1 hour ago, puntkick said:

I hope that we are sending someone with some balls down to Adelehad Stadium to inspect the surface before we commit to playing there Saturday and risking our players on the new surface.

Meanwhile Richmond,( Carlton ) Collingwood, Hawthorn,(Essendon ) get to play on their home ground round 1 !

The clue is in the names of the teams.... we are irrelevant

1 hour ago, Demon Disciple said:

Don't complain about the draw, we've got a pretty good one this year. Could've definitely been a lot worse

 

I wasn,t.But if youthink the first 3 outa 6 @ Etishit is good then that defines you.

Melksham TMac Smith

Vince OMac Hunt

Brayshaw Jones Lewis

Petracca Watts Garlett

Kent Hogan Harmes

Gawn Oliver Viney

ANB Stretch Pedersen Salem

Spencer Tyson Trengrove

 

Here is my biggest concern. If we choose to play Watts... Do we play Gawn more forward of centre and litter his feet with smaller type players or do we go tall with Weid and Spencil chocking it up in the forward line. Happier than most with the backline. Think we did well against the dogs and blues in this regard. Tyson seems to be a little underdone and from what I could gauge from Tyson at Maroochydore, he is touch and go - Casey games are no indication of form.

I agree with the sentiments on stkildas overlap run breaking us down if we let them - it comes down to smarts and who's prepared to give everything. 

 

I hate etihad for the record 

8 hours ago, demoniac said:

Video fairly average.

I am cautiously optimistic re Rnd 1 but they burned us on the outside last year. Hibberd's run will be missed. Hopefully Kent and Garlett are fit and in the 22. We look better on paper than the Saints. Anyway its Rnd 1 so hope springs eternal!

Video is cringe worthy

They should have paid the royalties to ac dc for hells bells or highway to hell

On 3/14/2017 at 8:38 AM, ArtificialWisdom said:

When it comes down to it I rate St Kilda pretty much spot on level with us. Given we play them twice, to borrow the phrase from the basketball, I'd want at least to 'split the season series' against them. So that means as much as I want to win round 1,If we dont, we will still have another shot at them at the G. So much is being put in to this round 1 clash. As long as its close i dont think the result matters all that much to us. If we get blown out then it might be panic stations but as long as its pretty close win or loss we will still be set up well for the long year 

Lose round 2? then is time to panic. 

I am not sure if I like the fact that we think so alike.

On 3/14/2017 at 3:34 PM, ArtificialWisdom said:

"No way" is a bit strong. But I suppose thats the closest to my opinion 

.

Phew! We are not the same person in alternate realities.

12 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

If deemed fit enough to play, Tyson, Kent and Garlett should all be automatic inclusions.  They make the side better.

I'm still very skittish about the potential selection of Spencer.  I don't think he'll suit the ground or the style of play we want at all, not to mention the time he takes away from Gawn in the ruck, plus I don't really rate Gawn as a forward.

It will be fascinating to see selection on Thursday night.

Gawn got smashed by Hickey twice last year who kept illegally jumping into him. Maybe Spence can nullify Hickey and leave Gawn as a headache in the fwd line? 

2 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Gawn got smashed by Hickey twice last year who kept illegally jumping into him. Maybe Spence can nullify Hickey and leave Gawn as a headache in the fwd line? 

Possibly, but I'd like to back in that Gawn has learned from both experiences.  I'm just not sold on Gawn playing forward - I like it when he drifts down there for the odd goal, which he did really well last year, but I'm not a fan of him as a stay at home forward while Spencer runs around in the ruck.

Proof will be in the pudding, though, and I'd be happy to be wrong.  But I just don't see it happening.

17 hours ago, old dee said:

I am not sure what you mean Mr. leg Can you be more precise please.

It was in relation to Caro saying the Saints believe "we are getting ahead of ourselves".

25 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Gawn got smashed by Hickey twice last year who kept illegally jumping into him. Maybe Spence can nullify Hickey and leave Gawn as a headache in the fwd line? 

I think smashed twice is an exaggeration. 

In the first match their stats were virtually identical.  13 disposals each, Gawn 3 marks to Hickey's one and 38 hitouts to 36, also in Gawn's favour.

I'm happy to acknowledge Gawn was nullified and perhaps even shaded due to Hickey's more telling disposals, but I wouldn't agree that a bloke that had no more disposals, less marks and less hitouts "smashed" the other guy. 

Hickey clearly won in the second game even though he once again had less hitouts. 

