The Zebras are back at Trevor Barker Beach Road Oval for the first time in a while and their ranks have been depleted through the unavailability of players through injury. This week they face a tough challenge from the Werribee Ducks.

SANDRINGHAM v WERRIBEE

Trevor Barker Beach Road Oval, Sunday 15 July 2007

SENIORS at 2:00pm

SANDRINGHAM

Backs Garland Warnock Holland

Half backs Biddlecombe Lamb Bode

Centreline Summers Moloney Gallagher

Half forwards Pickett Crowe Poyas

Forwards Valenti Sautner Ferguson

Followers Jamar Martyn C Liddell

Interchange (from) Dean Gilchrist Hayes Monaghan Neaves Neville Paterakis T Johnston Zarra

WERRIBEE

Backs Howard Barham Young

Half backs D Addison Pask Tiller

Centreline T Sheringham Gleeson Lynch

Half forwards Hill Wight Baird

Forwards Skipper Podsiadly Rockefeller

Followers Minson Faulkner Castello

Interchange (from) Eriksen Furfaro Garth Henderson Lavars McCormack Robinson J Sheringham

RESERVES at 11:10pm

SANDRINGHAM

Backs Collyer Gibb Liddell

Halfbacks Weetra McKenzie Dean

Centres Neville Zarra Tregear

Half forwards Richards Gribbin Hayes

Forwards Gileno Dunne Lyall

Followers Martin Paule M Johnston

Interchange (from) Cleeve Goold Henry McGettigan Ott Roberts Turcarelli Williams

Still no Hayes in the seniors despite the long Melbourne injury list. Interesting.

Why the hell is Shane Neaves starting on the bench and Mark Jamar on the ruck?

I thought Neaves has shown more progress than Mark Jamar?

Because Neaves isn't listed...

Jamar is MUCH further along. Despite not showing a WHOLE lot he has starred for whole seasons at VFL level...

Neaves hasn't.

It's interesting to read the optimistic comments about Neaves and then see that Jamar is rated above him - at least for this match.

We need to somehow increase Jamar's trade/market value. No doubt clubs such as Carlton and Collingwood will be fishing around for a ruckman at the end of the year.

Trade Jamar for a second/third rounder or an established player, elevate Neaves (hopefully he's good enough), and draft and rookie two ruckman.

The Pies took Chris Bryan who could not get a game at Sandringham, so surely....

Jamar would dominate at this level - his ruckwork would be better than most but does he dominate around the ground??

I would like to be proven wrong by the big russian - watch him impose himself on games more.....

We need to somehow increase Jamar's trade/market value. No doubt clubs such as Carlton and Collingwood will be fishing around for a ruckman at the end of the year.

Trade Jamar for a second/third rounder or an established player, elevate Neaves (hopefully he's good enough), and draft and rookie two ruckman.

Jamar is big. He just has not performed to the standard. I cant see Carlton giving any blood for an ordinary ruckman. They have enough of them.

I would be surprised if we get anything for him because he is OOC at year end and he is the sort of player who has value at PSD time. Free.

I would be chuffed if we got a 2nd/3rd round pick for Jamar. Great deal if we did.

I don't understand all the negativity towards Jamar. He has done a good job for us, especially throughout 2006. Why would we trade a proven AFL ruckman?

Jeff White only has a couple years left. What is wrong with a Jamar/PJ combination?

Its not like Jamar is 32 and has nothing more to give. He is developing and most importantly young. I have faith he'll be a good ruckman in years to come. I just hope he does it in Melbourne colours.

We have already disposed of Simmonds and Jolly, why throw away another ruckman?

We need to somehow increase Jamar's trade/market value. No doubt clubs such as Carlton and Collingwood will be fishing around for a ruckman at the end of the year.

Trade Jamar for a second/third rounder or an established player, elevate Neaves (hopefully he's good enough), and draft and rookie two ruckman.

Jamar was already dominating VFL a few years back and that was a reason why I was so excited by our ruck factory machine.

He will continue to dominate VFL with his bulk and size on smaller grounds.

If we want to increase his value, he has to play seniors.

Jamar to take first ruck, PJ second ruck. White to play midfield.

Neaves to play full time first ruck at Sandy.

I would rather PJ be our first ruckman as he has shown that he has a good future ahead of him. I just think Jamar doesn't get enough of the ball and hurt his opponents like PJ and White do.

I really can't remember the last time Jamar got over 10 disposals.

Why the hell is Shane Neaves starting on the bench and Mark Jamar on the ruck?

I thought Neaves has shown more progress than Mark Jamar?

You must be joking. Why don't you get to the games & have a look for yourself.

I'm not joking. I would rather Neaves be given first use in the ruck and even Jamar a spot up forward pocket.

I have seen Jamar play before and I'm not impressed. He's been on the list since 2002, a good 6 years, and hasn't produced anything!

It's time to move on now and try experiement with others like Shane Neaves. He has been really impressive and him starting on the bench would lower his confidence.

I don't understand all the negativity towards Jamar. He has done a good job for us, especially throughout 2006. Why would we trade a proven AFL ruckman?

Jeff White only has a couple years left. What is wrong with a Jamar/PJ combination?

Its not like Jamar is 32 and has nothing more to give. He is developing and most importantly young. I have faith he'll be a good ruckman in years to come. I just hope he does it in Melbourne colours.

We have already disposed of Simmonds and Jolly, why throw away another ruckman?

He is not a proven AFL ruckman.

