Whether you rate Warnock highly or not, when one (or god forbid two or all three) of Chip, Rivers and Garland are unavailable, we NEED Warnock, desparately.

We need Davis to get over his illness & develop quickly.

Whether you rate Warnock highly or not, when one (or god forbid two or all three) of Chip, Rivers and Garland are unavailable, we NEED Warnock, desparately.

I really struggle with this argument.

You cannot replace your best players; Warnock can't do what Frawley does.

Depth is such a red herring.

Depth is great for replacing your 16th best player with your 28th best player, but when you lose your best player, your 28th best player just won't cut it.

They can play a similar position, but not up to the standard required to maintain the form of the team.

If Frawley or Garland leave a hole in defence - Warnock is not going to make up the difference.

You can't replace your best players.

Edited February 25, 201114 yr by rpfc

do you not remember the predictions of doom after a certain loss to "hopeless" Freo?

Do I what !

Geez... I've never been a massive Garland fan but the guy was sub'd off halfway through the game (replaced by J. Howe) due to a "calf complaint"!

Here's hoping he pulls up ok.

I hope he is ok too. We need Key Defenders like him...

We need Davis to get over his illness & develop quickly.

I agree or we may consider using Campbell. Interesting, I went to the game last night and just watched the reply re Fox broadcast. Before the game, Spud Frawley commented on our team and picked out Garland and stated that after 2 pre seasons now should develop into a bonafide midfielder.I rest my case.

Do I what !

I hope he is ok too. We need Key Defenders like him...

I just hope you take Garland with your first draft pick as a key defender in your Ultimate team.

Whether you rate Warnock highly or not, when one (or god forbid two or all three) of Chip, Rivers and Garland are unavailable, we NEED Warnock, desparately.

At the moment- I agree fully.

Just because many disagree doesn't say that I have lost the argument. The two key defenders we have on our list are Frawley & Rivers. The others are fill ins- we need to recruit another tall to go with Davis although Cook could play there and that means we should try to gain another tall utility. Please note, I am not trying to knife Col - it is just he is too small, too light and not good enough(tries to do to much) to consistently play at full back or CHB. . Although he can pinch hit on occassions,no doubt. I watch him train reguarly, I watch him play all practice and real matches.That is my opinion.

I believe that defenders are the hardest to recruit - it's just so hard for kids to get picked if they're not midfielder, tall or forward. The last 'natural' defender to get drafted was Glass, imho, and that was how many years ago?

Garland is not great in that position, but he's not a disaster either; however, jury's out with me re: Warnock.

Seriously, it's the NAB cup... wtf...

Seriously, it's the NAB cup... wtf...

Soooo, what's your point?

I believe that defenders are the hardest to recruit - it's just so hard for kids to get picked if they're not midfielder, tall or forward. The last 'natural' defender to get drafted was Glass, imho, and that was how many years ago?

Garland is not great in that position, but he's not a disaster either; however, jury's out with me re: Warnock.

your post is full of merit. I realise we have an issue in this regard. However, Garland is too fragile in my opinion in a key back role. His frame is to light, slightly not tall enough and I genuinely believe not good enough. Rivers whom has regained his confidence and Frawley are our two main key backman. I have no doubts about that at this stage.Morton could even play CHB at times,Warnock at full back at times on a particular ype of player and ditto Garland. But we need to groom another player as a key defender- I have no doubts about that- and still genuinely believe Garland could turn out to be a great winger. Again it is my opinion and others can state theirs. However Chips Frawley whom was a pretty good defender believes Garland is a MIDFIELDER TYPE.

your post is full of merit. I realise we have an issue in this regard. However, Garland is too fragile in my opinion in a key back role. His frame is to light, slightly not tall enough and I genuinely believe not good enough. Rivers whom has regained his confidence and Frawley are our two main key backman. I have no doubts about that at this stage.Morton could even play CHB at times,Warnock at full back at times on a particular ype of player and ditto Garland. But we need to groom another player as a key defender- I have no doubts about that- and still genuinely believe Garland could turn out to be a great winger. Again it is my opinion and others can state theirs. However Chips Frawley whom was a pretty good defender believes Garland is a MIDFIELDER TYPE.

I concur with some of your comments, but like I said, my concerns about Warnock are still there. Can a modern footy club continue to play any player that has minimal impact, average decision making and ordinary skills? Garland has the versatility and skills to be part of a rotation that is integral in today's game.

Hey, of course it's your opinion and it's a valid one - I've really enjoyed the debate.

I concur with some of your comments, but like I said, my concerns about Warnock are still there. Can a modern footy club continue to play any player that has minimal impact, average decision making and ordinary skills? Garland has the versatility and skills to be part of a rotation that is integral in today's game.

Hey, of course it's your opinion and it's a valid one - I've really enjoyed the debate.

I think Warnock may play full back say on a Brown or Bradshaw type Garland may play on a Hansen type. But we agree that overall neither are a true key defendertype and we have to find one to cover the likes of Frawley and Rivers.

Seriously how the hell did this conversation go for this long ? ITS A NAB CUP GAME and he only played a half. Jesus hate to see what you say if Frawley doesn't start well. Will it be back to the old days of "frawley's a hack can't kick" Relax its the care factor cup he is clearly in our best 22 and quite frankly over the course of the last few years he deserves to be there.

I see Garland as our third key defender, meaning he is less a key defender than Frawley and Rivers. Garland can certainly be used more as a half back while the other two could not. Joel MacDonald is similiar, although a bit less of a key defender and more of a half back. Warnock is the most typical key defender in our side, he is a fantastic spoiler and leaves a physical presence but the modern game isn't kind to him as these days key defenders are recruited for their ability to run the ball out of defence and pick up disposals in their backline and be patient to break through the zone.

And to add to that, when I think of an ideal melbourne defence, I picture them lined up like this:

HB- Bartram Rivers Grimes

FB- Garland Frawley MacDonald