My take:

FB: Jetta - Dunn - Grimes

HB: HL - McDonald - Salem

C: Viney - N.Jones - Newton

HF: Watts - Hogan - JKH

FF: Garlett - Frost ® - Howe

R: Jamar - Cross - Tyson

I: Pedo - M.Jones - Brayshaw

S: Vince

E: Garland - Kent - Michie

Little bit surprised people have Frost at HB, its seems they're pretty keen for him to play up forward. Maybe they were just trialing, I hope so because I rate him down back.

For what its worth:

FB: Jetta - Dunn - Howe

HB: Grimes - McDonald - Salem

C: Lamumba - N.Jones - Newton

HF: Watts - Hogan - JKH

FF: Garlett - Frost - Gawn

R: Jamar - Cross - Tyson

I: Viney - vandenBerg - Vince

S: Brayshaw/Kent

Something along those lines is what I expect, not necessarily want.

E: Garland - Michie - Pedersen

EDIT: Switched M Jones for vandenberg. Keeping Howe, but that could easily be Garland.

Edited March 29, 201510 yr by watchtheeyes

I think Garland and vandenBerg will play.

I think Garland and vandenBerg will play.

I think you're right on reflection, missing vanders was an oversight.

Vanders in for M Jones.

I'd quite like Howe to replace Garland mind you.

Little bit surprised people have Frost at HB, its seems they're pretty keen for him to play up forward. Maybe they were just trialing, I hope so because I rate him down back.

For what its worth:

FB: Jetta - Dunn - Howe

HB: Grimes - McDonald - Salem

C: Lamumba - N.Jones - Newton

HF: Watts - Hogan - JKH

FF: Garlett - Frost - Gawn

R: Jamar - Cross - Tyson

I: Viney - vandenBerg - Vince

S: Brayshaw/Kent

Something along those lines is what I expect, not necessarily want.

E: Garland - Michie - Pedersen

EDIT: Switched M Jones for vandenberg. Keeping Howe, but that could easily be Garland.

What's more, Dawes is obviously a big loss. But if Frost and Gawn can simply provide a target and get the ball to ground then any combination of JKH, Garlett, Vanders, Kent will go to work. They can create problems for Gold Coast, so for us to win they need to kick the majority with chip ins from Watts (2 or 3) Hogan (2) and one from Gawn/Frost.

Its not out of the realm of possibility.

Seems many posters don't have a starting spot for Garland which I agree with.

I'd be very interested in knowing how many free kicks he gave away over that NAB challenge period. To me that says he is down on confidence. The other thing that worries me about him is his lack of intensity when in and around the contest. He just doesn't seem desperate enough.

I'd be starting Frost in defence and Gawn starting in the goal square.

Howe and and Vince get a game regardless of 'game time' they've missed. I'd be happy for them both to be managed minutes wise and I think they can both play HB with stints forward, one of them perhaps starting sub.

Brayshaw gets a game also based on his form over the last three games. Perfect sub candidate too. Start him half forward, give him a few centre bounce starts and sub him off.

Those three players will give us something that a handful on our list still don't give us. 'Meaningful possessions and disposals'.

I don't care if they don't accumulate many possessions, but as long as Vince splits the game open with his kicking, Howe saves some counter attacks forward for the GC with his marking and Gus' smart decision making, contested work and ability to kick a goal then I'll be happy.

That is much better than having Bail running around not being able to 'impact' on the game, or Garland playing a defensive job giving away free kicks to his man and not contributing to any attack from defence etc.

We need quality decision makers and players who can really impact on games even if they don't see much of the ball. We're playing a highly skilled side so we need to make the most of every inside 50 entry. Players who can't find targets by foot will be found out against GC. And no Saty, I don't mean being able to hit a sideways target 20 metres on their own. I'm talking about attacking, proactive kicking that is executed properly. Which reminds me, Kent gets a game too.

So Ins: Howe, Vince, Brayshaw and Kent.

Outs: Bail, Garland, M Jones and Pedo.

B: Jetta Dunn Frost

HB: Howe McDonald Salem

C: Lumumba Tyson Kent

HF: Watts Hogan Brayshaw

FF: Garlett Gawn JKH

Foll: Jamar Jones Viney

Int: Cross Toumpas Grimes Sub: Vince

With Garlett, Salem, Kent, Salem and Toumpas all having the ability to rotate, it should be enough to cover the managed time of Howe

and Brayshaw whilst they're on.

Edited March 29, 201510 yr by stevethemanjordan

Seems many posters don't have a starting spot for Garland which I agree with.

