16 hours ago, joeboy said:

Langdon got the job done against Daicos and would seem the only viable choice

Agree with Langdon for pure running power. He concedes a bit of height and aerial ability on Nas though.

If fit, could Jai Culley be the man? They are similar in height and Jai is a strong lad. Maybe a combination of Ed and Jai.

3 hours ago, AshTaafe said:

Can we leave JVR to focus on being a forward. He's been under the pump for a while and hadn't been developing enough. This pre-season he hasn't been doing as much ruck craft and frankly is looking more like a dangerous forward than ever...

Someone has to be the second ruck. Mihocek needs to come back into the side and Kentfield will go out. The other option is bring in Mihocek and Heath but that completely unbalances the forward line.

3 hours ago, Demongirl35 said:

Windsor played on him last year.

He was doing such a great job. I still remember thinking why on earth would we take him off! Then moments later NAS went absolutely nuts. We lost the moment Windsor got subbed.

yairs, that was my memory too

as such, duke vs nas, head to head

No Heath 😡

14 minutes ago, dice said:

No Heath 😡

Really weird team by someone at AFL house who hasn't followed much of preseason

Edited Tuesday at 21:415 days by adonski

5 hours ago, adonski said:

Really weird team by someone at AFL house who hasn't followed much of preseason

I gotta be honest I only tune in to the afl website for cal twomey and damos sliding doors(to Rile myself up). The rest is utter slop. Occasionally their stat pieces are ok

5 hours ago, adonski said:

Really weird team by someone at AFL house who hasn't followed much of preseason

I think the only change to that 22 will be CJ for Taylor.

6 hours ago, dice said:

No Heath 😡

i would doubt that cj wouldn't be best 23 to start his first year at the club

Will be interesting to see how Saints two ruckmen works for them and if we'll follow suit. The smaller forwardlines worked well in the practice matches though.

On 02/03/2026 at 16:31, Fat Tony said:

Someone has to be the second ruck. Mihocek needs to come back into the side and Kentfield will go out. The other option is bring in Mihocek and Heath but that completely unbalances the forward line.

Max Heath should get the gong ;-) And Gawny has been listed with "hamstring awareness" so a genuine ruck option has to be the safe bet.

Edited Wednesday at 04:135 days by AshTaafe
An extra thought to add

8 minutes ago, AshTaafe said:

Max Heath should get the gong ;-) And Gawny has been listed with "hamstring awareness" so a genuine ruck option has to be the safe bet.

Gawn played last week and I haven't seen him on the latest injury list.

Regardless, we play only one ruck because Heath or Gawn would unbalance the forward line. The fact that Heath didn't play last week, means he won't play.

If both play, there will be 50% of game time with both on the ground at the same time. It didnt work with Grundy and Gawn, why does everyone think it will work with Heath?

2 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

Gawn played last week and I haven't seen him on the latest injury list.

Regardless, we play only one ruck because Heath or Gawn would unbalance the forward line. The fact that Heath didn't play last week, means he won't play.

If both play, there will be 50% of game time with both on the ground at the same time. It didnt work with Grundy and Gawn, why does everyone think it will work with Heath?

Maybe they wanted an extended look at Kentfield in that role so they didn't pick Heath. Wouldn't rule him out yet, think he offers more in the F50 than Grundy.

1 hour ago, Fat Tony said:

Gawn played last week and I haven't seen him on the latest injury list.

Regardless, we play only one ruck because Heath or Gawn would unbalance the forward line. The fact that Heath didn't play last week, means he won't play.

If both play, there will be 50% of game time with both on the ground at the same time. It didnt work with Grundy and Gawn, why does everyone think it will work with Heath?

Perhaps he played well enough in the previous match to actually get the gig vs his old team round 1.

Would not at all surprise me if he has done enough....he looked good.

If he had kicked his chances at goals he would have been in our best.

With 5 on interchange he should be a great chance imo.

Really tough game to read. We are a great unknown with only 2 practice matches against woeful opposition to measure ourselves against. And I really don't rate St Kilda this year, nor do I understand the hype that is surrounds them.

Add to that, we probably have 8 players who have shown enough to get picked for the interchange bench.

I reckon both Dees and Saints will be fighting each other for positions 9-12.

2 hours ago, Fat Tony said:

Gawn played last week and I haven't seen him on the latest injury list.

