Changes for next week?

[satyricon 267]

not sure if Scully will be playing

expect - Bate,Trengove and possibly Mckenzie to be considered too

Why are you not sure if Scully will be playing??????.....

[armstrong35 262]

Why are you not sure if Scully will be playing??????.....

was just going ask the same question...

why why why why??????

[titan_uranus 23,250]

not sure if Scully will be playing

expect - Bate,Trengove and possibly Mckenzie to be considered too

That'd be a surprise. But you are the one and only poster on this website I can trust with info like this. Must be sore.

Why are you not sure if Scully will be playing??????.....

Bails has been giving us the inside word on selections for the past 4 or 5 weeks or so. He gets it right every time. So I'd listen to what he says. Or read it. Whatever.

[Red Sox 2]

That'd be a surprise. But you are the one and only poster on this website I can trust with info like this. Must be sore.

Bails has been giving us the inside word on selections for the past 4 or 5 weeks or so. He gets it right every time. So I'd listen to what he says. Or read it. Whatever.

That's what I am worried about, Bails has got it SPOT ON the last few weeks. Is this Dean or what? A quick post at 3pm and gone again? Going to be disappointed not having skull back out there....but on Bails word...I am prepared for the worst.

[Longsufferingnomore 1,500]

That's what I am worried about, Bails has got it SPOT ON the last few weeks. Is this Dean or what? A quick post at 3pm and gone again? Going to be disappointed not having skull back out there....but on Bails word...I am prepared for the worst.

Who cares who he is. What we care about is that his information has been spot on so please don't kill the messenger. Maybe they are keeping Sculls in cotton wool ready for the biggest game of the year.

[Bails 0]

Who cares who he is. What we care about is that his information has been spot on so please don't kill the messenger. Maybe they are keeping Sculls in cotton wool ready for the biggest game of the year.

No Brock either

ommitted or injured not sure

[Carn dees 108]

No Brock either

ommitted or injured not sure

Brock not playing? I had a funny feeling he wouldnt

[Red Sox 2]

Who cares who he is. What we care about is that his information has been spot on so please don't kill the messenger. Maybe they are keeping Sculls in cotton wool ready for the biggest game of the year.

Not killing anyone here LS....just pontificating on whether or not it could indeed be 'Bails'!

But stuff the cotton wool.....get him out there and win this week then worry about next week

[Red Sox 2]

No Brock either

ommitted or injured not sure

Bails joined Oct 07....is this you Dean

[Bails 0]

I may be wrong. I know it was on the cards though, he might need another week!!

Brock cant get a game at carlton ha

[rednblue 0]

I'm hoping for this:

Ins: Scully, Trengove, Bate, Strauss

Outs: Wona, Rivers, Jetta.....then I'm stumped, I'd say Bartram but he is the right size to take on one of Satantas little helpers.

I've put in Strauss for his lethal kick in and he will have more pace to go with one of the small forwards than Rivers. It was a toss up between Joel or Rivers.

[satyricon 267]

It is not rocket science to work out, if you read, watch and listen to everything, I told my partner that Gysberts would debut on the Tuesday and then he was picked on the Thursday, because he had been name checked by Bailey and Moloney a couple of times during the early part of the week, perhaps 'Bails' in another capacity was at the JO and saw something and rather than share, he can bask in his crystal balling......just find it a bit against the ethos if Scully is rested again instead of 'getting games into him' perhaps he has a noticeable injury

[PeterJames 46]

Melbourne

Backs: Bartram, Frawley, Bruce

Half backs: Grimes, Rivers, McDonald

Centreline: Green, Trengove, Davey

Half forwards: Jones, Miller, Scully

Forwards: Bennell, Watts, Morton

Followers: Jamar, Moloney, Jetta

I/C: Bate, Sylvia, Gysberts, Garland

Emg: McKenzie, Cheney, Newton

Team changes

In: Tom Scully, Jack Trengove, Matthew Bate

Out: Matthew Warnock, Joel MacDonald, Austin Wonaeamirri

[Bails 0]

It is not rocket science to work out, if you read, watch and listen to everything, I told my partner that Gysberts would debut on the Tuesday and then he was picked on the Thursday, because he had been name checked by Bailey and Moloney a couple of times during the early part of the week, perhaps 'Bails' in another capacity was at the JO and saw something and rather than share, he can bask in his crystal balling......just find it a bit against the ethos if Scully is rested again instead of 'getting games into him' perhaps he has a noticeable injury

scully named. interesting hhhhhmmm

Garland named too

Something smells here

[Bails 0]

scully named. interesting hhhhhmmm

Garland named too

Something smells here

Brock mclean was ommitted!

[stranga 328]

Rivers named ahead of Cheney? What a joke! How must he feel seeing Rivers absolutely stink in the seniors while he dominates at Casey.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Rivers named ahead of Cheney? What a joke! How must he feel seeing Rivers absolutely stink in the seniors while he dominates at Casey.

Hmmm, maybe because they dont play the same role. Cheney is not an ideal replacement for Rivers. But Rivers should have been dropped IMO. The saving grace for Rivers is Garland. Garland appears to have been selected but I think he will be a late withdrawal.

[titan_uranus 23,250]

Hmmm, maybe because they dont play the same role. Cheney is not an ideal replacement for Rivers. But Rivers should have been dropped IMO. The saving grace for Rivers is Garland. Garland appears to have been selected but I think he will be a late withdrawal.

How is Garland a saving grace for Rivers?

As it stands Warnock has been ommitted whilst Rivers holds his spot. That is not really a good or fair decision. We don't need to bring Garland or Cheney into it. The FD dropped a KPD to give us more room, it should have been Rivers. But it wasn't.

If Garland's a late withdrawal I would think Cheney would get the call up. Frawley, Rivers and Bruce should be able to deal with any height they throw forward.

[dee-luded 2,958]

So what is the other major string to Newton's bow?

For that matter, what is the first string on his bow??

No, wait, in what way does Newton even have a bow???

Well he'd been adequate when relieving Jamar in the centre hitouts. He can split packs & needs encouragement to do so. He demands minding as can take overhead marks which most of our current tall forwards do not. He can feed the ball off to passing small forwards bringing them into the game. He's Not the strongest, most rugged, smartest, nor gutsiest, but at the moment, none of our mature bodied key forwards are all of those. That is why he is of use at this point of our team development.

Backs: Bartram, Frawley, Bruce

Half backs: Grimes, Rivers, McDonald

Centreline: Green, Trengove, Davey

Half forwards: Jones, Miller, Scully

Forwards: Bennell, Watts, Morton

Followers: Jamar, Moloney, Jetta

I/C: Bate, Sylvia, Gysberts, Garland

Emg: McKenzie, Cheney, Newton

Team changes

In: Tom Scully, Jack Trengove, Matthew Bate

Out: Matthew Warnock, Joel MacDonald, Austin Wonaeamirri

Untill we have our tall forwards more physically developed than what we have at present, we can use players who'll give us at least what they have got to give.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

How is Garland a saving grace for Rivers?

As it stands Warnock has been ommitted whilst Rivers holds his spot. That is not really a good or fair decision. We don't need to bring Garland or Cheney into it. The FD dropped a KPD to give us more room, it should have been Rivers. But it wasn't.

If Garland's a late withdrawal I would think Cheney would get the call up. Frawley, Rivers and Bruce should be able to deal with any height they throw forward.

If Garland was actually fit then Rivers would have been dropped.