I'd be very interested in knowing how many free kicks he gave away over that NAB challenge period. To me that says he is down on confidence. The other thing that worries me about him is his lack of intensity when in and around the contest. He just doesn't seem desperate enough.

I'd be starting Frost in defence and Gawn starting in the goal square.

Howe and and Vince get a game regardless of 'game time' they've missed. I'd be happy for them both to be managed minutes wise and I think they can both play HB with stints forward, one of them perhaps starting sub.

Brayshaw gets a game also based on his form over the last three games. Perfect sub candidate too. Start him half forward, give him a few centre bounce starts and sub him off.

Those three players will give us something that a handful on our list still don't give us. 'Meaningful possessions and disposals'.

I don't care if they don't accumulate many possessions, but as long as Vince splits the game open with his kicking, Howe saves some counter attacks forward for the GC with his marking and Gus' smart decision making, contested work and ability to kick a goal then I'll be happy.

That is much better than having Bail running around not being able to 'impact' on the game, or Garland playing a defensive job giving away free kicks to his man and not contributing to any attack from defence etc.

We need quality decision makers and players who can really impact on games even if they don't see much of the ball. We're playing a highly skilled side so we need to make the most of every inside 50 entry. Players who can't find targets by foot will be found out against GC. And no Saty, I don't mean being able to hit a sideways target 20 metres on their own. I'm talking about attacking, proactive kicking that is executed properly. Which reminds me, Kent gets a game too.

So Ins: Howe, Vince, Brayshaw and Kent.

Outs: Bail, Garland and Pedo.

B: Jetta Dunn Frost

HB: Howe McDonald Salem

C: Toumpas Tyson Kent

HF: Watts Hogan Brayshaw

FF: Garlett Gawn JKH

Foll: Jamar Jones Viney

Int: Cross M Jones Grimes Sub: Vince

With Garlett, Salem, Kent, Salem and Toumpas all having the ability to rotate, it should be enough to cover the managed time of Howe

and Brayshaw whilst they're on.

Agree with your sentiments but you've left out Lamumba. Toumpas would be the swap there and I'd move Brayshaw to sub and start Vince.

Didn't vandenBerg pick up a knock last week. Thought I read that he was in doubt.

Anyway: Massive game this saturday. Gold Coast will likely be a big player this season, but there simply won't be any room for excuses if we get trounced.

Usually I'm absolutely buzzing for game day by now, let alone for round one, but after our abysmal performance last week at Docklands I still feel fairly down.

I feel like this team owes us unbridled effort every time they pull on the guernsey after the last eight seasons, but I've seen none since the first half vs the Bulldogs.

If we turn up at the G on Saturday and are outclassed by a good side: Fine. Conditional upon the fact that what is now a Dees side full of mature bodies throw their weight around and keep the ball moving forward.

If we have the ball being kicked over our defenders heads (ala. James Frawley) 20 times and fail to do much our end of the field: I won't accept stuff like 'we missed Dawesy' or 'Gold Coast are a good side' or even 'we didn't turn up'.

I couldn't tell you when I was last this blase about round one starting up, and I do wonder whether the flame might blow out if we get done.

Agree with your sentiments but you've left out Lamumba. Toumpas would be the swap there and I'd move Brayshaw to sub and start Vince.

Completely forgot about him.

I'd swap him for M Jones and start Toump on the pine.

Seems many posters don't have a starting spot for Garland which I agree with.

I'd be very interested in knowing how many free kicks he gave away over that NAB challenge period.

Garland gave five free kicks and out of interest Matt Jones gave away eight free kicks.

Garland gave five free kicks and out of interest Matt Jones gave away eight free kicks.

re Garland: Anyone know the average per game for backmen over the comp?

What kind of compo will we be looking at if Garlo wants to leave at the end of the year, and are there any FA available that we can peruse that will be worth diluting any compo we would receive for him?

What an unfair, stupid, stupid rule that is anyway. So (in most cases) weaker teams lose FAs and are penalised for wanting to draft a FA of their own, whilst the team that is strong and holds on to their required FAs, get a free hit at the pool! Can anyone explain why such an unfair rule is in place?

Ablett will play and I hope he does. Let GC come to us expecting an easy win and lets smash them.

I disagree....

re Garland: Anyone know the average per game for backmen over the comp?

Would be interested to find that out because 5 and particularly 8 (!) seem like a lot! 13 free kicks is hugely disruptive to a teams momentum/opportunity to slow down the opposition.

