Just now, dazzledavey36 said:

I think you are undervaluing Laurie's tank.

Maybe I am.

Missed opportunity for the title: Who will be our Sparg plug?

39 minutes ago, John Demonic said:

Missed opportunity for the title: Who will be our Sparg plug?

Hopefully someone who provides more sparg(k).

Vines in for Spargs (injured), is the only logical change imo.

If we play like we did against the Lions and the Swans, we shouldn’t have any problems beating the Saints ………. but note the ‘IF’.

Personally, I’m disregarding the big ‘IF’, and I’m extremely confident of a comfortable Dees win. I’ll be truly ‘gutted’ if that doesn’t happen!

Go Dees!

45 minutes ago, John Demonic said:

Missed opportunity for the title: Who will be our Sparg plug?

Lucky we're not looking for a replacement for Jordan Butts

1 hour ago, Ghostwriter said:

Vines might not be available this week. He didn’t train today.

Thanks for info..

Somehow that doesn't bode well.

Beginning to have a Gus feel to it.

Don't like this ....

2 hours ago, Dee Zephyr said:

I got my hopes up Ghosty after watching Goody’s presser today. He said Jack was on track to play this week.

Yeah I saw the presser. A friend was at Casey today (behind the locked gates) and didn’t see Jack there.

Vines would seem to be a straight swap for Spargs. No appearance today is a worry though.

Having said that, he still might be a good chance. I don't think Vines needs a match sim hit out in order to know what's required.

The other side is, the FD might be putting him in cotton wool and looking towards Monday week's block buster.

Edited Wednesday at 11:491 day by Demon Dynasty

Is Spargos injury due to Mills?

And if so am I correct in understanding he only got a week?

4 minutes ago, leave it to deever said:

Is Spargos injury due to Mills?

And if so am I correct in understanding he only got a week?

The injury was sustained before the Mills collision in a separate incident.

I was left completely unconvinced by Goody's presser response on Viney's availability...

Definitely in doubt 🧐

My 2 cents.

AJ stays in.
He might not've kicked the goals but he can read the play and had a hand in a bunch of them.

On 26/05/2025 at 12:08, Colm said:

Agreed with a lot of your post but not sure about the strength of the list. I think to have a good list we need more depth. I think Sydney’s list is in a fairly similar position to ours. I count that they had about 6 best 22 players out injured over the weekend. We had one in Viney.

It’s no coincidence that our form has improved as we have had nearly a full list to pick from. If we had to bring in another 5/6 from Casey we would have struggled to perform nearly as well.

Pies ran over the top of north yesterday without 8/9 of their best 22. North smashed us when we had 5/6 out. Of course there are other reason to for our improved form as our new game plan beds in and some key players finding form.

I’m still very confident about JVR and the Kolt will be in our best 22 at some stage this year and clearly the same goes for an aging Tmac and Viney.

I just don’t think we have enough quality beyond that to cover our best 22, we need our good fortune with injuries to continue for the remainder of the season.

Kolt, viney, AMW, tmac, mcadam, woe, Howes, Jefferson, brown and JVR. How many more depth player do you want?

16 hours ago, Freddy Fuschia said:

Disco’s playing the best football of his life down back, so why move him?

Windsor had 24 touches last week - that’s not too shabby.

Were you at the game?

Yeah I was there

Disco was great and has been forward or back

Windsor just seemed a little bit slower and not his usual smooth self.

surprised he had 24 and would need to watch replay to see how many effective. I love him but he just seemed a bit off pace at the game. Maybe does need to play again to get back to pace, so will have to reconsider/\.

I am sure the coaches know whats going on and where the players are at and what they need. Ive still got plenty of faith in them as long as they play with the intensity and desperation hat is needed.

22 minutes ago, Oxdee said:

Kolt, viney, AMW, tmac, mcadam, woe, Howes, Jefferson, brown and JVR. How many more depth player do you want?

The thing about depth is it’s fine to a point. Who on that list is replacing Gawn? Not saying you’re wrong but depth always looks better on paper.

5 hours ago, Roost it far said:

The thing about depth is it’s fine to a point. Who on that list is replacing Gawn? Not saying you’re wrong but depth always looks better on paper.

Dees are in an impossible position with a ruckman. No good ruckman will want to play second fiddle to Gawn at Casey every week. We will replace Gawn when he no longer is at the top of his game but the night still be years away

6 hours ago, Roost it far said:

The thing about depth is it’s fine to a point. Who on that list is replacing Gawn? Not saying you’re wrong but depth always looks better on paper.

There is no club in the AFL that would have the quality to replace Gawn. Hea a generational player.

Campbell of course would still provide a solid back up option. Completely different style of ruckman, but would at least give us a solid mature and experienced body to crash and bash.

13 hours ago, ElDiablo14 said:

Viney anyone? He would make us a beast in tackles inside our fwd 50. And surprisingly he is a good kick at goal.

Yeah to Viney easily,in this position! In fact would be tempted to leave him there for the majority of the rest of his career!

Edited Wednesday at 21:061 day by picket fence

7 hours ago, Roost it far said:

The thing about depth is it’s fine to a point. Who on that list is replacing Gawn? Not saying you’re wrong but depth always looks better on paper.

