8 hours ago, deespicable me said:

I thought Kent looked sharp. I've seen him a couple of trainings and he came back pre-season with a bit of pud, got injured for a while and has taken a while to get in good shape. I was thinking he is pretty close now.

Watts not there would make me think he is possibly two weeks away yet and may not get back for the game against Carlton.

Garlett and Jones both looked good, both probably step it up next week and both are a chance for the Blues, running at 75%.

Viney was interesting, he is still not 100% in the shoulder (in my opinion). They tested him with some bumps but he rolled his shoulder away on impact. I don't know anything about shoulder injuries so I'm not sure what the treatment is for his problem and whether it will be an ongoing problem or is nothing more than sore. Hopefully he doesn't have to carry it for the rest of the season.

 They may be rolling the dice a bit with him and considering what he is in for against the Swans mids on Friday I will be watching him closely and hoping like hell he can get through unscathed.

The Carlton game is 10 days away, so if there's no tear or strain he (Watts) may well be right to go against Carlton even though he won't be risked tomorrow.  If they ruled him out against Sydney early on there was no point completing a full training session.  What would the point have been ?

Garlett may be right to go next week, but Jones has supposedly a minimum four week injury and the type of injury that can easily reoccur.  He won't play against Carlton.

Viney would no doubt have soreness, but he pulled up so well they didn't even bother sending him for scans.  I'm not concerned about how he'll perform.

 

18 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

How about White in for Salem and Josh Wagner replaces Hunt at the back and Hunt goes forward

 

17 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

Essendon caught out Sydney with speed forward of the ball and out the back, so why not Hunt as a forward

EFC & the Tiges both caught out the Swans defence for pace...

I like your thinking here...whether White or another, Hunt forward is a good option.

1 hour ago, ProDee said:

The Carlton game is 10 days away, so if there's no tear or strain he (Watts) may well be right to go against Carlton even though he won't be risked tomorrow.  If they ruled him out against Sydney early on there was no point completing a full training session.  What would the point have been ?

Garlett may be right to go next week, but Jones has supposedly a minimum four week injury and the type of injury that can easily reoccur.  He won't play against Carlton.

Viney would no doubt have soreness, but he pulled up so well they didn't even bother sending him for scans.  I'm not concerned about how he'll perform.

 

Just quietly viney could have a serious injury . No source . 

14 hours ago, monoccular said:

 

Stability in the back 6 has been vital to our progress.  Not sure that there will be two changes there.

Hunt's potency is that he is quick but especially that he's a line breaker and huge meter accumulator. This is because of the space afore him coming off the hb. He's a weapon in this regard. Occasionally he will keep running if suits and indeed stride towards goal but ffs lets not gift any opposition by removing him from his place of power !! 

1 hour ago, ProDee said:

I doubt anyone disagrees with you, but players need to be versatile and forward pressure has never been more important.  So, in the absence of your best pressure forward these types of moves come into play.

Yup. It will be decided at the selection table. If they go with a Wagner over the likes of Kent or Kennedy then that will pretty much tell us the answer and as others have said I would think Hunt would spend some time forward.

My only hope is that if they bring in JKH it is for a midfield rotation not as a Gartlett replacement. I know we want versatility but JKH just isn't a small forward. His productive VFL form is on the back of him running in the midfield.

13 minutes ago, CityDee said:

Just quietly viney could have a serious injury . No source . 

If you have no source why would you even bother posting this ?

He either does or he doesn't.  If he does, he won't play, if he doesn't he will.

 

1 hour ago, ProDee said:

The Carlton game is 10 days away, so if there's no tear or strain he (Watts) may well be right to go against Carlton even though he won't be risked tomorrow.  If they ruled him out against Sydney early on there was no point completing a full training session.  What would the point have been ?

I hope you're right about Watts but in my limited experience watching training it's always good to see them back running after an injury coz it means they aren't far away. After yesterday I think maybe Garlett and Jones are ahead of Watts in their rehab.

25 minutes ago, deespicable me said:

I hope you're right about Watts but in my limited experience watching training it's always good to see them back running after an injury coz it means they aren't far away. After yesterday I think maybe Garlett and Jones are ahead of Watts in their rehab.

