..

..

Nobody should be dropped, but Bail must come back in somehow if fit. Glad I`m not making those decisions! Somebody mentioned Rick P may be injured, but I`m not sure if it`s that serious??

completly serious too, haha

i dont think you can make a change to the team who beats the top team by 50 points..

There was mention made in the news of Petterd being injured towards the end of the match. If this is so, he may have to sit out for Bail.

All things being equal:

Dunn out

Bail in

Ricky was off and on at times throughout the match. It seemed shoulder, then hammy or other leg injury. Hopefully he should be right.

Bail might have to sit it out. I'd say Dunn or Bennell are most likely to be dropped. But thought Dunn was serviceable tagging and Bennell was lively as always.

Hard to get Rivers back in the backline. Garland did a great job on Staker and offers more versatility.

Ricky was off and on at times throughout the match. It seemed shoulder, then hammy or other leg injury. Hopefully he should be right.

Bail might have to sit it out. I'd say Dunn or Bennell are most likely to be dropped. But thought Dunn was serviceable tagging and Bennell was lively as always.

Hard to get Rivers back in the backline. Garland did a great job on Staker and offers more versatility.

He got crunched in the Back, Ponsford Stand Flank, first half, by, I think Merrett. Both were on the turf for a little while. He may have had referred pain all over from that.

If Ricky is injured I'd move Garland forward and bring in Rivers.

Dunn is unfairly maligned at times (other times fairly) but I think he did a good job on Brennan.

Still, not sure he has a matchup against the Roos.

If Ricky is injured I'd move Garland forward and bring in Rivers.

Dunn is unfairly maligned at times (other times fairly) but I think he did a good job on Brennan.

Still, not sure he has a matchup against the Roos.

That's actually a decent point. Harvey demolishes Dunn every tme and he's the only guy in their team worth tagging

Nobody should be dropped, but Bail must come back in somehow if fit. Glad I`m not making those decisions! Somebody mentioned Rick P may be injured, but I`m not sure if it`s that serious??

He did come back on after the incident.

If he's injured, I'd bring Bail back. I don't know why Bail was out in the first place (i.e. was he injured or did someone have to make way for Martin?), but I like the boy and I want him back in the team.

Otherwise I'd try going unchanged again. Even though I want to say Bail for Dunn.

I think some people have it out for Dunn, he was excellent on Brennan last night.

Each week he has a new role and considering he is getting a game he is doing his job.

maybe bring bail in for martin?

i dont think martin had a great game

and i dont think the roos have a big backline ?

what do people think?

maybe bring bail in for martin?

i dont think martin had a great game

and i dont think the roos have a big backline ?

what do people think?

I think Bail deserves to come back in, also i would love to see Watts get a game.

For who? no idea.

maybe bring bail in for martin?

i dont think martin had a great game

and i dont think the roos have a big backline ?

what do people think?

Martin didn't play defence though. He rucked, and did well, and went forward, and did better than he's done before.

He stays.

maybe bring bail in for martin?

i dont think martin had a great game

and i dont think the roos have a big backline ?

what do people think?

Bail apparently has a quad injury.

I thought Martin did fairly well, and deserves to stay in the team, as I suppose all of the others do. Dunn did very well on Brennan I thought.

Bail apparently has a quad injury.

I thought Martin did fairly well, and deserves to stay in the team, as I suppose all of the others do. Dunn did very well on Brennan I thought.

yeah i heard that, just thought they said that to make way for martin.

martin had an ok game

his just lost his pace if you agree.

and melb are starting to get back to their old running game style

Bail apparently has a quad injury.

I thought Martin did fairly well, and deserves to stay in the team, as I suppose all of the others do. Dunn did very well on Brennan I thought.

NO CHANGE--

Martin is required to cover talls.

If Ricky is injured I'd move Garland forward and bring in Rivers.

Dunn is unfairly maligned at times (other times fairly) but I think he did a good job on Brennan.

Still, not sure he has a matchup against the Roos.

You're not on your own E25, but where is this obsession of getting Garland up forward coming from? He is a valuable part of our back line - why not leave him there?

If Petterd doesn't get up, Martin to FF, Bail in. If Petterd is fine - No Change.

I also disagree with the person who said Bennell could be dropped - like a lot of them, he is getting better and better with more game time. He will be a pretty handy player in the years to come.

You're not on your own E25, but where is this obsession of getting Garland up forward coming from? He is a valuable part of our back line - why not leave him there?

If Petterd doesn't get up, Martin to FF, Bail in. If Petterd is fine - No Change.

I also disagree with the person who said Bennell could be dropped - like a lot of them, he is getting better and better with more game time. He will be a pretty handy player in the years to come.

When our backline is playing so well, what is the obsession to bring in Rivers at all?

Bennell dropped?? You are kidding.

No injuries then no changes.

You're not on your own E25, but where is this obsession of getting Garland up forward coming from? He is a valuable part of our back line - why not leave him there?

If Petterd doesn't get up, Martin to FF, Bail in. If Petterd is fine - No Change.

I also disagree with the person who said Bennell could be dropped - like a lot of them, he is getting better and better with more game time. He will be a pretty handy player in the years to come.

I think Rivers is good enough to earn a spot and I have faith in Garland up forward.

For the sake of continuity i thought replacing Petter with Col was a like for like proposition, but I actually like the idea of keeping Martin forward more.

He exciting thing for me is that we have decent players showing fantastic form that can't get in the side.

Players are coming out for injury and finding it exceptionally hard to force their way back in.

That, for me, is a brilliant state of affairs.

You must make appropriate changes based on form and injuries in the Brisbane game

I didnt think we had any standout weak links to be honest so that comes down to injuries or selecting the side to play North

I believe Rivers was the best performer in the VFL but why would we change a winning back six

Rivers IMO has not risen to what most of us expected and i dont have him in my top 22 (well not high enough to fit into the back 6)

Rivers has taken far too long to take the next step and thats only presuming he ever does

I predict he wont

I expect Bailey will rest some of the youngsters during the year which wont be a form based decision

No change.

You can't possibly not reward the players who put in an amazing effort to smash Brisbane, especially when there were no weak links last night.

Edited April 25, 201015 yr by Jaded

out martin

in rivers or bail

No change.

You can't possibly not reward the players who put in an amazing effort to smash Brisbane, especially when there were no weak links last night.

Match ups may play a role in a change in the side.

Selection is not always based on performance.

Personal opinion here but I would give Garland a run in the twos and bring Rivers back up.

Staker was all over Garland and Garland gave a few too many free kicks away.

I think he needs to find his touch back at Casey.

Rivers is extremely underrated on this forum. If it wasn't for injuries,god only knows how many people would have him as their number

one backman.

I say one change. In - Rivers

Out - Garland

Edited April 25, 201015 yr by stevethemanjordan

First, Staker all over Garland? Just enlighten me; what impact did Staker have on the game? The commentators said it all: very little. If he'd been any good they might have scored more goals.

Second, Dunn was good, maybe not as good as the week before, but very useful.

Third, Martin might have tried hard, but he was not much use; a fit Bail would have been much better value, I think. Martin has some deluded fans, but he is not ready for a key role. He plays OK in back pocket, and that's it - so far, anyway.

If Bail gets fit, and can't regain his spot after playing so well for three weeks, then something's amiss. If he isn't fit for next week, then they have one dilemma less.

I find it hard to imagine how they could change a team that's beaten the near-top side on the ladder by 50 points and it could have been 72 as they ran all over them in Q4.

Chances are, Petterd will be injured - he was obviously hampered by a shoulder injury after half time. Any changes might revolve around what happens to him, I would say, and we have to wait and see.