from being suspended) but I think Bomber will be reluctant to drop a premiership player for Gamble. The only player likely to be dropped is Gamble. I doubt a backman will be omitted (team balance issues).

I think Rooke, Hunt and Mackie are all safe for a while. Tomahawk safe for the season unless his form dropped heaps. Mackie is particularly safe after missing a few games this season and needing to run into form a little. Rooke and Hunt are hard nuts and Bomber seems to love their impact on the opposition. Even by AFL standards, Hunt and Rooke are big bodies and would hurt like hell crashing into their opponent.

Thats what I was meaning to say

Cheers.

 

[The Casey Cat]

according to gfc.com.au

Vice captain Cameron Ling and running defender Andrew Mackie are in doubt after sustaining leg injuries in last week's win over Richmond.

Thought so. I don't know about Mackie but I just could not see Ling coming up after last week. Stokes in for Ling.

 

[DanA]

I also agree with most of it except I think they may give Hawkins a rest just before the finals and I don't believe that dropping Mackie will effect team balance too much. We can always play a back 6 of:

Harley Scarlett Hunt
Medhurst Rocca Davis
Milburn Taylor Wojcinski
Thomas Cloke Didak

With Enright another who can provide run out of the backline. Rooke can play back in a pinch and I thought Kelly was exception across HB in the All star game. West can play on Fraser/Wood should they rest forward which means we should have all bases covered. I just don't see what Mackie has too offer that is so structurally important.

Gamble on the other hand does do some this we will miss. He is our No.1 players for defensive pressure in the forward 50 (averaging over 3 tackles a game) and has chipped in with 9 goals in 6 games and is handy overhead.

Stokes has been extremely damaging as a link up player this year and doesn't do a hell of a lot on the defensive side these so that creates a whole for us.