Regardless, we play only one ruck because Heath or Gawn would unbalance the forward line. The fact that Heath didn't play last week, means he won't play.

If both play, there will be 50% of game time with both on the ground at the same time. It didnt work with Grundy and Gawn, why does everyone think it will work with Heath?

Don’t be so sure. We have a new coaching panel, 5 on the bench and not many tall fwds left

It’s either T Mac or Heath for me. I’d give heath a try or we’ll lose the majority of second ruck battles

I would be staggered if we picked Heath

20 minutes ago, adonski said:

I would be staggered if we picked Heath

would you play T Mac as the swingman cover or go small?

8 minutes ago, DubDee said:

would you play T Mac as the swingman cover or go small?

3 'talls': Checkers, JVR, Fritsch

I'd either go small or play Melky, probably the latter, on top of the 3 above

Edited Wednesday at 07:495 days by adonski

FB: CJ Lever Petty
HB: Lindsay Disco Salem
C: Langdon Steele Langford
HF: L. Pickett JVR K. Pickett
FF: Fritsch Miohcek Chandler
R: Gawn Windsor Rivers
INT: Howes Sparrow Culley Melksham Kolt

Sounds like Culley is a good chance to be fit for round one

Feels like the last two spots are very much up in the air, I'd like to see Melksham for the experience + additional marking target in the absence of Jeffo + Kentfield

Feel like Kolt gets a gig a lineball decision with any others, based off first round pick aura

21 minutes ago, adonski said:

3 'talls': Checkers, JVR, Fritsch

I'd either go small or play Melky, probably the latter, on top of the 3 above

So JVR would be 2nd ruck?

Just now, DubDee said:

So JVR would be 2nd ruck?

Yes. I don't consider JVR rucking for 10-20% of the game to be a big deal but I know others don't like it

Will be interesting to see where Kingy lands

4 hours ago, roy11 said:

Maybe they wanted an extended look at Kentfield in that role so they didn't pick Heath. Wouldn't rule him out yet, think he offers more in the F50 than Grundy.

Neith Gawn or Grundy are genuine forward options whereas Heath is. He crashes packs, fairly accurate in front of the sticks and is suited to the new ruck rules to boot :-)

22 minutes ago, AshTaafe said:

Neith Gawn or Grundy are genuine forward options whereas Heath is. He crashes packs, fairly accurate in front of the sticks and is suited to the new ruck rules to boot :-)

There’s no proof of this, he’s played 4 AFL games.

This is a tough one to feel comfortable about any prediction. Saints will have a game under their belt and I feel that is a distinct advantage. Plus, it is difficult to know how we will perform after a 'different' pre-season, a lot of changes and only a game and a half of warmup games.

At this time this is how I would have them line up for the first throw-up (That really just sounds wrong). Kossie, Steele and Windsor at Max's tap. Possibly swap out Windsor for Rivers depending on how offensive you want to be. Beside Rivers we would have Langford, Lindsay, Sparrow, Laurie, Langdon and L Pickett to rotate through the middle TMac covers Key positions back, forwards and in Ruck. Tactically we might go with Heath to counter Saints going with two rucks. The warmup games across the league did show faster ball movement from the center throwups compared to previous seasons.

FB: Howes Petty Lever

HB: Rivers Turner Salem

C: Langdon Steele Lindsay

HF: Chandler Mihocek Langford

FF: L. Pickett JVR Fritsch

Foll: Gawn K Pickett Windsor

Int: CJ, Sparrow, Tmac, Laurie, L Pickett

We have a lot of flexibility in the team with players able to cover two or three positions.

Will give the saints a watch this week end to see how they go and then maybe adjust this team.

1 hour ago, adonski said:

FB: CJ Lever Petty
HB: Lindsay Disco Salem
C: Langdon Steele Langford
HF: L. Pickett JVR K. Pickett
FF: Fritsch Miohcek Chandler
R: Gawn Windsor Rivers
INT: Howes Sparrow Culley Melksham Kolt

Sounds like Culley is a good chance to be fit for round one

Feels like the last two spots are very much up in the air, I'd like to see Melksham for the experience + additional marking target in the absence of Jeffo + Kentfield

Feel like Kolt gets a gig a lineball decision with any others, based off first round pick aura

Howes worries me, not convinced. T.Mac a near cert!! Kolt,... also ditto, not convinced. would definately play Mooseman, NO DOUBT!