He is a proven VFL ruckman who has played games at AFL level. Big difference. Across his career he averages 9 hit outs and 4.6 disposals around the ground. This supports the observations that he is a decent tap ruckman who struggles around the ground. He has done nothing to warrant a spot in the last 2 years except being tall. PJ has come ahead of him in leaps and bounds. Neaves is not ahead of him yet because he is 5 years behind in development. I think the excitment about Neaves is because he is showing the potential to be a much better all round player.

The reason Simmonds and Jolly left have been discussed on this board frequently. They were not 'disposed of'. They chose to leave to chase glory and white was a better ruckman, and in many opinions still is.

Jamar hasn't developed into the ruckman that either Simmonds or Jolly is and there is daylight between him and Jeff White.

Still no Hayes in the seniors despite the long Melbourne injury list. Interesting.

Hayes is still occuping HFF in the Sandy ressies while other VFL listed players are getting games in the seniors. That would suggest to me that the coaches don't think he's ready to step up yet.

He is not a proven AFL ruckman.

He is a proven VFL ruckman who has played games at AFL level. Big difference. Across his career he averages 9 hit outs and 4.6 disposals around the ground. This supports the observations that he is a decent tap ruckman who struggles around the ground. He has done nothing to warrant a spot in the last 2 years except being tall. PJ has come ahead of him in leaps and bounds. Neaves is not ahead of him yet because he is 5 years behind in development. I think the excitment about Neaves is because he is showing the potential to be a much better all round player.

The reason Simmonds and Jolly left have been discussed on this board frequently. They were not 'disposed of'. They chose to leave to chase glory and white was a better ruckman, and in many opinions still is.

Jamar hasn't developed into the ruckman that either Simmonds or Jolly is and there is daylight between him and Jeff White.

Spot on deanox.

Agree totally. Good post.

Because Neaves isn't listed...

Jamar is MUCH further along. Despite not showing a WHOLE lot he has starred for whole seasons at VFL level...

Neaves hasn't.

Jamar is demonstrated that he won't make it even after many, many opportunities while Neaves has been Sandy's best ruckman this year and he is four years younger.

This is the very reason why I've said in the past that we should (at the very least) look at our set up with Sandringham and consider the possibility that a reserves side may be a better alternative, especially given that the AFL will make it cheaper to do it. Having players like Newton and Neaves wasting time on the bench is counter productive.

He is not a proven AFL ruckman.

He is a proven VFL ruckman who has played games at AFL level. Big difference. Across his career he averages 9 hit outs and 4.6 disposals around the ground. This supports the observations that he is a decent tap ruckman who struggles around the ground. He has done nothing to warrant a spot in the last 2 years except being tall. PJ has come ahead of him in leaps and bounds. Neaves is not ahead of him yet because he is 5 years behind in development. I think the excitment about Neaves is because he is showing the potential to be a much better all round player.

The reason Simmonds and Jolly left have been discussed on this board frequently. They were not 'disposed of'. They chose to leave to chase glory and white was a better ruckman, and in many opinions still is.

Jamar hasn't developed into the ruckman that either Simmonds or Jolly is and there is daylight between him and Jeff White.

The Jeff White discussion is a very complex one (and one I love debating ), during his time with us he has seen off three other ruckman (Stynes retired too early imo) but for various reasons we weren't able to take full advantage of his abilities. One thing is for certain though, changing the centre bounce rule was something he never really got over.

Interesting, now that the teams have been adusted to differentiate between T and M Johnston something has emerged. BTW thet Tommy, or is that Tomi, Johnston is a right little goer that we could do worse than pick up, but I digress ...

Normally you can deduce the Sandy interchange bench based on who is named in the seconds. In this case, however, only Neville, Zarra and Dean are named in the seconds, leaving five on the bench for the seniors. To me, this means a late change in the Melbourne side. Bruce out?

Normally you can deduce the Sandy interchange bench based on who is named in the seconds. In this case, however, only Neville, Zarra and Dean are named in the seconds, leaving five on the bench for the seniors. To me, this means a late change in the Melbourne side. Bruce out?

It could also mean that Melbourne will take an extra player to Brisbane which would leave four on the bench for the Sandy seniors (on the other hand they could fly the emergency back on Saturday night as they did last year with CJ and Warnock).

I may be wrong here, but Sandy were on ABC tv for round one and i haven't seen them since. Have we been televised this year apart from the aforementioned game? It just seems that the bombers and port and williamstown are always on and I never get to see our boys. I'm pretty sure I've checked most weeks. Anyone know?

I may be wrong here, but Sandy were on ABC tv for round one and i haven't seen them since. Have we been televised this year apart from the aforementioned game? It just seems that the bombers and port and williamstown are always on and I never get to see our boys. I'm pretty sure I've checked most weeks. Anyone know?

That's because the Zebras seem to play most of their games on Sundays.

i think sandy asked for those sunday games for some reason, but i cant quite remember why. could be wrong. it could be related to the mfc having a pile of sunday games, allowing the teams to play at the same time...

I may be wrong here, but Sandy were on ABC tv for round one and i haven't seen them since. Have we been televised this year apart from the aforementioned game? It just seems that the bombers and port and williamstown are always on and I never get to see our boys. I'm pretty sure I've checked most weeks. Anyone know?

Sandy are on ABC in two weeks. Sandringham v Bendigo at Trevor Barker Oval.

Zebras always cop a raw deal on the TV. Werribee, Bullants, Port Melbourne are constantly on!

Final Score today

Sandringham 7.5 15.11 23.12 26.17 (173)

Werribee 3.3 5.5 9.9 15.13 (103)

Sautner got 7....Holland 3

I was unable to get to the match but apparently only 8 Melbourne players....heard that on he radio....but will await confirmation of that total...

Even so...a great result