Colin Garland out 4 to 6 weeks

[Rolling Stone 146]

Viney Fan, I'm loathe to make emphatic statements. And with that I'm now going to make one. Garland is vital to us. So often last year he managed to marshall the defence to stop an even greater flogging. Remember we didnt have a midfield per se. I have him in my top 5 players in terms of importance....easily.

If we won only two games last year I think its fair to say that no player is irreplaceable but having said that, we can't really afford to lose many players to injury which is something which applied to all teams, more so those who are struggling like us. Based on the 4 to 6 weeks out, I would suggest that Garland won't miss much in terms of games (unless he transmogrifies into Nick Smith) so there's no need to panic.

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,217]

Ability to play on tall and small forwards, provides some run out if defence with reasonable disposal.

As for being beaten by Betts, well I can't think of a player that has never been beaten at some stage of their career....maybe Hird.

Trading him is a stupid idea he's only 24/25. As for drafting another key defender, isn't that what all clubs do, with players for all positions. Problem is there is now 18 clubs so until this massive untapped talent pool of Greater Western Sydney kicks in were stuck with him, something I'm very happy about. Was it Col and Chip that held Buddy and Roughy to 2 goals between them a couple of years back?

[Bring-Back-Powell 14,389]

Garland is not in the top ten of our most important players in my opinion. He is not a game winner. He is replacable.

I disagree with this.

After the St.kilda game last year, I started a thread stating that Garland was the best player at the club, even better than N Jones.the fact that he just got pipped by Jones in the Bluey suggested to me that the MFC also highly rates him.

[Elusive Tunbridge 795]

"Colin Garland is ... set to miss four to six weeks after undergoing surgery on his right ankle on Thursday.

A small bone spur had been troubling Garland, who finished second in the club best and fairest last season, in recent weeks.

Melbourne decided it was best to deal with the problem now to give him every possible chance to be available for round one."

The sky is not falling.

[What 18,810]

Garland is a big loss, make no mistake.

However with Grimes now moving to half back and a bolstered midfield, it wont be felt nearly as much as previous years,.(assuming he misses games that is)

Obviously hoping he is ok though and comes back fully fit cos we need him!

[deeko 952]

When we start winning Garland will be a very handy experienced player, but he won't be the game winner/game breaker and I don't think he will be our most important defender, assuming Frawley stays (now he is an important player to us!) and I expect Tom McDonald to be more important than Garland in years to come.

I have nothing against Garland, he is a loyal well respected player, but I honestly hate the way he plays 90% of the time.

I think he lacks mongrel and hardness. He is the one player who I would like to trade because I can not see us winning a premiership with him and would prefer him to be an opponent.

I know this is deep, but it is honestly what I have thought for a long time.

That statement indicates to me we are watching different players.

He is incredibly tough, I can recall multiple times last year where he jumped back with the flight into packs. Has super courage in the air and is very hard over the ball.

When someone says 'mongrel' I think of a sniper behind play or someone throwing cheap shots. He doesn't have this and I'm thankful as it means absolutely sweet f.a.

The man is a glove and a very solid defender. For those who worry about him not being a match winner you should worry as he never will be. But as Cards13 said on the last page he is a game saver and does it well.

Is super flexible playing on bigs (shut down Milne and Betts multiple times) and then playing on the bigs (remember him dumping Cloke QB last year??) and always goes well in a backline that gets completely pumped continually.

I fear for the day where we have to play Dunn & or Pedo because Judy is out as they are useful as two away imo.

[monoccular 17,336]

He's doing a heap of running on the load/gravity reducing machine.

Does NASA have some secret device that he is using? Or is he practicing in the "vomitorium", the NASA "weightlessness plane"?

Garland is not in the top ten of our most important players in my opinion. He is not a game winner. He is replacable.

When we start winning Garland will be a very handy experienced player, but he won't be the game winner/game breaker and I don't think he will be our most important defender, assuming Frawley stays (now he is an important player to us!) and I expect Tom McDonald to be more important than Garland in years to come.

I have nothing against Garland, he is a loyal well respected player, but I honestly hate the way he plays 90% of the time.

I think he lacks mongrel and hardness. He is the one player who I would like to trade because I can not see us winning a premiership with him and would prefer him to be an opponent.

I know this is deep, but it is honestly what I have thought for a long time.

At the moment nobody, not anyone, is a game winner as measured by season 2013. Does that mean that everyone is replaceable ? (Actually everyone is technically but I hope you get my gist). He has certainly the potential to be a game saver, along with the likes of those you mentioned, Frawley and McDonald, but neither of these e could be really called game winners either.

I would certainly have him in my first ten selections.

[Undeeterred 3,045]

Would be a really interesting read to come up with 10 names who are more important than Garland - I think he's easily top 10, but would be an interesting exercise to try to find 10 others.

[Lordweaver 235]

yes it would be interesting....NOT

[DeeSpencer 24,792]

Would be a really interesting read to come up with 10 names who are more important than Garland - I think he's easily top 10, but would be an interesting exercise to try to find 10 others.

Yes

Clark

Dawes

Frawley

Grimes

Jones

Maybe

Hogan

McDonald

Vince/Cross

Viney

Tyson/Trengove/McKenzie

My reasoning is as such. I think if 2 (or maybe 1) of the big key forwards are really up and about then the importance of Hogan drops off and he can just be a kid and settle in. Grimes as captain and defensive marshal at half back is important, although he and Garland preferably are a team as such. As is Frawley. Tommy McDonald as the guy who usually gets the 2nd defender not as important. Jones vital of course and then we need to have 3 other midfielders who can impact games more than Garland, but we are yet to see them.

[Undeeterred 3,045]

yes it would be interesting....NOT

Just leading you to water, Lord, not making you drink!