mo64

You can't be serious. Newton has been more impactful in his 1 1/2 games for us than Matt Jones has ever been. Outside dash is irrelevant if you inside mids can't win the ball, and at least Newton can hurt the opposition with his disposal. Matt Jones isn't getting a game for a reason.

Carted off on a stretcher in the last quarter with a head injury, so unlikely to play. There'll be mimimal changes because we have no depth.

Whilst I agree with your 2nd point about our core midfield stinking on the day, you're underselling the importance of rotations, spreading and pressure, against a team whose strength is their run. From our starting line up from last week JKH and Brayshaw were absent, and both provided run, spread and pressure. JKH for Dawes wouldn't have changed the result, but having 1 less player to apply pressure and run means that the other players have to work harder. Despite what the scoreboard read, the writing was on the wall during the 2nd quarter. IMO, we also went into the game with 1 too many talls in the backline. Once it was decided that Garland would take McCarthy and T Mac took Cameron, what's the point of having Dunn and Howe down back? Once Tomlinson went down, Dawes should have been subbed and Howe moved up forward.

But your senseless take on football amuses me.

Ha, ha, ha. What a joke. You were the bloke that kept prattling on about GWS being scared of Dawes. Then you got even more excited when a track watcher in Canberra made the point that Dawes was jumping out of skin, and took another dig at me. If you had half a football brain you'd realise that opposition players aren't scared of a player that can't mark and is an average kick. Yeah, Dawes really brutalized them. Your lack of football knowledge is embarassing.

I got ridiculed for stating this before the game. We can't have Howe and Garland both playing back. We got caught out last week by GC when they went small, but GC didn't convert their chances. And we can't have Dawes and Frost in the side if Frost's role is as a 2nd ruckman/forward.

Oh but Dawes was supposed to brutalise the opposition, and they would be sh#t scared!!!! What a moronic comment.

According to one source, their skill level has improved over the preseason. But because neither will speak to the source over the fence, they have yet to be mentioned in any of the training reports to date.

You clearly don't believe that so called recreational drugs are a problem then, and can't differentiate between legal and illegal? If clubs are concerned with everything that is legally ingested by the players (diet and nutrition), then they have every right to monitor whatever illegal substances a player may take.

Neither of Hogan's goals came from body work. Watts' role is totally different to JKH. All his goals came from playing deep, and he doesn't apply the same defensive pressure. If I was GWS, I'd welcome Frost playing as a deep forward. IMO, Watts, VDB and our smalls offer a greater mismatch to GWS than Hogan, Dawes and Frost.

Two questions binman: Have you taken recreational (illegal) drugs? What's your take on Geelong suspending Motlop, who apparently had too much to drink 4 days before a game? I've never taken an illegal drug or substance in my life, but have witnessed the consequences of drug use. Clubs are merely protecting the players from themselves.

We kicked 17 goals without any forward taking a mark through body strength, apart from VDB pushing Malceski aside, then taking an uncontested mark. If you can move the ball quickly, it doesn't matter who's on the end of the kick. Pace creates as much of a mismatch as strength. Personally, I think we're more dangerous with 3 small forwards (Garlett, Kent, JKH), and I also believe that they offer greater defensive pressure than the additional tall. I'll be interested to see what role Frost plays, because I think we'll struggle if Hogan, Dawes and Frost are in the forward line at the same time.

In front after every quarter.

We need players going 3rd man up against Mumford at stoppages around the ground. Howe, Dunn and Watts are all capable. Hawthorn regularly use Hodge and Lewis in that role.

Doubt it. Hasn't done any training with the ruck coaches, so why would you think that he's a potential 2nd ruck? Pedersen is in the same boat as a few others. He would have to show amazing form at Casey to even be considered for senior selection. His omission from the 2 NAB Cup games is a sign that he's not part of Roos' plans. He's a player with some natural talent, but doesn't seem to have the competitive spirit to be an AFL player.

Spencer will only come in if Jamar goes down, as he's purely a no.1 ruckman. During the preseason and NAB Cup, Gawn was given every opportunity to cement the 2nd ruck position and failed. Frost displays the intangibles (2nd efforts) that don't show up on the stats sheet, which is why he's in the side. Even if he doesn't get the hit out, he competes at ground level. He also has pace to lose his opponent running forward. Unfortunately he's an average kick because he missed 2 gettable goals on Saturday. If he kicks them, everyone would be lauding him.

Not that hard to work out that both coaches gave the 2 Suns players 1 point each. No bias as implied.

He's been out for quite a while.

Disagree. I think that Davis and Patfull will hold their own against Hogan and Watts,and I don't think that Frost and Dawes are damaging forwards. I think that Kent, Garlett and JKH would cause more concerns for GWS.

I really don't see what Michie has to offer. He can accumulate possessions without hurting the opposition, and that's about it. As bad as Toumpas looked on Saturday, like Macca, I'd give him another game if Vince and Dawes weren't available. It just goes to show that we still seriously lack AFL standard depth. The likes of Michie, McKenzie, Bail, Riley and M.Jones will win a lot of games for Casey, but not necessarily Melbourne.

You write like a 12 year old with angst because he's had a sh#tty school holiday, so I won't bother responding anymore.

I suggest that you look up a dictionary then, because the term "brutalise" is redundant in modern AFL football. Just because he has a big frame doesn't mean the Dawes offers any additional toughness to the side. I've never seen an opposition player be petrified by Dawes' mere presence on the field.

So can we expect Dawes to be missing rounds 3 and 4 through suspension? I want to see toughness like the way Vandenberg ran in off the wing and collected the Suns player and the ball. Or Brayshaw sitting under the ball with 2 opponents to take that mark. Dawes' cheap shots last year that earned suspensions are not tough.

Vince for Toumpas is a given. If Dawes plays, it makes the Garlett, Kent, JKH combo even more effective. Our small forward combo could be a strength of this team. Frost plays, because he's our designated 2nd ruckman. But I don't want to see a top heavy forward line of Hogan, Dawes and Frost. As I said earlier, for team balance I'd replace one of our tall backs for Dawes. But I reckon they'll give Brayshaw a full game at Casey, which would be disappointing.

I watched the whole Saints/GWS game, and GWS dominated the first 3 quarters, but didn't hurt the Saints on the scoreboard. Unsure what other options they have as a 2nd ruckman, but Tomlinson gave them nothing up forward. Cameron was Cameron, and McCarthy was really impressive. Like I said with our forward structure, it's all about what gives you the best opportunity to win the game.