Bailey seemed to hint he could be close to selection this week... seems a quick recovery from a fairly serious hammy but would be awesome to have his hardness back against the pies..

Bailey seemed to hint he could be close to selection this week... seems a quick recovery from a fairly serious hammy but would be awesome to have his hardness back against the pies..

How many games has he missed? 2? Plus most of the Saints game. I think I'd rather he come back through Casey - make every player earn their spot in this side.

If he were to come back who would he replace? MacDonald? He's played well since coming in. Strauss, Evans, Nicholson? Bit harsh, none of them have done much wrong in the seniors so far.

How many games has he missed? 2? Plus most of the Saints game. I think I'd rather he come back through Casey - make every player earn their spot in this side.

If he were to come back who would he replace? MacDonald? He's played well since coming in. Strauss, Evans, Nicholson? Bit harsh, none of them have done much wrong in the seniors so far.

All those guys did ok on friday but i would think tapscotts efforts beforre he was injured would ensure hes selection before them... maybe in tapscott out strauss..

Maybe another week's rest to ensure he's 100% right?

All those guys did ok on friday but i would think tapscotts efforts beforre he was injured would ensure hes selection before them... maybe in tapscott out strauss..

I seriously doubt he is going to play this weekend.

I think it is just a ruse by DB to try and unsettle the Pies.

I seriously doubt he is going to play this weekend.

I think it is just a ruse by DB to try and unsettle the Pies.

Maybe so but it was still brought up so ... Gee i would love too see him in i reckon would thrive on the occasion!

I seriously doubt he is going to play this weekend.

I think it is just a ruse by DB to try and unsettle the Pies.

I love Tappscot, even have his number on my new jumper! But i doubt the possible inclusion is going to cause Collingwood to loose any sleep !

I think they will give him one more week to be extra safe. Then whoever performs worst out of evans, strauss, nicholson, benell would probably go.

I certainly would NOT rush him back unless there is NO doubt that he has really fully recovered.

Probably Strauss, but possibly Evans.

Given the nature of the injury and our run after the Pies game, I'd save him until he's cherry ripe.

but still bailey said a possibility..get him in!!

We need him. He is one of our most important players, in the elk of chapman from geelong. If fit, he must start in our 18. Drop strauss, he is not ready.

exactly get him back... a hard nut..

He did his hammy in the St.Kilda game, by the time Queens Birthday comes around it will be 23 days.

Comparitively Watson didn't play the Melbourne game and said it had been 21 days since his hammy and they erred on the side of caution. [plus from their arrogant view they were playing Melbourne].

I don't know the grades of hammy's - I think Tapscott's was a grade one. But I would imagine if Bailey says he will go close, 23 days might be enough.

He doesn't play. Would be a stupid choice.

He doesn't play. Would be a stupid choice.

He may well not play. But why would it be a stupid choice if fit ?

He may well not play. But why would it be a stupid choice if fit ?

For mine a multitude of reasons. For memory, when he injured the hamstring it reeked of a Grade 2 strain with inability to put weight on it, strain caused by a fast fibre motion and also the idea that obviously swelling was prevalent as the week after in the rooms he was on crutches.

This kid leg power is something I hope the club harnesses in the next 10 years and rushing it back seems to me to be a bad idea.

If in fact, he is 100% fit, I wouldn't be overly concerned if he played 70% in the 2's. This week is going to require the most running of the team the whole year. We have a team who stood up and dominated a team priding itself on that from Round 1 in the Bombers and beat them at their own game. Paired with this, is that coming into his injury his performance for mine was slowly deteriorating and for mine I don't think it warrants rushing back into the time like you would a Trengove.

I won't be the slightest upset if he does come in HT, just see alot of benefits both long and short term for him and others if he spends one game down at Casey.

Edited June 7, 201114 yr by Demon Land 7

I won't be the slightest upset if he does come in HT, just see alot of benefits both long and short term for him and others if he spends one game down at Casey.

That's fine. Besides there is usually minimal changes after a win. I'd be content either way.

I'm sure everyone on the list would want a start in this upcoming game.

3 weeks is the MINIMUM requirement for the mildest of hammies. Tapscott's looked in the grade 2 area to me, definitely not grade 1. He WILL NOT PLAY on Monday, and he won't play for Casey either, given it's on Saturday.

As a physiotherapist, recurrent hamstrings are one of our major sporting bugbears, and to avoid them there is a basic 3 week minimum rule. The incidence of retear grows exponentially as you bring them back before this. The ONLY exceptions are obviously elimination game situations, such as a grand final, where you accept the substantially elevated risk. Dealing with recurrent hamstring tearing so often becomes a career problem to manage, it just isn't worth it for a home and away game.

Let's hope he's a chance for the following week.

He did his hammy in the St.Kilda game, by the time Queens Birthday comes around it will be 23 days.

Comparitively Watson didn't play the Melbourne game and said it had been 21 days since his hammy and they erred on the side of caution. [plus from their arrogant view they were playing Melbourne].

I don't know the grades of hammy's - I think Tapscott's was a grade one. But I would imagine if Bailey says he will go close, 23 days might be enough.

There is an unwritten rule at football clubs that it takes 21 days for a hammy to recover. I'm pretty sure last Friday was day 20 for Watson, hence he was very close to playing. If you're Jnr McDonald, it's 48 days.

Anyway, I don't think they will make any changes this week, therefore, Tappy will have another full week to recover and will return immediately to the seniors.

Tapscott won't play.

I'd say if hes available he will play. Already missing bartram to play on someone like Dick who may come in, or Davis who may go forward.

He won't play, both Bennell and Strauss did enough last week to keep their spots. Would love for these two to really keep improving and cement there spot in the back 6. You imagine Tapscotts hardness in our forward line something that we lack, we have talent up forward but no grunt, this guy will add talent and plenty of Grunt.

Paired with this, is that coming into his injury his performance for mine was slowly deteriorating and for mine I don't think it warrants rushing back into the time like you would a Trengove.

Agreed DL7, I too thought that he had been quite average heading into the injury, and his SC points would tend to agree. I also reckon it would be a little early, and think that the boys who played last week did well enough to warrant reselection.

It's already been said he won't play...

I reckon it's good. We had only one or two passengers last week, and the defence did a great job. I assumed one of Bennell, Nicholson or Strauss would have done little enough to be replaced. But they all did well, and none will be dropped. Going on form, the Pies should beat us, in which case there will likely be a youngster that can make way for him... If he's fit he's straight in.

From the MFC site, he's still a week away.

On the other hand, both Garland (!!) and Bartram could be considered if they pass fitness tests.

Whatever happens, the assumption would be that all 3 (Tappy, Garland, Bartram) will be available for the following week against Freo, with Jamar and Bail possibles for the week after that against Richmond.

Not too shabby ... as long as we don't lose any more.