6 hours ago, Steve0908 said:

Melksham TMac Smith

Vince OMac Hunt

Brayshaw Jones Lewis

Petracca Watts Garlett

Kent Hogan Harmes

Gawn Oliver Viney

ANB Stretch Pedersen Salem

Spencer Tyson Trengrove

 

Here is my biggest concern. If we choose to play Watts... Do we play Gawn more forward of centre and litter his feet with smaller type players or do we go tall with Weid and Spencil chocking it up in the forward line. Happier than most with the backline. Think we did well against the dogs and blues in this regard. Tyson seems to be a little underdone and from what I could gauge from Tyson at Maroochydore, he is touch and go - Casey games are no indication of form.

Tyson's underdone but Pedersen is straight in with no JLT?

1 minute ago, Fifty-5 said:

Tyson's underdone but Pedersen is straight in with no JLT?

Not unique to these 2 names but that logic seems to be spreading around here. I've seen it at least 4 or 5 times in the last week

9 hours ago, Akum said:

Agree in general. If we turn in any sort of reasonable performance, this is probably the game that winning or losing means the least for our prospects for the season

I disagree, in so far as there is a fairly good chance we might be battling the saints to make the 8 or perhaps even a poisition within tbe 8. So in that regard it could well be season defining

1 hour ago, AzzKikA said:

I am not sure if I like the fact that we think so alike.

59 minutes ago, AzzKikA said:

Phew! We are not the same person in alternate realities.

Damn I thought for a second we could have won a nobel prize!

48 minutes ago, Redleg said:

It was in relation to Caro saying the Saints believe "we are getting ahead of ourselves".

I was being smart Mr. leg Sir.

58 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

Tyson's underdone but Pedersen is straight in with no JLT?

Yeah. Tyson was quite worried when I spoke to him and Instagram showed some interesting pics of Pedo rucking.

1 hour ago, jnrmac said:

Gawn got smashed by Hickey twice last year who kept illegally jumping into him. Maybe Spence can nullify Hickey and leave Gawn as a headache in the fwd line? 

 

1 hour ago, Wiseblood said:

Possibly, but I'd like to back in that Gawn has learned from both experiences.  I'm just not sold on Gawn playing forward - I like it when he drifts down there for the odd goal, which he did really well last year, but I'm not a fan of him as a stay at home forward while Spencer runs around in the ruck.

Proof will be in the pudding, though, and I'd be happy to be wrong.  But I just don't see it happening.

Earlier in their careers Gawn & Spencer played a bit of footy together at Casey. Gawn was preferred forward and Spencer in the ruck...the only reason I could see at the time was that Gawn was a marginally better forward than Spencer, and that wasn't saying much.

I always thought at the time they needed to play Gawn more in the ruck because even then he was superior to Spencer.

It was only when big Max had his opportunity to play as the number one ruckman that he blossomed.

Now if we want to see Max regress the move to play Spencer in the ruck and Max forward will achieve this.

Dont flirt with form...

Max must play as the number one man and spend a significant amount of time on ball and as 'Wise' says he's better off drifting forward rather than being stationed there.

In my team Spencer wouldn't get a game but unfortunately going by the JLT games it looks like Goodwin is heading down that path.

I'd like Spencer to be played off the bench when and if Hickey is getting the better of Max.  I could see Spencer's aggression phasing Hickey, allowing Max to come back in and take advantage.

Gawn in the forwardline, backline, wing, centre... wherever is a massive asset. Spencer is insurance. No slight on Jake, but Gawn is AA and Spencer is, at the best, serviceable. Gawn plays everytime he's fit. Spencer waits until he's not.

8 hours ago, puntkick said:

I wasn,t.But if youthink the first 3 outa 6 @ Etishit is good then that defines you.

They're away games - do you think we should play every single week at the G? Seriously some people

1 hour ago, binman said:

So in that regard it could well be season defining

There is no such thing as "season defining" in Round 1.

2 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

Possibly, but I'd like to back in that Gawn has learned from both experiences.  I'm just not sold on Gawn playing forward - I like it when he drifts down there for the odd goal, which he did really well last year, but I'm not a fan of him as a stay at home forward while Spencer runs around in the ruck.

Proof will be in the pudding, though, and I'd be happy to be wrong.  But I just don't see it happening.

Gawn and Jesse don't work well as a forward line, they both fly for everything and a lot of times last year got in each others way.

8 minutes ago, mauriesy said:

There is no such thing as "season defining" in Round 1.

GWS lost to a middle rung team round 1 last year and they went OK during the year...

25 minutes ago, mauriesy said:

There is no such thing as "season defining" in Round 1.

Usually I'd agree with you, but I would think that the season opener against Port in 2013, that we were expected to comfortably win but ended up losing by 79 points (prompting Neild to say "We didn't see that coming..."), was definitely season defining... it only got worse from that point on.