I would play him forward with stints in the midfield (not ruck). Actually I just want to see him play.

Mitch Clark or Dean Kent??

Given we are talking about a player with serial foot injuries, reducing his ruck duties as much as humanly possible is a bit of a no brainer isn't it? Especially considering the options we have in that department. Keep him at FF, Fitz to do the relieving ruck duties.

Maybe, being pedantic, unresolved may be a better term. But whatever, surely the hurly burley of ruck work would put a vulnerable foot at greater risk that playing (most of a game) at FF?

FCS - IF he is played in the ruck,and gets injured again in the process, then I reckon I will give the club away after 60+ years.

They have a very rare and valuable asset - a powerful, strong marking, accurate kicking FF. Why put him at increased risk especially when we have a few options in the ruck.

Remember we are the only (excl GCS and GW$) team never to produce a 100 goal a year FF. Mitch may not become our first but he is certainly a candidate for a Coleman.

Going shooting (photography) with Mitch on Sunday most likely (him and my dad are mates). Will give any update I can about his foot, and his thoughts on our current situation

Please do D94

Any news is good news.

Would be good just to get him on the park.

Please do D94

Any news is good news.

Except if it's bad, which I hope and pray it isn't!

Going shooting (photography) with Mitch on Sunday most likely (him and my dad are mates). Will give any update I can about his foot, and his thoughts on our current situation

So, you are off to Hosier Lane then? ;-)