Koro wrote:
In: Ellard, Army, Lucas
Out: Collins, Carrots, Betts.
Sub: Walker (Unless used as the Rhino suggests, in which case Armfield or Robbo).
Wanting to see Ellard and Curnow both playing. Will work really well IMO. Throw in Judd and we will be hard to beat at stoppages. Lucas possible to play Gibbs role in the midfield Gibbs to rotate between the HF and midfield. Would like to see Ellard also rotated through the fwd line as he can kick a goal. Certainly did so for Swannies back here. He and Gibbs both spending some time rotating through will cover the 'loss' of Fast Eddie. Hopefully Eddie can recharge in the Ants.
Armfield down back. I read that he is playing fwd in the Bullants lately but is great running out of half back.
Outs pretty much been talked to death on the other 9 pages so don't really need to add anymore here. Thought Thornton should have stayed in last week, but now Hendo is here will probably get another game. To be honest, don't really know the crows side as well as most other sides, but if an extra tall would be of help up front then T-Brid could come in instead of Lucus. (Feels too tall, but mentioning it in case we can exploit the Cow's defense).
Bower and McLean another week in the twos unless Bower really is ready to go. Then White would be the one feeling unlucky. Much better game last week than earlier, but the one to give way IMO.
Whilst not starring, don't think you can drop Hampson. Can't bring anyone else in for him and don't want to see Hendo or Waite having to cover him. Hampson, like 206 did, needs games. When Kruezer is back then Hampson will be having to really earn his spot though.
Sub:
Like Walker as a sub as he is the prototype impact player, as well as being a good sized utility - ie, versatile. Did read a far more thought out post earlier by The Rhino (pg 4) talking about Walker being the man to stop Dangerfield (as he's done before), in which case it'd be a shame not to be able to do that. If Walker has that role then Armfield or Robinson.
Case for Walker/Army/Robbo as sub: They impact games when they come on, which is why I think it a better option than the 'ease in approach' for say Lucas. I know Freo has toyed with using the sub as a way to ease a player back in, but I think bringing in a player that can have a real impact on the game, and use their pace/extra energy is a better option. A. Krakeour did this well, as did the Hawks by bringing on Jordan Lewis against Melbourne. Our use of Collins (easing him into the game) - not so successful. Freo also showed the benefit of impact players as subs in Palmer and Walters. Whatever else you can say about them, they do at least attempt to impose themselves on the game. Sometimes the two uses meet, ie - West Coast's Gaff. But his success is having a high energy, versatile player that benefits from being able to use his energy in a burst.
(Apologies for the rambling and a for a post a bit off topic...)
(Edit: Just corrected one sentence so it made more sense - grammatically anyway. I leave the footy sense judgement up to you).
Thanks mate, glad SOMEONE read it. To say I was a bit peeved at watching the Showdown, spending about 20 minutes writing up that preview, only for it to be lost in a back page behind the usual bogans and no shows pissing on about their usual vendettas about players they don't like good....
I agree with you in theory about Walker being the sub, but in practice, I reckon it won't happen as it would mean two weeks running for Walker as the sub. Teams have shown to be loathe so far to have the same player as the sub two weeks running for match conditioning reasons (see: Hird dropping Davey last week), and we've been unwilling to use the same one twice to begin with. Reckon Armfield....otherwise, your Robbo suggestion also has some considerable merit, especially if Ellard plays
Login
Register
FAQ