That’s like asking Collingwood who is replacing Nick Daicos, or the Dogs who would replace Bont. The answer is someone who isn’t as good but can play their role.

No team can replace their best players. It’s why injuries are one of the most significant factors in winning a flag.

Heard that Spargo doesn't need surgery

Great news for the lad

I would select Tmac his week and play him forward and 2nd ruck, select Viney

Danger game. We have a poor record in AS.

Lyon is a good tactical coach & while the Saints are ordinary they manage to pull off upset wins every year.

Last week i made the case that dees at 2.10 were overs and therefore represented value.

I also made the point that thinking we were value is not the same as thinking we would win, but that in fact i did think we would win.

Putting my punting hat on again for our game against the Saints it's sort of the opposite scenario.

I do think we'll win but the current odds of 1.49 is unders (ie under the true odds) IMO - and therefore the 2.64 you can get for the Saints is overs (but i still wouldn't back them because a good rule of thumb is not backing flakey teams you can't trust - and the saints are well and truly in that camp).

All things being equal, the plus 11 points Is better value.

But all things aren't equal.

As I noted last week, I don't bet on dees games, but if i did I would stay well away from this match (for any bet) because there's just too many variables, which taken together make this the very definition of a danger game.

Despite being in much, much better form than the saints I'm actually less confident this week than i was against because of these variables:

• Lyon will coach to nullify and negate - no chance he goes with a fast ball movement game plan that would advantage us

• Further to that point, Lyon will be focused on disrupting our method (look for us to have a huge number of uncontested kicks and marks accross our half back line as I reckon Lyon will flood back and not press up on the ball carrier)

• This creates a problem for us as, unlike say the Pies, our method is a woekk in progress and we don't have much experience dealing with scenarios where our opponents are hyper focused on disrupting our method as opposed to focusing first and foremost on their own method

• The game is at the Alice - unique ground, unique environment, both teams travelling etc

• I wonder if our high performance program is geared towards being in optimal shape on Kings birthday at the potential expense of this game (ie bigger block of training into this game then taking advantage of the 8 day break to taper into the pies game)

• After three huge matches in a row, and one coming up next game, Is there any risk of players subconsciously not being fully switched on?

One variable I was really worried about was the weather.

Heavy rain was predicted in the lead up which risked making surface really spongy as it doesn't drain well apparently.

And of course rain on game day would not help our cause and conversely help the Saints.

Bur fortunately i dont think there's been any hige downpours this week and apart from 1mm forecast today it's dry up to, and including, match day.

This is a huge game for us given how important the 4 points are to any chance we have of making finals. Bur I'm really nervous about it.

Key will be taking our chances early and putting scoreboard pressure on them. If we do i could see us opening them up and putting a big score padt them.

If we don't, and the Saints stay there,vor thereabouts, i fesr we are in for a very anxious watch.

2 minutes ago, binman said:

Last week i made the case that dees at 2.10 were overs and therefore represented value.

I also made the point that thinking we were value is not the same as thinking we would win, but that in fact i did think we would win.

Putting my punting hat on again for our game against the Saints it's sort of the opposite scenario.

I do think we'll win but the current odds of 1.49 is unders (ie under the true odds) IMO - and therefore the 2.64 you can get for the Saints is overs (but i still wouldn't back them because a good rule of thumb is not backing flakey teams you can't trust - and the saints are well and truly in that camp).

All things being equal, the plus 11 points Is better value.

But all things aren't equal.

As I noted last week, I don't bet on dees games, but if i did I would stay well away from this match (for any bet) because there's just too many variables, which taken together make this the very definition of a danger game.

Despite being in much, much better form than the saints I'm actually less confident this week than i was against because of these variables:

• Lyon will coach to nullify and negate - no chance he goes with a fast ball movement game plan that would advantage us

• Further to that point, Lyon will be focused on disrupting our method (look for us to have a huge number of uncontested kicks and marks accross our half back line as I reckon Lyon will flood back and not press up on the ball carrier)

• This creates a problem for us as, unlike say the Pies, our method is a woekk in progress and we don't have much experience dealing with scenarios where our opponents are hyper focused on disrupting our method as opposed to focusing first and foremost on their own method

• The game is at the Alice - unique ground, unique environment, both teams travelling etc

• I wonder if our high performance program is geared towards being in optimal shape on Kings birthday at the potential expense of this game (ie bigger block of training into this game then taking advantage of the 8 day break to taper into the pies game)

• After three huge matches in a row, and one coming up next game, Is there any risk of players subconsciously not being fully switched on?

One variable I was really worried about was the weather.

Heavy rain was predicted in the lead up which risked making surface really spongy as it doesn't drain well apparently.

And of course rain on game day would not help our cause and conversely help the Saints.

Bur fortunately i dont think there's been any hige downpours this week and apart from 1mm forecast today it's dry up to, and including, match day.

This is a huge game for us given how important the 4 points are to any chance we have of making finals. Bur I'm really nervous about it.

Key will be taking our chances early and putting scoreboard pressure on them. If we do i could see us opening them up and putting a big score padt them.

If we don't, and the Saints stay there,vor thereabouts, i fesr we are in for a very anxious watch.

100% no notes

(But yes I also think we will win, but $1.49 is way unders)

12 hours ago, adonski said:

Lucky we're not looking for a replacement for Jordan Butts

his absence will leave a hole