I was half expecting Jamar to go it alone on Leuenberger and Clark, neither of whom are doing that well.

Rivers will go ok... but I would have thought Warnock would be better one-on-one. Fev has a nasty habit of kicking bags on us.

Leunberger is in pretty good form imo, perhaps career best. Clark is in bad form but he is still AA from last year. They have one of the better ruck combos going around and I think Jamar would struggle vs both of them solo.

Players leave clubs when they feel they're hard done by or see no future opportunity. This is not the case for Warnock. His omission was warranted based on costly disposal errors and a lack of pace. He might be unlucky to not get a call up this week but it just so happens that all our defenders are playing very well. I hope he can develop an attacking side to his game at Casey and if he does there will certainly be a place for him at the Dees before long.

Yes he will be disappointed.

That is football in a team that is on the way up.

I'm sure Warnock is made of thick enough fabric that just because he wasn't called up the last two weeks he will seek a trade.

MFC will give him a good contract. They see his value.

He will be back in the team before the end of the year too me thinks!

I'd prefer Warnock to Rivers on either Fev or Brown.

Garland will go to Fevola tonight, with Rivers provide the chop out for both him and Chip on Brown.

Garland will destroy Fev with his pace, just keep running Col!

Leunberger is in pretty good form imo, perhaps career best. Clark is in bad form but he is still AA from last year. They have one of the better ruck combos going around and I think Jamar would struggle vs both of them solo.

Career best, but he's still developing. And Clark has been awful this year. They can't both take the ruck taps at the same time, and I'd back Jamar against either one... All day long.

I think against in-form ruckmen, like Mumford, Sandilands, Cox, maybe Brogan who's playing well right now... Jamar could use the chop out. Also when we don't have enough forwards, PJ gives Jamar the chance to hurt them on the scoreboard. But in this case? I reckon the extra legs would do more for us at the Gabba, in what possibly will be a warm night?

WHat I'm trying to say is... I don't rate the Lions right now. However, Fev hasn't gone this long in poor form before. He's VERY due, and he kicked 4 in a thrashing last time we played them. With no Brown to help him too... Another pacey KP defender I think would give our defence more confidence against those two guys who are, admittedly, out of form... I'd just hate to see us play them INTO form.

I'd prefer Warnock to Rivers on either Fev or Brown.

Agree. Let's hope selection doesn't bite us back.

Garland on Fev was a brilliant match up. Beat him on the lead about 5 times and made Fev lose his cool. No doubt Fev would have kicked a few if his injury didn't play up, but I had confidence Garland would have kept him under control.

Frawley continued his good work with a solid job on Brown.

has Warnock fallen out of favour? or is he not doing what the coach is asking of him?

has Warnock fallen out of favour? or is he not doing what the coach is asking of him?

Whose spot in the side does he take?

I think it's as simple as the fact that our backline balance looks close to perfect at the moment and there's no room for Warnock in there at the moment.

Screw Hawthorn!! If they want to have Matty they can cough up a first round pick for him.

Give Matty a 3 year deal, and move on. He is a required player at the club, and will challenge for a spot even if rivers/garland/frawley are fit.

Warnock's not going to get back into the side until we need him. At the moment we don't need him. It's not that hard to comprehend. Frawley, Rivers and Garland are coping fine, with good help from MacDonald, Bartram, Bruce, Bail and Morton, and we're winning. Absolutely no need to change the defence at all.

Screw Hawthorn!! If they want to have Matty they can cough up a first round pick for him.

Give Matty a 3 year deal, and move on. He is a required player at the club, and will challenge for a spot even if rivers/garland/frawley are fit.

Keep Warnock at all costs.

At the moment we have great depth of talent in our defence and it is no surprise we are considered one of the best defences going around. I don't want to disrupt that mix and depth in key defensive spots is absolutely crucial.

ATM i am in love with our defence.

Tall defenders- Frawley, Garland, Rivers and Warnock

medium defenders- MacDonald, Bartram

running defenders- Grimes, Bail

Developing- Strauss, McNamara, Cheney

That's 8 core defenders. Only 6 will probably be playing at any one time, but we NEED depth in this area in case of injuries.

I wouldn't be letting anyone go

Whose spot in the side does he take?

I think it's as simple as the fact that our backline balance looks close to perfect at the moment and there's no room for Warnock in there at the moment.

I would have disagreed with you before last night, but watching Garland demolish Fev left me comfortable with the decision to leave Warnock out of the side for now.

Until one of our defenders drops their form, Warnock will struggle to get back. I don't necessarily like it, as I think Warnock is a better defender than Rivers (quicker and about par for ball use), but that's what happens when you're in good form.

On the other hand, it would be complete and utter madness for us to trade him. KP defenders don't grow on trees, and you can never have enough depth in that department. What we'd get for him, given he isn't a big name or a big accumulator of possessions, would not be anywhere near the value that he gives us... even as a depth player.

Until one of our defenders drops their form, Warnock will struggle to get back. I don't necessarily like it, as I think Warnock is a better defender than Rivers (quicker and about par for ball use), but that's what happens when you're in good form.

Disagree regarding Warnock and Rivers on "about par for ball use." Rivers to me, is way more adaptable to various tasks and has alot more nous than Warnock with the ball by foot or hand. After a contest in the air, I'm not sure Warnock is quicker than Rivers on the second & third efforts either when ball is in dispute. All these various attributes lead me to believe Rivers is in fact a better defender overall than that of Warnock.

What Warnock seems to excel in is the ability to stay with the bigger forwards on short sharp leads. Although he doesn't necessarily come up trumps most times, as some would have you believe.

On the other hand, it would be complete and utter madness for us to trade him. KP defenders don't grow on trees, and you can never have enough depth in that department. What we'd get for him, given he isn't a big name or a big accumulator of possessions, would not be anywhere near the value that he gives us... even as a depth player.

Agreed.

Disagree regarding Warnock and Rivers on "about par for ball use." Rivers to me, is way more adaptable to various tasks and has alot more nous than Warnock with the ball by foot or hand.

Really? Neither is a particularly good kick, but I reckon Rivers turns it over more than Warnock does.

Still, I'm with you that Rivers is a better defender.

Really? Neither is a particularly good kick, but I reckon Rivers turns it over more than Warnock does.

Still, I'm with you that Rivers is a better defender.

Really.

It may seem he may turn it over more, because he has always had the ball alot more than Warnock.

Rivers is more versatile.

Rivers is more versatile.

And I think this is what it all boils down to. Warnock can take a gorilla, but not a lot else.

according to garry lyon matty warnock (instead of robbie) was playing for carlton, he mentioned it a few times. I was thinkings FFS some just correct him haha