titan_uranus

A real find. Surprised me with his speed and kicking.

Definitely Morton's best game in a while. Showed pace I didn't know he had, and for once he backed into packs and looked like he had a hunger for the contested ball. I didn't think Bennell was as good as some people seem to think. Still appears/is too laconic for mine. Made some skill errors at crucial points. An improvement, sure, but it wasn't that good, I didn't think.

A little bit taller maybe, but a million times quicker. No comparison, really.

Doesn't want to fall into the Jurrah-trap of trying to take a screamer every contest, but he looked quite good. Can't see any reason why we would play Bate, Dunn or Petterd (on current form) any time soon.

Much better game. No loose man in defence Correct structures. Green played forward most of the day. Add that to his good calls to drop Bate, Petterd, Warnock and Dunn and retain Nicholson and Evans (both look good to me), and he's had a good week. Of course, it means little if we can't give a yelp on QBW, but for now, good work DB.

Good: Martin dominating Gysberts and McKenzie's inside work Scully's return Rivers in defence Green as a forward Watts Nicholson Bad: Jurrah until three quarter time Ugly: Gawn's miss Bennell's miss Sylvia's injury

6 - Rivers 5 - McKenzie 4 - Martin 3 - Gysberts 2 - Moloney 1 - Watts So much easier to give votes when the team actually fires.

Debatable.

Gold Coast against Port maybe?

Four debutants in three weeks. At least we're trying.

Fantastic changes IMO. We lose nothing in removing Bate, Newton, Petterd, Warnock and Maric. Maric maybe is a bit stiff, but overall he's not the player people think he is, or want him to be. When he has even a remote influence on the game, it makes people happy, but in the end, his decision making is not great, his kicking is about half as good as what people say it is, and he doesn't offer a lot when we don't have the ball. Having said all that I was seeing improvement in him, so on that basis I wasn't expecting him to make way, but I couldn't care less. Scully and Trengove pick themselves. Gawn deserves his turn, given his form and our ruck stocks. He certainly won't be any worse in the ruck than Newton was. Same goes for Howe; he can't do any worse than Bate or Petterd have been doing of late. Strauss gets his chance, I assume because we're looking for some skill bringing the ball out of defence, without Davey, Tapscott and Grimes. Hopefully he's prepared to work hard and get the contested ball, because he didn't look like he was ready for that last year. Morton and Bennell are very, very fortunate to have held their spots, but I think we might see them both play forward this week. Bennell to crumb, Morton because where else would he play? I see no reason for playing Jurrah as the sub. If he's going to influence the game, let him have the entire game to do it. If he's not fit he shouldn't be playing, so I'm going to presume he's fit, in which case he should be out there from start to finish. Jetta to be the sub (although I note we have used 9 different players so far in 9 games).

So glad they've retained the final 8, and haven't expanded it to a final 9 or 10. Don't like how this is only for 2 years, but hopefully common sense continues to prevail.

I can't either, but only by default. Essendon play a few talls, we'll probably need Warnock down back, especially if they decide to throw Hurley down there too. This doesn't change much though, Warnock is still a complete liability with the ball in hand.

If he is doing what is asked of him then we are asking extremely little of him. I have faith in the FD as much as you do. To the point where I cannot imagine they would be happy with how he played prior to being suspended. Which leads me to conclude that we could not possibly be that stupid as to turn straight back to him. He doesn't deserve it, and if that means we have to throw Howe in, even if the FD doesn't think he's ready, so be it.

Without having read the thread: I thought Connolly's comments were poor. If other players think that of us, that's not disrespectful, that's just how they perceive us. Even if it were disrespectful, I wouldn't come out and complain about it. It's completely true. Clubs view us as weak. They look at our gameplan and think, that's a gameplan that involves outside runners, fast movement, and uncontested play. It does. Moreover, so far this year we've really struggled at winning the contested ball, we have players in our side who don't like physical contact (Dunn, Morton, Bennell, Davey), and we don't tackle hard. You can put those things down to a lack of leadership, or having to play physically underdeveloped players due to injuries, or whatver. But the Gold Coast is playing a myriad of teenagers, and no one's calling them soft.