Edited March 30, 201510 yr by watchtheeyes

The average frees against in a game during 2014 was 16.7 (http://www.afl.com.au/stats)

8 by M Jones is a lot.

Edited March 30, 201510 yr by watchtheeyes

Vince and Howe, who battled hamstring complaints through the pre-season, trained without inhibition at Gosch's Paddock on Monday morning.

Before training, Roos hinted that both, despite their lack of preparation, would likely feature against the Suns.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-03-30/finally-hogan-to-debut

Roos presser - http://www.melbournefc.com.au/video/2015-03-30/media-conference-paul-roos

Edited March 30, 201510 yr by hogans_heroes

Would be interested to find that out because 5 and particularly 8 (!) seem like a lot! 13 free kicks is hugely disruptive to a teams momentum/opportunity to slow down the opposition.

That was 5 frees over three games (less than 2 per game)... I wouldn't have thought that was excessive for a defender considering the pressure that players forward and back are under.

What kind of compo will we be looking at if Garlo wants to leave at the end of the year, and are there any FA available that we can peruse that will be worth diluting any compo we would receive for him?

What an unfair, stupid, stupid rule that is anyway. So (in most cases) weaker teams lose FAs and are penalised for wanting to draft a FA of their own, whilst the team that is strong and holds on to their required FAs, get a free hit at the pool! Can anyone explain why such an unfair rule is in place?

Poor implementation by the AFL.

I watched training this morning and Howe was moving really well and is a certainty to play in my opinion. I'll be interested to see who comes in for Dawes to play the tall forward role up forward along side Hogan, playing Gawn and rotating him and Jamar through FF is probably the most likely but neither of them have shown much up forward over the pre season but I suppose they'll provide a big target none the less and I'll be happy if they can just bring the ball to ground for Garlett and whatever other small we go with

Did McKenzie not play for the Scorps on Saturday ?

Think he might be getting a run in the 1's this week - a move which I detest !!

What kind of compo will we be looking at if Garlo wants to leave at the end of the year, and are there any FA available that we can peruse that will be worth diluting any compo we would receive for him?

What an unfair, stupid, stupid rule that is anyway. So (in most cases) weaker teams lose FAs and are penalised for wanting to draft a FA of their own, whilst the team that is strong and holds on to their required FAs, get a free hit at the pool! Can anyone explain why such an unfair rule is in place?

As of right now, I don't think anyone would be disappointed if Garland left for free agency.

In terms of compensation, probably a 3rd or 4th rounder.

That was 5 frees over three games (less than 2 per game)... I wouldn't have thought that was excessive for a defender considering the pressure that players forward and back are under.

Right, by the way the comment was written I assumed it was in one game. In that case, I agree that's not excessive for a defender.

Fat Tony’s Team

B Garland, T McDonald, Jetta
HB Grimes, Dunn, Salem
C Vince, Cross, Lumumba
HF Watts, Hogan, Howe
F Vandenberg, Pedersen, Garlett
Fol Jamar, Tyson, N Jones
Int Brayshaw, Kennedy-Harris, Newton, M Jones

Emg Michie, Viney, Frost

Notes:

• I hope Roos goes relatively small and we play Pedersen as second ruck/forward over Frost or Gawn. This is based on him being a more natural and more mobile forward.
• Brayshaw looked ready made when we drafted him and has been receiving glowing reports in the VFL. I have him over Viney.
• N Jones to play head-to-head on Ablett if he plays in the midfield, otherwise Garland if he goes forward.
• Vince to start with Bennell, Cross with Prestia and Tyson with Swallow.
• Vince and Howe are in our best five players, so I would play them in the AFL if they are ready.
• Garland was ordinary against Freo, but was better in the last two weeks. I think GCS will go with only two tall forwards, so we need to have players who are flexible enough to play small and tall. People have short memories and forget how good he was in 2013 and are pinging him on an injury riddled season last year.
• I like Kent over Kennedy-Harris, but JKH was reportedly better performed last week.
• I like what Vandenberg adds to the team.
• The sub could be any of Vandenberg, M Jones, JKH, Brayshaw, Howe or Vince.
• Demons by 9 points.

Did McKenzie not play for the Scorps on Saturday ?

Think he might be getting a run in the 1's this week - a move which I detest !!

They may be waiting to see if Ablett plays - McKenzie may be played simply to run with him all day. He has a decent record when playing on GAJ.

As of right now, I don't think anyone would be disappointed if Garland left for free agency.

In terms of compensation, probably a 3rd or 4th rounder.

I would be. I still believe he has something positive to offer our side going forward.