I know what you mean, but there was footage a day earlier on the news showing him running the boundary at a fair clip.

As long as he hasn't made the injury worse, and we haven't heard he has, and as long as there's no tear or strain, and we're led to believe it's back related, then I wouldn't read too much into one training session.  Especially, as he would have already been ruled out.

1 hour ago, ProDee said:

If you have no source why would you even bother posting this ?

He either does or he doesn't.  If he does, he won't play, if he doesn't he will.

 

PD I think he is joking

17 hours ago, willmoy said:

I ,like you unconvinced on Kent, yet , but i reckon they will put him in. Swans are slowing down a bit and Hibberd and Hunt cause their Brains Trust no end of angst.........

Not a Kent fan but have been watching the Casey reports closely. They are upbeat about his commitment, tackling pressure etc. Makes sense to bring him in as this will likely worry the Swans and if he brings the right attitude - which he should given he knows how well the team is performing without him - then he could make a big impact. 

 

3 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Not a Kent fan but have been watching the Casey reports closely. They are upbeat about his commitment, tackling pressure etc. Makes sense to bring him in as this will likely worry the Swans and if he brings the right attitude - which he should given he knows how well the team is performing without him - then he could make a big impact. 

 

Kent plays neither the Salem role, nor the Garlett role in the team.  Suspect he won't get the nod.  He has looked OK, but he is more high forward flank type role at Casey.  Maybe he replaces Watts and we shuffle the pack more substantially?

Jones will be out for at least four weeks. From experience, running is not the issue with quad injuries. The problem is kicking.

I have faith that Kent will perform the necessary pressure acts if recalled. Let's not forget he was one of our best forward pressure players two years ago before his hammy went snap against the tigers. He's got pace (which everyone seems to think is the key to unlocking the Swans defence) and is always good for at least a goal or two as well.

Go Deano!

8 hours ago, Dees2014 said:

Interestingly, OMac was practising with the forwards group at training yesterday.  Apparently, Roos liked him as a forward, so maybe they are preparing him for just such a scenario above. Certainly would considerably enhance our flexibility. He is after all IMHO a longer kick and better overhead mark than his brother. It wouldn't surprise me if in the long term they want to develop Nietz type skills in him.

a better overhead mark than tom?! don't think so mate. definitely better footskills though!

20 minutes ago, buck_nekkid said:

Kent plays neither the Salem role, nor the Garlett role in the team.  Suspect he won't get the nod.  He has looked OK, but he is more high forward flank type role at Casey.  Maybe he replaces Watts and we shuffle the pack more substantially?

Not sure you can just automatically replace someone in the 'Salem role' or the 'Garlett role'. You have to mix it up and be flexible. Keep in mind the team pushes up pretty high from defence in any case and runs back hard. Kent can do that role if he has the right attitude.

He can also play the pressure fwd to lock the ball in. Makes sense to me that they will bring him in.

17 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

Jones will be out for at least four weeks. From experience, running is not the issue with quad injuries. The problem is kicking.

This. The tear in quads is always the rectus femoris, the long muscle which goes over the hip and knee joints. It's usually recovers very quickly to allow full speed sprinting, but is held back by being the prime mover in kicking. The thing in Jones' favour is his resilience, so we can be sure his healing rate is about as good as a 29 year old's can be. 

23 hours ago, Copuchas said:

Just back from training.  Salient points:

- no Watts for the entire session

- Garlett joined Jones for run throughs on the boundary for the whole session.  Practiced a few snaps at goal but you'd think unlikely to come up

- Jones quipped that his quad was feeling significantly better than the previous session

- Hogan participated fully in the whole group session

- Kent looked sharp and up and about

- TMac doing lots of goal kicking practice

- Joel Smith training fully with the main group

- Hunt looked a bit flat, Pedersen looked a bit sore

Interesting comment you made about Hunt, he's looked a bit flat for a few weeks in my opinion, in fact since he got that knock.

I may be wrong but he seems to be slightly off the boil, I guess it happens to kids his age at this stage of the season. 

11 minutes ago, Webber said:

This. The tear in quads is always the rectus femoris, the long muscle which goes over the hip and knee joints. It's usually recovers very quickly to allow full speed sprinting, but is held back by being the prime mover in kicking. The thing in Jones' favour is his resilience, so we can be sure his healing rate is about as good as a 29 year old's can be. 

