I was really hoping Matt Jones made the side. I expect a "no change" now. 

1 hour ago, titan_uranus said:

Grimes is the only one of those three I'm interested in seeing this week but I'm also not that interested in dropping/resting Hunt, Trengove, Oliver or Kennedy, so I think I'd rather see no change.

I'd be surprised, though, if we really didn't change anyone off a 6 day break into a wet game interstate against a top 4 side.

Agreed.

Who, if you had to, would you drop for Grimes?

7 minutes ago, P-man said:

Agreed.

Who, if you had to, would you drop for Grimes?

Stretch or Hunt for the bigger body and experience in the wet

or

O-Mac or Dawes for a smaller team in the wet

I think Dawes will be good for these conditions. He tackles like a train crash and hits packs. And he isn't going to get smaller as the day goes on

11 hours ago, Maldonboy38 said:

Do we have any genuine mud runners, those who excel in wet, slippery or muddy conditions? 

Matt Jones

Franklin kicked one in the wet against Gold Coast.  Rohan and Parker got two each (out of a total of 11).  Tippet was their best player.  Sunday's match will be played in extreme conditions - maybe not quite the Gold Coast conditions of a few weeks back, but a very wet track nonetheless.  If our guys come out handball happy like we did in the early stages against the Hawks, we'll lose.  Ferocity at the contest will win on Sunday, pure and simple.  Dawes good on a wet track, must stay in.  Grimes or Michie in for Stretch makes sense if they don't elect to take Oscar out of the 18 today (illness!).  You can bet they'll be monitoring the weather forecast hourly until 5pm....but it looks like it's all locked in.  Hopefully Rohan doesn't come up.

One of Frost or OMac must be withdrawn from the squad (i was impressed with both last week but conditions don't suit). We have one tall too many for the conditions, surely Roos & match comittee can see this... TMac to take Buddy & Frost/Omac to take Sinclair/2nd ruck when their down there. We cant have Roos in the presser saying "we got it wrong at selection" AGAIN. Ideally I'd go with:

IN: Grimes 

OUT: OMac 

 

 

Let's hope we now know to hack it off the ground. Kicking in danger rule no longer applies as per Hawks game

9 hours ago, DemonWA said:

Stretch or Hunt for the bigger body and experience in the wet

or

O-Mac or Dawes for a smaller team in the wet

Hunt, Kennedy, Trengove and Oliver are the only options.

(Nobody bother telling me that the omissions don't have to come from extended bench.  Albeit with no evidence other than experience, I am 100% certain they do.)

11 minutes ago, Nasher said:

Hunt, Kennedy, Trengove and Oliver are the only options.

(Nobody bother telling me that the omissions don't have to come from extended bench.  Albeit with no evidence other than experience, I am 100% certain they do.)

Nash, there could be that late illness. (Cough, cough)

1 minute ago, ManDee said:

Nash, there could be that late illness.

Are you aware of someone ill?

6 minutes ago, Nasher said:

Are you aware of someone ill?

NO.  But a tall could become ill and need to be replaced. (Nudge, nudge, wink, wink....say no more)

4 minutes ago, Nasher said:

Hunt, Kennedy, Trengove and Oliver are the only options.

(Nobody bother telling me that the omissions don't have to come from extended bench.  Albeit with no evidence other than experience, I am 100% certain they do.)

I think it's a convention, not a rule.  

Given the weather and the opposition (they're not very tall) I think we should go with one less tall back.  I'd go Michie in for Omac, Franklin and whichever backup ruck Naismith/Nankervis they play are their only genuine tall forwards - TMac and Frost for them.  I think if we listed a tall on the extended bench we'd be telegraphing our final selection and I suspect that what's going on.

I think we're OK forward with Hogan, Dawes and Watts because they can all play effectively when the ball hits the ground.

I wouldn't mind Grimes for Stretch too given the conditions but i don't think he will come out of the 18.

5 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

I wouldn't mind Grimes for Stretch too given the conditions but i don't think he will come out of the 18.

Stretch is such a clean player, I want him in the wet conditions.

12 hours ago, rjay said:

GWS...

Woops forgot that one

24 minutes ago, Nasher said:

Hunt, Kennedy, Trengove and Oliver are the only options.

(Nobody bother telling me that the omissions don't have to come from extended bench.  Albeit with no evidence other than experience, I am 100% certain they do.)

http://s.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL Tenant/AFL/Files/Images/2016 Laws of Australian Football.pdf

5. TEAMS

5.1 NUMBER OF PLAYERS IN TEAM

Unless the number is varied under Law 5.2, a Team must consist of between 14 and 18 Players, who may be on the Playing Surface at any one time, and no more than 4 Interchange Players. The Controlling Body shall determine the actual number of Players which may play for each Team in the competitions conducted by the Controlling Body.

