stevethemanjordan

I cannot see any way Deledio comes in. It's an enormous risk for a round 4 match. Round 4! Had the sub rule been kept then maybe he would have been given the green vest to start. But considering he was barely even allowed to kick a football up until last week, it would be ludicrous for them to play him. I reckon they'll leave Astbury and Lids out of the 22. Big advantage for us as long as we come to play.

Nothing better than having an in-form 22 plus a host of other talent banging the door down in the reserves. I haven't seen it for years. The beauty of having players like Brayshaw, Vince, Oliver, Petracca etc is that they're all multi-positional players. If Hunt or Wagner were to make way, Vince would slot to a half-back with Clayton to play a mid/forward role. Brayshaw can play back, middle and forward. We have so many options. That's the really exciting thing. At the moment, it's clear we're trialing different back-line outfits. Having Wagner and Hunt playing back there and a senior leader who's a backman playing reserves is proof of that. I think we look settled everywhere but the back-line at the minute. It's holding up, but clearly the coaching group are trying to get a really cohesive back-six who possess a diversity of attributes suited to the modern game. We're in a really really positive place and to have guys like Petracca, Weid and Trengove all being made to be one-hundred percent fit and firing before they get a game is hugely significant for their development and confidence and our club at large. It's early days yet, but the Essendon loss may have just been what we needed. (As much as I hate those sayings). There's a time where a young team turn a corner and take-over as the new breed and I reckon we're seeing more and more glimpses.

Conspiracy central up in hur'.

Double identity. Busted.

Will play? But it's touch and go? I might contradict myself, but at least I don't contradict myself... Big fella, big fella, big fellllllaaa

Loves the attention, TGR.

You living under a rock?

Having a near full list to chose from is enormously advantageous. Especially given the number of injuries and underdone players Richmond have. I also believe our list is ahead of theirs in terms of talent now and really we should win comfortably as long as we bring the same intensity as we did last weekend. I would love nothing more than for this game to be a statement game for our club. I can't remember the last time we've beaten up on a big Melbourne based club at the G. We're pretty close to playing four quarters of hard-nosed and skilled football. Always hard to feel confident with Melbourne, but at some point we'll see a switch flick with this group and we won't look back. May this be the game. Dees by 45 +

Yeh he had a couple of games where he got some opportunistic small forward crumbing type goals. But Brayshaw and Oliver are both really strong overhead, are taller and are renown as goal-kicking mids. They're more dangerous and difficult to defend and matchup on as they'll beat a small in the air and are dangerous on the ground against a tall.

ANB's fitness would be far superior to that of Petracca's. He has elite endurance and is playing mostly through the midfield in the VFL. The reason he isn't getting a game atm in my view is because we have preferred personnel who are contested ball winners like ANB but also offer the side more versatility positionally speaking. Brayshaw and Oliver for example offer attributes that ANB doesn't have and are more dangerous as forwards with Brayshaw also having the ability to play at half-back. I think ANB is your classic in and under midfielder who will run all day and it's just unfortunate (for him), that there are others ahead of him at this stage. Trac is a different kettle of fish. Of course he has to build fitness and conditioning, but VFL will only bring a certain level of fitness. And when he comes in for us, he almost certainly will be spending the majority of his time playing either HF or FP. So his 'fitness' levels won't have to be at the same level as someone like ANB who would be playing a lot more midfield time at AFL level due to the type of player he is and level of endurance he's at. Either way, can't see either of the getting a game this week. Would love it if they played Petracca as a deep forward against the Tiges though ala Stringer at the beginning of his career. I reckon he's easily ready for a role like that but the only problem is it messes with our structure and who comes out for him? Would bring a lot of Melbourne fans to the game on Sunday night.

I believe there's only one.

In total disagreeance. Whatever way Roos 'spins' it to the media, Wagner is a direct replacement for Garland and adds a whole lot more. Dunn replaced O-Mac with the Essendon game being the only exception as Dunn was deemed not ready. Garland was required to play 'taller' than usual as part of our rotating defence on that awful day. He has since been replaced by Wagner who is a centimetre or two off Garland's height. He can play tall and small like Garland but as I have said, adds a whole other dimension that we were in need of and that Garland wasn't offering. That's the reality of it. Dunn and McDonald are now our two KPD with Wagner playing Garland's position.

That's the only way I see Tracc playing. To replace Oliver who could perhaps do with a 'de-loading' week. (Like Hogan and Brayshaw had last year). Not saying he is tired, but I'm sure we'll see it eventually. Would mean Vince to play more midfield time and Garlett to play a higher-half forward role. Get Tracc isolated closer to goal for his contested marking. I'm going too far. Don't play him yet. (But seriously, play him..)

