Changes next week v the Roos

[Little Richard 6,219]

Probably no change, but if there were to be one it would be Michie in for Riley, for me.

[Deez 298]

Riley was really, really poor. That he was subbed out half way through the third quarter rather than with only 5 minutes to go suggests the coaches thought so, too. Will Roos give him a chance to redeem himself? He's the only player I can see that might be replaced. If so, it's either for Gawn or JKH, depending on structural needs. I would have thought JKH would be the better option.

He didnt set the world on fire. Id like to see a direct swap for a player similar to riley, bring in michie. He needs another crack soon.

[binman 42,159]

I reckon as much as Roos demands a series of solid performances at Casey, conversely he needs to see at least two ordinary performances in the ones before the axe falls.

Salem had a stinker against the Pies but Roos kept him in, albeit as the Sub.

Riley will get another chance this week before Michie or others come into consideration IMO but I reckon he'll need to catch the eye. I'd settle for no disposals and knocking Harvey into next year.

I reckon as much as Roos demands a series of solid performances at Casey, conversely he needs to see at least two ordinary performances in the ones before the axe falls.

Salem had a stinker against the Pies but Roos kept him in, albeit as the Sub.

Riley will get another chance this week before Michie or others come into consideration IMO but I reckon he'll need to catch the eye. I'd settle for no disposals and knocking Harvey into next year.

I agree on Riley. He was poor but Roos doesn't drop players for being poor, particularly after one week. He drops them for not playing their role, which makes me wonder why Terlich was dropped, meaning i wonder if he broke team rules or went away from his assigned roles. Funnily enough i suspect Salem was not dropped last week, despite seemingly needing a rest, because he played poorly and Roos did not want to send the wrong message.

[DeeSpencer 24,958]

I agree on Riley. He was poor but Roos doesn't drop players for being poor, particularly after one week. He drops them for not playing their role, which makes me wonder why Terlich was dropped, meaning i wonder if he broke team rules or went away from his assigned roles. Funnily enough i suspect Salem was not dropped last week, despite seemingly needing a rest, because he played poorly and Roos did not want to send the wrong message.

He drops them for being poor as well. There isn't just a magic do you role. You have to be good as well! But Terlich was the 7th best defender. McKenzie coming in to tag Stanton on a wing meant that we could use Matt Jones or Cross at half back a bit and then we didn't need a 7th defender. So his role had gone and he wasn't playing well enough to use further up the ground or to shuffle another defender up the ground.

Agree with you on Salem, but he did drop JKH so Salem went to the sub role.

Even if Riley was playing his role 3 touches in 2.5 quarters isn't offering the team much. If he stays in then it will be about stability and getting an improved effort out of him. My concern is that his fitness will hold him back, so he'll certainly be more influential with another chance but it might not be enough of a difference. I can see the point for keeping Riley in.

[rolly 149]

riley into the sub vest instead of salem or possibly bring in blease as sub.

riley would be stiff to get dropped after just the one game but he prob contributed least on field (except fir that awesome rib cracking tackle)

if riley does get dropped then blease has had sevrral weeks of good footy at casry and could provide that extra dash and pace late in the game

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

no change for my 2c

11 losses in a row to North (over 7 years)

we haven't had back-to-wins since r13/14, 2011

time to knock these blokes off surely

[The Chazz 4,077]

I would not be surprised if Vince was playing injured on Sunday night. Hoping it was only a corky around the hip area, but he was far from 100% (made that goal even more brilliant).

Haven't watched Misson's report as yet, but doubt it would've been mentioned.

[Fat Tony 5,188]

I still think we are too slow, so I would bring in Blease for Riley. Jamar also looks to be getting tired and might need a rest. Salem should be the sub again.

[picket fence 16,812]

_{The only change I would ponder might be Blease for Riley!}

_{Rationale I would like to see a bit more pace in the lineup}

_{Blease has strung together some good games! Plus time to see If IF he is worth keeping beyond this year!}

_{Three good reasons Eh?}

_Fence!

[Biffen 12,936]

Blease to give us some speed.

[Elusive Tunbridge 795]

Blease knows what he has to do to get into the side, and he hasn't done it yet.

[Maple Demon 449]

We won on Sunday. If it ain't broken, don't fix it.

[Gorgoroth 12,785]

What is the hang up with Blease?

I must admit I've not seen all of Casey's games but what I've seen has not been of such a standard that he gets a game.

Sure pace is good, but said person with pace needs to use it to tackle, chase as much as push into space to get the ball and when he does he needs to finish.

Not sure Blease is at that stage yet.

[Don24 103]

Tappscott in for Riley, plays same role, just as tough but with more pace.

He has been in the best 3 out of last 4 weeks so form is solid (without being outstanding)

Unleash the bull