Because Grimes disposal is a highlight of his game.

No Al, because he has more positive aspects to his game than the other two. But it also depends upon match ups with Freo. Bail has played his better football forward of centre and if Jetta doesn't play we'll need a small defender. Grimes fits the bill imo.

Wet weather, drop watts, dry weather watts stays in

Grimes or Terlich for Jetta

Bail or Toumpas for Kent (will be sorely missed)

Gawn for Kent; Grimes for Jetta. Bail may come in instead of Grimes if Lumumba goes into defence to, in effect, take Jetta's spot.

I can't see Jamar taking on Sandilands and Clark without help from someone who can actually ruck properly.

Did you read the previous posts Stu? Again the point i was making is, why is Grimes an automatic selection for Jetta.

Because Jetta a shut down defender. Did you read your own post?

Ever consider being dropped might do him the world of good.

Ever consider he's actually playing ok?

Only forced changes please. That's how you build a TEAM.

OUT: Jetta (Concussion), Kent (Hamstring)
IN: Toumpas, Grimes


Grimes to play a midfield/half-back role that Salem played last night, Toumpas to replace Kent's role, Salem to play a full-time defensive role.

Salem is our best kick, and so we need to go through him at all opportunities to stop the Fremantle press across half-back. Grimes' disposal is far too poor to do this, but I still think he can be a good midfielder for us. Toumpas should play the role Salem played last night, which is drifting wherever he can to get the ball and dispose of it well.

I have a sneaking suspicion that, if he plays well again this afternoon, Aidan Riley might well be in the mix...

We need to replace Kent with speed. Bail is the perfect replacement in terms of playing that defensive fast forward role. He can't kick, which we know, but he does work hard defensively. It's a no brainer for me.

We could try to bring [Pedersen] in for Jetta. That means Garland needs to play small, which he has done before, and [Pedersen] will help in the ruck and play as a defender to help the back 6 in Jetta's absence. Or Lamumba goes from wing to the backline and Pedersen goes forward.

As much as I don't want to stuff up the balance by bringing in a tall for a small, I think it's too risky to go with just 1 ruckman against Freo.

I suppose selection will also come down to weather. We could go 1 ruckman if it's going to be wet, but I don't think Roos will risk it. If Jamar goes down, we literally won't be able to win a clearance.

Edited April 25, 201510 yr by Jaded

Why is [Pedersen] always in square brackets? Is it an automatic replacement for his unfortunate nickname? If so, that seems a little PC.

I have a sneaking suspicion that, if he plays well again this afternoon, Aidan Riley might well be in the mix...

I have the same feeling. Defensive forward role. Just seems that's the way the team's being structured. He doesn't offer as much offensively as Kent obviously, but is being groomed for that role methinks.

Why is [Pedersen] always in square brackets? Is it an automatic replacement for his unfortunate nickname? If so, that seems a little PC.

Close. Guess again.

Dean Kent (hamstring) looking at a long stint on the side line. I think Ro Bail or matt jones pending VFL form may be called on to fill that half forward spot

I couldn't think of anything worse than Matt Jones coming in and playing half forward. Bail is a much more logical choice. He has at least shown the ability to tackle hard and kick goals in the past, just like Kent. Matt Jones has shown neither.

Grimes for Jetta is easy.

I really want to see Toumpas succeed in the AFL, but can't see a spot for him even with injuries starting to mount.

Looking at Fremantle's forward line for tonight's game, they have Pavlich, Taberner and probably their resting ruckman in the forward line, plus Chris Mayne. That's quite tall, so I suspect we'll need McDonald, Dunn and Garland all playing as tall defenders, and maybe Howe will take Mayne.

On that theory we can't use Garland on a small, so we'll need someone to take Jetta's spot - I presume that will be Grimes.

As for Kent's replacement, Toumpas isn't really a like-for-like given Kent's role as a half-forward with a major defensive focus. Bail played that exact role pretty much all year long last year, so that makes a lot of sense. But Toumpas is the one who has been on the fringe of selection this year, not Bail. Obviously what happens at Casey will dictate a lot, but I'd be saying Grimes and Bail for Jetta and Kent.

Why is [Pedersen] always in square brackets? Is it an automatic replacement for his unfortunate nickname? If so, that seems a little PC.

Close. Guess again.

I've been wondering what this is all about too. Still don't get it Nash. Help.

I got sick of people spelling it with an 'o' in it, so I put it in to the word censor. I thought this was a nice subtle way of helping people.

Or we back jamar to take them both on and play a small instead and hope that gives us an advantage (only need Dawes to nullify Clark..

Dawes was far from bad in his brief stints in the ruck (as seen from the TV screen, anyway).

But would Pedersen (or Gawn) be a better option as back up, with JW being given the opportunity to spend a few weeks at Casey regaining touch, form and confidence?

I'd say

Out Jetta, Kent

In: Toumpas, Grimes

there may be a temptation to play Gawn or an extra ruckman to combat Sandilands/Clarke but to be totally honest I think that regardless of who we play freo will get the better of that area, I think the best bet is hoping that Dawes and Jamar can compete strongly enough against them that they can't totally kill us and try and read off their ruckman a little bit,

Even if Roos is tempted to play a second ruckman, I think he'll be more tempted to stick to his plan this year of not bringing in players unless they're performing at Casey.

I don't think Gawn, Spencer or Pedersen have done enough yet at Casey to be in that position (unlike Michie), so I think Roos' view of making players earn it will trump his (possible) thought of a second ruckman.

I got sick of people spelling it with an 'o' in it, so I put it in to the word censor. I thought this was a nice subtle way of helping people.

How about Mitchie and Lamumba??

I got sick of people spelling it with an 'o' in it, so I put it in to the word censor. I thought this was a nice subtle way of helping people.

instead of [censored] for other words, could these each have a suitable replacement/synonym too?

could br fun

instead of [censored] for other words, could these each have a suitable replacement/synonym too?

could br fun

I'm ready to start being able to call everyone and everything a [campaigner].

I'm ready to start being able to call everyone and everything a [campaigner].

How about calling them an Immanuel?

How about Mitchie and Lamumba??

Or even Henrietta Lumbago!

Max Gawn back to combat Sandilands ... hope so.

Bail for Kent is the most logical.

That's what I was thinking - our team structure was perfect this week (don't want to ruin that spread and speed)

If we want to win this one we will need to take some risks.

Pedo could also potentially come in for Watts as well (I want to show faith in Watts but at least you know what Pedo will deliver)

could watts go to interchange or sub: ? Pedo would be more than useful helping up front & in the ruck.