Well, even the thread title would imply a decision having happened either way, not the potential for it.

Please, more care next time.

Agree -- this is purely ongoing speculation and not worth yet another new thread.

Dunn been in good form - don't want to risk that. As America de cali said Frawley may not be here next year anyway so if we can get use to playing without him then good (Garland would help).

IF Garland gets back soon and IF Frawley isn't out for a prolonged period and IF Hogan eventuates then either Garland goes forward and Frawley returns to defence or vice versa.

ATM though it sounds as if the NS curse may be reawakening with Frawley in doubt, Garland not ready and possibly Geougiou doubtful with concussion

I see it this way. If Frawley goes back to defence he stays. If he continues to play forward he goes. Roos has made a clear statement he is going to rebuild us from defence first. Not going to waste his time building a defence around Frawley with all the doubt about his long term tenure unresolved.

Well he is our No 1 defender with a huge price on his head but not playing in defence. Your maths dont add up. Still a required player yes, but now spare parts for the forward line. If his form drops I expect he would be dropped rather than shifted back to defence. But now that he may be injured it may be a moot point.

I've seen it that way. Roos has said in the past he wouldn't play a player who was moving to another club and given our lack of size in the forward line through injury he is playing it smart and using him forward and building a solid defence at the same time.

Frawley was clearly not right yesterday, moment I think in the third when trying to jump at a ball he leap with both feet up at same time which to me says foot problem. His application since going forward and assistance with our structures has been important.

I hare moonboots

BRFE called it.

I would leave chip forward, why change a backline that's clearly working?.and his form apart from yesterday has been good

chip also gives us 2 mature talls up front. whilst we build depth & a possible new backline for next year, just in case.

any new kids can come in down back, not throwing to the wolves, to get themselves grounded, before venturing forward.

most everything Roosy does, feels just about right to me. its the old wayz of blooding kids. gently gently. & make them earn it, fight for the right to a jumper in their weight division first.

Thank God we got the win when we did. Hope Frawley is ok.

BRFE called it.

During the game?

That out on the full he kicked when the game was in the balance says a lot about his footy smarts.

He's not all there in the head and yeastersay we won and he had an underwhelming game..

Gimme the compo pick, I'd rather it.

if he's got a broken big toe from the 2nd Qtr, then he would have had pain killers injected. this could be a reason for a sloppy out on the full.

That out on the full he kicked when the game was in the balance says a lot about his footy smarts.

He's not all there in the head and yeastersay we won and he had an underwhelming game..

Gimme the compo pick, I'd rather it.

Few people have said that about his out in the full. It was a skill error, he tried to go down the line close to the boundary which is the correct decision. It was a horrific skill error, but nothing to do with footy smarts.

Few people have said that about his out in the full. It was a skill error, he tried to go down the line close to the boundary which is the correct decision. It was a horrific skill error, but nothing to do with footy smarts.

Yeah, I have been thinking the same thing. Where did people want him to go, straight down the corridor? Correct decision, just woefully executed.

i think he has been poor the last 2 weeks. Very well held also.

I reckon we should send him back, if not injured.

Does anyone have $5 and really bad hand writing to pretend to be a little girl and get this deal done?

Can we add a bloody question mark to the thread title? I saw this as an announcement.

As for Chip, talk about an overreaction. He has a poor game so he no longer cares about the club and/or he must be dropped? I'm glad Roosy is in charge.

based on preference, I would keep him.

But i would not keep him if it came as an underwhelming price. If it was a choice between Frawley and a GWS power forward, ill take the power forward.

If we could do a swap for Patton, i'd do it

Dodgy foot won't help his asking price.

I see it this way. If Frawley goes back to defence he stays. If he continues to play forward he goes. Roos has made a clear statement he is going to rebuild us from defence first. Not going to waste his time building a defence around Frawley with all the doubt about his long term tenure unresolved.

I think he's put Frawley forward to give us a second tall target. Frawley is quick too, which makes him even more dangerous in the forward half. Equally, I think it allows Roos to shape a defensive unit around a group that he knows will stick around. That said, I think Frawley will stay.

Melbourne must have used more moonboots in the past few years than every NASA astronaught in the past 60 years combined.

apparently he hurt his toe during the 2nd quarter. Guess that explains a few things. Hope he's good to go for next week.

another foot injury to one of our best players?

And people wonder why i question the fitness stadff

what the hell is going on

another foot injury to one of our best players?

And people wonder why i question the fitness stadff

what the hell is going on

Hurt it during the game you buffoon, how is that the fitness staff fault?

Hurt it during the game you buffoon, how is that the fitness staff fault?

Depends if it was a contact injury or if the running in the game caused the problem (with too much running on the wrong surface/wrong footwear/wrong technique). But I certainly think we need to wait for more details until we play the blame game.

another foot injury to one of our best players?

And people wonder why i question the fitness stadff

what the hell is going on

If he gets off, we can perhaps recruit Oscar Pistorius.

I think he's put Frawley forward to give us a second tall target. Frawley is quick too, which makes him even more dangerous in the forward half. Equally, I think it allows Roos to shape a defensive unit around a group that he knows will stick around. That said, I think Frawley will stay.

It's and interesting one. He's definitely forward to help the structure but if Roos thinks he's on the way out it might also add to the decision.

It's and interesting one. He's definitely forward to help the structure but if Roos thinks he's on the way out it might also add to the decision.

Agreed, mate.