5.2 VARIATION OF NUMBER

Unless otherwise determined by the AFL, a Controlling Body may reduce below 14 or increase above 22 the number of Players (including Interchange Players) who may participate in a Match played in the competition conducted by the Controlling Body

5.3 TEAM SHEETS

5.3.1 Details

Unless otherwise determined by a Controlling Body, a Team Sheet shall:

(a) list the names and numbers of the Players in the Team;

(b) identify the Interchange Players;

(c) identify the captain; and

(d) list the name of the coach, Team Runner(s) and any other Official participating in the Match.

5.3.2 Completing and Lodging Team Sheet

Unless otherwise determined by a Controlling Body, an Official of each Team shall complete and lodge with a field Umpire its Team Sheet no later than 30 minutes before the scheduled commencement of a Match.

13 hours ago, Maldonboy38 said:

Do we have any genuine mud runners, those who excel in wet, slippery or muddy conditions? 

Who ever is selected they must stop over handballing

Nate Jones is our worst proponent he keeps calling for the pill while running further into trouble.His team mates must learn to ignore the call and take the first best option ie a short or medium kick to advantage or a long handball ah la Oliver or Gawn

Gawn knows how to win clearances on many occasions he hand passed 20 metres into the clear

His team mates should learn it. If not we will be smashed by teams like Hawthorn and Sydney

5 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Stretch is such a clean player, I want him in the wet conditions.

Yes agree with that and I do really like him.  But he's gotta get his hands on it and in these conditions against this opposition that won be easy.  

His 2 kicks 15 handballs ratio last week is uninspiring for the conditions.

21 hours ago, DeeZee said:

Got a feeling Grimes will come in for someone, as they rested him for the last quarter at Casey,not sure who yet, they may rest one of the youngsters.

Agree, maybe Clayton Oliver who has been relatively quiet in recent weeks but is still a gun in his clearances. Jack though has earned a recall.

13 hours ago, Maldonboy38 said:

Do we have any genuine mud runners, those who excel in wet, slippery or muddy conditions? 

Van Der Hum ?????????????

5 minutes ago, Dees2014 said:

Agree, maybe Clayton Oliver who has been relatively quiet in recent weeks but is still a gun in his clearances. Jack though has earned a recall.

I think the wet will suit Oliver, his work at stoppages is VG. When watching replays watch his work, I say replays because during the match I watch the ball and you miss much of his good work. Edit:- Also he is so quick at times that you miss his possessions.

Hopefully we learnt our wet weather footy lesson versus Hawks a fortnight ago... Move it forward relentlessly, ease off the finesse, and play in front.

48 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

I think it's a convention, not a rule.  

Even if it's a convention and not a rule, it amounts to the same thing: I've never seen them deviate from it (the MFC, at least) and I can't see any reason why they'd start this week.

I'd put a wager on the changes coming out of the extended bench, but I don't reckon "I'll put Jack Watts in my avatar" will have quite enough punch   

I reckon the thing ManDee is referring to of faking an illness in a player is also one of those things that happens all the time in the minds of supporters and never in actual reality.

21 minutes ago, pineapple dee said:

Van Der Hum ?????????????

Wow, Pineapple, you have jumped back almost 40 years there! I remember Van Der Hum so well because my racing fanatic grandfather called it a certainty and convinced me to put some money on it. Now THAT was a wet track. 

15 hours ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

Yeah you're right, was just looking at that. Two weeks ago we got smashed with storms, now whilst it won't be that bad again they are predicting quite a bit of rain so I would've thought we have one tall too many. Tippet is out, and they have an array of dangerous mid size players. As you know i haven't been a huge fan of Grimes over the years but on Sunday the stage is set for him to come in, all jokes aside I think there will be some ordinary skills on display at times from a raft of players due to the weather. I didn't name him earlier because I think the footy department has rightly or wrongly moved on from him. We are a chance on Sunday, people talk a lot about wet weather players, I lean more towards smart players. A few backs watching GC v Sydney, I said to myself numerous times why isn't there 2 smalls around the pack when the ball is bombed inside 50, one front and centre and one goal side over the back where the ball more often than not bounces through for a behind after key forwards fail to mark it.

It will be the Swans 3rd game in about 5 weeks that is played in really boggy conditions. Can't be good for their fitness...