Garland in? - who could be out???

[w00dy 146]

Losing Sylvia means we lose run, and Garland doesn't provide that. Although he probably could free Bruce up from defence.

Garland coming in means Macdonald won't have to play on a key forward like playing on Cloke last week, and he will give us the run... Having said that Col Garland is pretty good at giving us some run from the backline too...

[The Chazz 4,077]

Hi Nasher...

[titan_uranus 23,258]

Hi Nasher...

Don't be a tool.

So you made an educated guess and got it right. Fact remains that at the time of your post there had been no confirmation that Sylvia was out and Garland was in.

Nasher did the right thing. Don't act like a [censored].

[The Chazz 4,077]

Was it uneducated?

[Nasher 33,245]

Hi Nasher...

We won. Let's hug.

[The Chazz 4,077]

We won. Let's hug.

Agree!!! It is a grand old flag!

Just want consistency from Admin, that's all mate.

[Jaded No More 60,249]

Chest beating and man hugs aside, I thought Garland did very well today considering he hasn't played in over a year.

Hasn't lost his agility, pace or smarts and is still a delight to have out on the ground. Would love to see him tried up forward at some point this season.

Edited April 11, 2010 by Jaded

[titan_uranus 23,258]

Was it uneducated?

No, like I said, it was an educated guess. You observed that 2 of the 3 emergencies played the night before, and that Cam Schwab posted on Twitter in Garland's favour.

Like I said, when you said it it wasn't a fact.

Chest beating and man hugs aside, I thought Garland did very well today considering he hasn't played in over a year.

Hasn't lost his agility, pace or smarts and is still a delight to have out on the ground. Would love to see him tried up forward at some point this season.

Great signs I thought. Looked a little behind the play at times but he attacked the contests and was generally in the right spots at the right time.

We're a better team when he's in it (and playing well).

[Jaded No More 60,249]

We're a better team when he's in it (and playing well).

His first game in a year and we win... coincidence?

[45HG 1,539]

His first game in a year and we win... coincidence?

Yes B)

Haven't watched the replay and whilst I thought he was decent I'm still not sure I'm thrilled he was brought straight in. But play on.

[The Chazz 4,077]

No, like I said, it was an educated guess. You observed that 2 of the 3 emergencies played the night before, and that Cam Schwab posted on Twitter in Garland's favour.

Like I said, when you said it it wasn't a fact.

Again I will ask, was it an educated guess?

To stop this rot - I knew he was in, but refuse to reveal my source.

[The Chazz 4,077]

No, like I said, it was an educated guess. You observed that 2 of the 3 emergencies played the night before, and that Cam Schwab posted on Twitter in Garland's favour.

Like I said, when you said it it wasn't a fact.

Great signs I thought. Looked a little behind the play at times but he attacked the contests and was generally in the right spots at the right time.

We're a better team when he's in it (and playing well).

Where did I say this?

[titan_uranus 23,258]

Where did I say this?

You didn't. But that's how you acted, especially with your 'Hi Nasher' post, and the fact that you said 'Garland is in'.

Who cares really. So long as you don't brag the next time your post is edited to reflect a more accurate picture despite you being right, it doesn't matter.

[dee-luded 2,958]

This surprises me. I didn't think Garland would be fit. I also thought Sylvia would be ready.

If we had doubts over Sylvia, and I think we did because there was an article a couple of days ago saying we'd be giving Sylvia every chance, shouldn't we have left Cheney out of the Casey team? Losing Sylvia means we lose run, and Garland doesn't provide that. Although he probably could free Bruce up from defence.

Your right TU, but for both to come in, two must go out. Obviously as a club, we got to play our kids to get them up to speed & today i saw first hand, in the first half of todays game that we, at the moment, severely lack midfield running power, thats why Bennell, IMO, kept his spot. By the way, he played much better toward the end of todays game.

Garland Had to come into the side, as no other real match up was available for the Birdman. So, I believe, garland got the Nod, ahead of risking Sylvia this soon after his broken Jaw.

IMO, we are in a predicament, being immature through the middle atm, until we get Morton & Sylvia. Jetta, & Wonna will IMO, come back through Casey Scorps soon.

Injury List

Injury list as at 6 April 2010

- Jared Rivers – Knee – Test

- Colin Sylvia – Jaw – Test

- Neville Jetta – Groin – 1-2 weeks

- Austin Wonaeamirri – Hamstring – 2 weeks

[The Chazz 4,077]

You didn't. But that's how you acted, especially with your 'Hi Nasher' post, and the fact that you said 'Garland is in'.

Who cares really. So long as you don't brag the next time your post is edited to reflect a more accurate picture despite you being right, it doesn't matter.

Don't misquote then - simple. Sh!ts me to tears when people are accused of inaccurate things from people misquoting or misparaphrasing.

Also, don't accuse me of editing a post so I can brag. The posts I edited were well before team sheets were lodged, and the only reason I did it was so Nasher didn't have a heart attack.

Question - is Titan Uranus and Nasher 1 person?

Whatever the answer, read my posts tool. I was right, and an admin was wrong. More than happy to move on, as long as my request for consistency from Admin is accepted. Very similar to AFL umpires!