Well said. For some strange irrational reason they seem to love Dow who is not good enough to tie SPS's bootlaces. But they keep flogging the dead horse because he was pick 3. Apparently Setterfield was BOG last week but they recall can't kick, can't mark, can't find the ball Dow. Go figure !

The fact there isn’t anyone pushing him out the side is more concerning. Will never forget when Licuria and Lockyer got pushed out of Coll midfield was when they announced themselves in the early 00s. Ed is a similar player to those two, but with us the rung underneath are either or both underdeveloped or not ruthless enough

We have hit a point where we are cycling rookies (kennedy, owies & parks) and playing out of form kids due to injury list being too long.

Ed who had 30 possessions, our equal most tackles (7), our most clearances (8), our most centre clearances (4), our most inside 50's (10)?
How does this "protected species" keep getting a game?

BTW, who "cleaned him up" exactly?

..MM dropped for output, or actual injury ??.. ....if he's not injured, or Carlton style not injured enough, I think he should be played.. ....with time through the middle.. ....and use him, if not now, then later,, as an offensive player.. ....all out attacking play.. ....give him license to roll the dice..

Yes injury list is one hell of a disaster.

Silvagni, Murphy, Williams, Carroll, Kemp, Marchbank, Fisher, Martin, Curnow, Philp, McDonald all unavailable for selection this week because of injury with De Koning and Newman first game back in the seconds. That's essentially 30% of our list we can't pick and it seems to be like this most weeks year on year.
So much talent sitting in the stands every week - so @#$%&! frustrating!

I am one, how many turnovers did he have.

3 clangers out off 30 possessions. Cripps had 11 out of 25 possessions.
Zorko who apparently cleaned him up had 7 clangers out of 20 possessions. But it's a rhetorical question anyway, isn't it?
Will the reality actually sway your opinion?

For the record, Ed hardly played on Zorko. He didn't attend the first 3 centre bounces of the second quarter when Zorko had 3 of his 6 possessions for the quarter and Brisbane kicked 3 goals in around 4 minutes. In fact, Curnow is rarely playing on a particular player at stoppages any more unless he's given a hard tagging role. For the past few weeks he plays a more strategic positioning role as a stoppage sweeper.
At centre bounces, he lines up on the defensive side of the stoppage to prevent the opposition exiting out the front of the stoppage which is the most difficult to defend. Around the ground he also positions himself on the defensive side to prevent players taking the ball on the fly. So he doesn't dictate his opponent. The opposition do by their set ups.

Why do you think he plays that role? IMHO, it's because he has the commitment, discipline and selfless attitude to play the role. Who else would you trust to play it other than Walsh?
Zorko beat Cuningham and Williams twice in the centre square. The couple of times Zorko went to Ed in the second quarter. Ed beat him. He plays a team role so when I read shit about him being a protected species or being touched up, it tells me the person making the claim either is happy to bag players without watching their role properly or they don't understand his real value.

So when he receives a coaches vote for his game, and supporters try to tell me he should be dropped, who should I believe? The person who understands his role or the one who perhaps doesn't?

I am one, how many turnovers did he have.

3 clangers out off 30 possessions. Cripps had 11 out of 25 possessions.
Zorko who apparently cleaned him up had 7 clangers out of 20 possessions. But it's a rhetorical question anyway, isn't it?
Will the reality actually sway your opinion?

For the record, Ed hardly played on Zorko. He didn't attend the first 3 centre bounces of the second quarter when Zorko had 3 of his 6 possessions for the quarter and Brisbane kicked 3 goals in around 4 minutes. In fact, Curnow is rarely playing on a particular player at stoppages any more unless he's given a hard tagging role. For the past few weeks he plays a more strategic positioning role as a stoppage sweeper.
At centre bounces, he lines up on the defensive side of the stoppage to prevent the opposition exiting out the front of the stoppage which is the most difficult to defend. Around the ground he also positions himself on the defensive side to prevent players taking the ball on the fly. So he doesn't dictate his opponent. The opposition do by their set ups.

Why do you think he plays that role? IMHO, it's because he has the commitment, discipline and selfless attitude to play the role. Who else would you trust to play it other than Walsh?
Zorko beat Cuningham and Williams twice in the centre square. The couple of times Zorko went to Ed in the second quarter. Ed beat him. He plays a team role so when I read shit about him being a protected species or being touched up, it tells me the person making the claim either is happy to bag players without watching their role properly or they don't understand his real value.

So when he receives a coaches vote for his game, and supporters try to tell me he should be dropped, who should I believe? The person who understands his role or the one who perhaps doesn't?

Great read.

Makes sense.

Backed up with facts.

Ed should be congratulated for selfless footy. Wish it would spread to some of the heroes in the team.

I don't know the answer to that redback, but the way he and Cripps are hacking the ball forward, and the way Williams and walsh are kicking long bombs, maybe they are doing what the coach asks of them, and maybe the coach expects turnovers from blind kicks forward.

The smart opposition coaches would would direct their backs to guard the area the hacked kick is likely to go: hence turnovers.

It look like that to me. Its unsophisticated and simple. Then lock it in.

Who knows?

Wrong bv, don't embellish facts, he had 10 clangers.

Wrong bv, don't embellish facts, he had 10 clangers.