The only pos he'd potentially be ready for is a high-pressure, dangerous around goal and contested marking forward pocket role given his fitness level. But who does he come in for? We have to fit Vince and Garlett back in this week. Who comes out for those two let alone Petracca? Unless of course there are some sore bodies, it'd be hard to drop anyone based on form yesterday. Richmond have some injury worries with Hampson and Astbury set to miss and Maric is well underdone having only played 75 mins in the VFL as a Ruckman and forward. We need to exploit that. They won't be as tall as Collingwood so I'm not sure we need both of Frost and Pedo even though both were really solid yesterday. I want him to play as much as anyone, just not sure it'll be this week.

If I had a close friend who in an interview regarded us as 'relatively close', I'd be a bit concerned. The point overall is that Jones is the heart and soul of our club and clearly has little interest or respect for those who want to jump ship rather than steer it.

Loved Jones' answer when asked about how it was playing against Howe in the post match interview with Burgan. He clearly has little respect for Jeremy.

Looks shorter than his listed height of 189cm. Great to have another strong overhead in the back six.

When I saw him kick it from fifty on the run, I knew it was our day. Frost. On the run. From 50.

The addition of Wagner and Dunn is clearly more effective and has changed the dynamic of the back-line for the better. Obviously it's two games in but Wagner has already demonstrated why the coaches have given him the nod over Garland. Yesterday he showed more aggression, intensity, skill, composure and intercept play than I have seen from Garland in years. No exaggeration. I'd go as far to say that if Garland had played like that yesterday, ye ol' trusty posters in Wiseblood and co would be PM-ing me in sheer excitement as to what they'd witnessed whilst in addition asking that I go into space and take my helmet off. Whilst there were still some moments of hesitancy and poor decision making from young Wagner, his proactive and positive contribution far outweighed those negative aspects of his game. Wagner also showed his appetite for intercept marking, something Garland has in the past been known for. Another positive for the young fella. On a positive note for Colin, it's good to hear he had a solid game for Casey. All of these things bode well for the MFC at large. Remember that. Dees.

Sorry if it's been covered, but how did Trenners go given his concussion last week? For those who were there that is.

Posters are continually forgetting that Oliver is and has been playing restricted game time. He again only played approx 69 minutes TOG on the w/e. I disagree he looked tired, he just wasn't seeing as much of it as he did last week and I think people are confused because of the difference in possession numbers from this week to last. But it doesn't necessarily mean he's tired. Just didn't get enough of it. He simply doesn't waste a disposal when he has it and he actually looks to move it in a proactive way. His tackling and handballing in close yesterday were highlights and I think he'll be needed against Richmond on Sunday night. Ben K interestingly enough had the least amount of TOG which gives me the impression he was a bit fatigued during the week. Brayshaw wasn't concussed so he'll be playing next week. Got a knock to the head, had a concussion test which he passed and then played the game out. Was also on restricted minutes and he was solid yesterday so can't see why he'd be dropped at all. I did witness some sore bodies by the end yesterday in Harmes, Tyson and Matt Jones. We're in a great place in regards to injuries atm and we have the luxury of bringing in fit players for sore/fatigued ones and I think that might be reflected in the changes against Richmond. Vince and Garlett are automatic inclusions based on their body of work for our side. A really tough selection week though. Go Dees.

What part of 'match fitness/conditioning' do you not understand? It's pretty simple.

I regret nitpicking and apologise for causing a ruckus. There is a word I wish I hadn't used in that first post which was 'many'. Perhaps he didn't win 'many' taps against ruckmen other than Goldy, but he certainly didn't win all 63 against the big guy. And that, and only that was the simple point I was trying to make. There is nothing left to argue because I agree with your observations concerning everything else. Again, I was nitpicking. Gawn had a monster of a game and kept us in it in more ways than one. I don't mean to undersell him in anyway and appreciate his efforts. Peace and love.

'Whilst Max was on top in the hitouts vs Goldstein, I think you'll find that many of the hitouts he 'won' were also against Petrie and Brown whilst Goldy was resting. People seem to think those 63 hitouts were all against Goldy.' That was my initial post. That was the fact and is the fact. I didn't argue that he had more or less 'effective' hit-outs. Nor did I argue that he won more or less hit-outs than Goldstein. You've confused yourself. My post was plain and simply that out of the 63 hitouts he won, not all of them were against Goldstein. That is a fact. And I posted it because some on here were implying that he won those 63 against Goldstein and Goldstein only. They both had really influential games. I have nothing left to argue.

I was pointing out a fact. Two facts actually. One of them being that Gawn most certainly didn't 'kill' Goldstein on the weekend and if you chat to any sane, non-biased supporter, you'd find that none of them would be an agreeance with that exaggerated comment. And the second fact is that the 63 hitouts were also against Brown and Petrie, who aren't ruckmen and more importantly, aren't Goldstein.. Facts. Am I not happy? Un-cheered? Or underestimating Gawn's hitouts? Of course not. But you lot seem to find it difficult to hear someone who might also praise the efforts of an opposition player who in the eyes of most non-biased supporters would say was equally as influential for their side. So difficult in fact that you chose to think I'm negative, un-happy and underestimating Gawn's hit-outs. Gawn had an amazing game. Goldy had an amazing game. See if you can repeat that without feeling sick.