Wiseblood

O'Rourke was greedy by choosing the Hawks. He thought he would rock up there and win a flag, yet he chose a side at the peak of it's powers and he can't get a run. He would have been much better going to a middle of the road club, like the Saints for example, where he would have been given far more opportunities. Instead he is languishing in the reserves and his football career is at a stand still.

I still think he's a bloke we might be able to get on the cheap. Hasn't done a great deal for the Swans so far, but he competes and is good defensively, so would still be worth a look if he became available.

No disrespect to you, Doc, but a post like this is utter rubbish. If Garland didn't actually compete then he wouldn't play. It's plain and simple, and it's ridiculous to suggest that he doesn't. You can knock him for other stuff, but to suggest he doesn't compete in games is pretty poor and incorrect.

Hindsight. What a wonderful thing. Is this the same hindsight we always use when we talk about all the other players we could have had in other drafts? You want to say it's not the point you're raising, but you kind of continue to talk about it anyway. Tyson has been good, Salem has been ok, but he's only been in the system a few years and he's being asked to play a position he never played as a junior. Kelly has just started to come into his own, but I'd hardly say Salem is 'way off the mark'.

He only brought it up because Salem got dropped. [censored].

Why? He has one off game and we hit the panic button?

I wouldn't mind Dunny playing as a forward. Who is our second ruck, though?

Yeah, that's it. I'm sure the coaching staff saw that too and dropped him. Oh wait...

Number of the Beast... Satan... Demon.... Demons...

Let's just kneecap the poor bloke and be done with it.

That's great. So why isn't he playing? And just in case Steve or Curry or whoever fly in from the night, I'm not defending Garland, merely arguing that Dunn in for Garland makes no difference.

Is it? We might have said that last time, yet Dunn played a few games, did very little and got dropped. I'm simply arguing that all these posters who pot Garland are asking him to be replaced with someone who did no better the last time he played either.

The dominoes are just beginning to fall. Great stuff from Clarrie, love a bit of loyalty early in the career!

I don't have the energy to argue the point on Garlo, Stu. I really don't. I don't see him as bad as others do, and I don't see that he's been awful the last few games either that warrants him being dropped. I see a few jumping on the bandwagon and calling for his head. There have been others that are under performing that should go before him - Salem being one and it sets that example. If others want him dropped, then that's fine. I don't totally see it that way but I'm not going to fill up this thread arguing the point as it will get me nowhere.

Garlo for Dunn isn't the answer. Col got dropped earlier in the year, Dunn came in and did nothing, then got dropped himself. No reason to think the same won't happen again. It's just deck chairs being swapped.

Not unless we get a backman in return. If he wants to sign for 2 years then he signs for 2 years. I don't think we can afford to let him go unless we have a good replacement ready. And no, O Mac is not that replacement. He still has a long way to go and while he's played a few decent games at AFL level he hasn't done it consistently or shown the level that Tom has.

Agree with everything Healy has said. Sign on Tom. Get behind the club like Jack did.

I don't necessarily argue that it wasn't an integral part, but the Hawks had the personnel that made it work. They didn't just pick two ruckmen and it magically worked, they had the right mix that made it work. If we had a few more runners, even a few more blokes who could hit some bullet passes, then we could do it. But at this point I think Spencer would end up being more of a liability than someone who will add some wins to our season.

It all comes down to how we finish off the season. If we're around the finals race come season's end then it will be easier to convince someone like Prestia that he is part of that missing piece of the puzzle that pushes us over the edge and into the finals in 2017. If we end up 12th again then other clubs like Richmond, St. Kilda, Carlton etc quickly become more attractive. It's up to us to make sure that doesn't happen.

So you're saying they've won the last 3 flags because they played 2 ruckmen? If only it were that simple. For the record - the Hawks can afford to do it with excellent players AND an excellent game plan. We haven't come close to reaching those heights yet and, therefore, we can't afford to have two ruckmen in the same side at the moment.

I wouldn't say that - I think many of their players ducked and used some illegal tactics to get free kicks, but their ruckmen just played Gawn very well.

No. We can't carry two ruckmen. Gawn had a bad game on the weekend, but it's not a reflection on his tank, more a reflection on how well the Bulldogs played him. It might work once in a blue moon but Spencer isn't exactly an athlete and I feel like it would hurt our running game if we had both of them on the field at the same time.

I don't think we need to worry about that too much this year. I feel confident we'll re-sign all the players that are crucial to the club going forward. It seems clear to me that Prestia isn't all that keen to stay at GC beyond this year, and I'm sure we've had some dialogue with his management. I'd happily pass off an up and coming fringe player (ANB, for example) and a second rounder to get him to the club. His injury history does worry me slightly, but if he got the all clear then I'm all for it.

If we see him heading off to visit family or on a plane to Perth then he's gone!

I like the idea of the defence, and I think this year while we are still getting used to it we'll have good days and bad. These things take a little time. It does rely a little on Gawn getting on top in the middle and allowing our midfielders, with those half back flankers, to dictate the play. It also means our smaller forwards need to work super hard to create plenty of pressure.