Do we know which leg it is?  I've noticed this year that Jones was kicking on his left leg much more than in past years and I suspected he was carrying something on his right.

Seems to me that he may have been carrying this for some time before the Doggies game.

12 minutes ago, Vogon Poetry said:

Do we know which leg it is?  I've noticed this year that Jones was kicking on his left leg much more than in past years and I suspected he was carrying something on his right.

Seems to me that he may have been carrying this for some time before the Doggies game.

Don't know which leg. It's not really an injury you can carry and get away with. I reckon all our players are kicking more on the non-preferred this year. Seems to have been a focus pre-season. 

50 minutes ago, Vogon Poetry said:

Do we know which leg it is?  I've noticed this year that Jones was kicking on his left leg much more than in past years and I suspected he was carrying something on his right.

Seems to me that he may have been carrying this for some time before the Doggies game.

Jones was kicking off both feet at training/rehab yesterday, he will be trying to convince them he will be right to go against Carlton

I am with the Club, if September action is realistic this year why risk rushing Watts Garlett and Hogan

34 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

Jones was kicking off both feet at training/rehab yesterday, he will be trying to convince them he will be right to go against Carlton

I am with the Club, if September action is realistic this year why risk rushing Watts Garlett and Hogan

Agreed, no risks with these 3 please. All serious finals contenders need a fresh and close to injury free list come September.  Jones and Watts are critical for our structure and game. I am not so sure about Hogan unless he can come back into the side and become a weapon. However, we don't need a forward line that revolves around him. We need him as a contributor. In regard to injuries, it is this time of the season that needs judicious and sensible decisions around team selection. Most players are suffering from physical and mental fatigue, so it is not the time to take risks when players are already sore. Hopefully our depth and list quality will get us through the coming month. The balance between winning games but not risking players is going to be all important. It's like walking a tightrope. 

2 hours ago, hemingway said:

Agreed, no risks with these 3 please. All serious finals contenders need a fresh and close to injury free list come September.  Jones and Watts are critical for our structure and game. I am not so sure about Hogan unless he can come back into the side and become a weapon. However, we don't need a forward line that revolves around him. We need him as a contributor. In regard to injuries, it is this time of the season that needs judicious and sensible decisions around team selection. Most players are suffering from physical and mental fatigue, so it is not the time to take risks when players are already sore. Hopefully our depth and list quality will get us through the coming month. The balance between winning games but not risking players is going to be all important. It's like walking a tightrope. 

Could not agree more Ernest.

Never thought I would be saying this but IMO we can afford to drop this game.

do not play anyone who is not one hundred percent.

2 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

I am with the Club, if September action is realistic this year, why risk rushing Watts Garlett and Hogan?

 

2 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

Jones was kicking off both feet at training/rehab yesterday, he will be trying to convince them he will be right to go against Carlton

I am with the Club, if September action is realistic this year why risk rushing Watts Garlett and Hogan

Exactly! And the positive spin is that we are creating depth and opportunities. 

We need those three to have any sort of impact during finals 

Interesting that quite a few players seem to have been trying out different positions at training.

Would be fair enough if we're more concerned about this opposition, & about who's going to miss through injury against this opposition & who's going to have to carry injuries into this game. Perhaps we're thinking ahead & anticipating changes we might need to make during the game, & trying them out to see which changes might come off & which changes probably won't.

For example, if we can't stop the Swans getting it out of defence and attacking off their HB too easily, would it help us or hinder us to switch Hunt forward?

If Buddy looks like getting hold of O-Mac or Frost, would it be better or worse to switch O-Mac forward and T-Mac back?

If Viney's shoulder gets a few hard hits early, which of the "Kens" is most likely to be able to come off the HFF to give us what we need on the ball to allow Viney to play more minutes on HFF?

You'd think they'd want some idea of what options there are and what options there aren't, because in this game it's much more likely that we'll have to swing a few players around and play them in unfamiliar positions. My take against the Swans is that they may well get us if we do what they're expecting, but we're a better chance if we can do the unexpected and it comes off.