I don't care (and I don't agree). He was insipid before being suspended. If you don't remember, go and watch the North game again. Woeful. He does not deserve a game. I don't care if that means we sacrifice a potential 'pinch-hitter'. He deserves a long run with Casey as punishment. Besides which, as I said, I don't agree. Gawn comes in for Newton and plays first ruck. If you are worried about the forward line drop one of Bate or Petterd, who both suck, and try Howe, who is in good for for Casey. He may have presented OK, but his one-on-one work was awful and just not good enough, especially for someone who has been around as long as he has. He also can't kick. Can't mark, can't kick, that's not worthy of persisting with for me.

You've been on here long enough to be able to cop some criticism, as well as the occasional poster who doesn't read the entire thread. I'll admit I didn't read you qualification, which would have made me post something different, but I still don't necessarily subscribe to the view that because of the way he was 'ushered' out of Hawthorn that he wouldn't make a good coach. That doesn't mean I think, based on his radio commentary, that he automatically would make a good coach, but what I'm saying is sometimes things don't work out at one club, but might change at another.

I'm not saying Brereton would make a good coach, but to say that he wouldn't based upon his fallout from Hawthorn and some of the comments he makes on SEN is a bit rich IMO. FWIW I quite like his commentary. I also didn't say any of those players I mentioned would be good coaches. All I'm saying is that you don't have to be 'revered' by the club, or even connected to any club, to be a coach.

This I don't like. Why do we seem to be the only club that requires more numbers behind the ball to 'create drive'? The other 16 clubs do not need to send their mids and forward into defence to get the ball out. But we do. As I have been for three years, I am unconvinced that the best way for us to win a premiership is to put numbers behind the ball and work it out that way. I'm even more unconvinced now that the rest of the competition uses a forward press, which is in many ways the opposite to what we use, and plays right into their hands.

100% correct. Which leads me to these pieces of garbage: He doesn't have a role because we've given him a go basically everywhere and he's sucked everywhere. He played about 4 good games late last year as a forward, and that's it. He doesn't have the football brains to be a proper forward, he doesn't run hard enough, he is stupid, he doesn't zone properly, he is lazy, and he has poor skills. A better kick? Couldn't be more wrong. More versatile? That's if you define versatile as 'able to be played in more than one role'. That does not imply he can actually perform in any of those roles. Which he can't. I'm not saying Bate or Newton are particularly better (they're not), but Dunn is just as hopeless, and just as undeserving of a spot. A bit of grunt and mongrel? He is, for the most part, weak and soft, and when he does attempt to play with some 'grunt and mongrel' he gives free kicks and 50 metre penalties away, and/or gets reported.

By that logic Garry Lyon, Gary Ablett, Billy Brownless, Sam Newman, Mark Ricciuto, and every other retired great who is not coaching or directly involved with a club is flawed. What a load of poo.

Utter rubbish. Putting the man behind the ball was nothing but a defensive tactic, which gave us no chance of winning. I give him no credit whatsoever for having us 16 points down at half time. We lost by 47. It's not like it worked. It is a pathetically weak tactic that does not help us and should never have been deployed.

Right now Gawn, Howe, Blease and Scully are all putting their hands up. Whilst Scully might need another week, the other three should all be in contention.

Is that Tom McNamara named as rover? Is he playing midfield now? I always liked TMac. Maybe he should get a game. Don't know if we have enough spots on the list for another rookie (Newton (what a waste), Evans and Nicholson have three already), but he has played a lot of good football for Casey in 2010 and 2011 with no reward. Meanwhile, Bennell, Morton and potentially Dunn continually get given starts in the seniors without doing anything for Casey.

Step 1: DO NOT BRING BACK DUNN! Do not forget how terrible he was against North Melbourne, and in fact for the entire year so far. He has been shocking. He does not deserve to get an instant recall to the side simply because we are playing badly. He needs to do his penance by playing at least 4 weeks for Casey. We gain nothing by playing him. From there, it's simple. Trengove is an automatic inclusion. He can have Morton's spot. Morton is pathetic. Newton's not much better, so I'd let him go and give Gawn the number 1 ruck job. Martin is good enough to be number 1, but in the long run with Jamar back, Martin's a number 2, so let Martin and Gawn split it. Tough ask, given Essendon's rucks, but Newton is hopeless. Bate is also crap, as is Petterd, so one of them makes way for Howe, who should be playing. I would also like to remove Bennell, but he stays by virtue of the injuries and lack of depth. Evans and Nicholson also stay, but are simply biding time. In: Trengove, Gawn, Howe Out: Morton, Newton, Bate