binman

You're probably right. Good match up and is a strong mark and accurate kick so can hurt them offensively too.

Well white has gor me stumped . Ant chance he will play a defensive forward role on mills? Bugg ro play small forward role I still can't see hunt playing forward bur i didn't even consider white so qhat di i know

#omacmyths. Fair dinkum you need to take your bias glasses of. This is is completely untrue. I just watched the replay. Only one of petrie's goals, his fourth, involved omac, when he was too strong and outmarked him after a quick kick from the centre. His other goals were from marking mismatches - a point richo made - and one of them frost did not impact the contest when he should have. Not aggressive enough in the air? Have you been watching the last few weeks? He has been smashing packs and routinely doing huge spoils. It must be so annoying for you that the selectors dont share your opinion of him.

Agree. Yes TMac has gone forward but Goody (and Roos before hm) is loathe to make changes down back, even during games. yes hunt went forward for a while but that is rare example. As an example our HB flankers Salem, Hunt and Hibberd could all run through the midfield in the way Hannan, Trac and garlett do but rarely if ever do. Synergy is jut too important when using the zone defensive style we favour. I can't see hunt playing forward for that reason but also his meters gained is a critical element of our game plan. Opposition coaches would love for us to play him up forward for this reason. Wagner is the obvious replacement for Salem. And it will be either Kent or JKH for garlett. Kent is the more obvious choice but JKH has played so well in the last few weeks i won't be surprised if they reward that form.

I reckon that's it about, his x factor. He makes thing happen. Must be a hard match up

True

He's not there. Nor should he be

Yep, hes surprisingly quick ans also hard to tackle. Quick hands too. His give to hibberd in the play that resulted in thst final boundry throw in was brilliant.

Why? And what's your point?

Some good thoughts o this thread about selection. I don't have a clue who will come in or who might get dropped. I can see the arguments for why Omac might go if Hogan and Watts come back in but i don't think they will drop him. Yes TMac going back might mean too many talls but having a consistent back line is critical and i think they are loathe to disrupt the synergy that exists. Similarly i don't see them dropping Hannan. He gives us something that no other player does, with the possible exception of Kent (who does not provide the same level of forward pressure). He is physically imposing strong in the contest, attacks the ball in the air, can go through the mid field, can kick opportunistic goals and has a real x factor and a knack for kicking important goals. Who knows who they drop if Hogan an Watts both come back in. Salem is a definite out so if Watts does not come up and Hogan is available i think they will just bring in Hogan. No other change. If neither Hogan or Watts can play then Wagner for Salem. Simples

Jeffy had four possessions. Two were goal assists.

I normally don't advocate for the club to come out and make statements about controversial issues but in this case i do wonder if a statement calling out [censored] like taylor, grant and carey for labeling our player a soft cheat and our doctors liars. Barely one word of condemnation for schofield. No wonder players dont trust the media. Why would they? It is full of ex players who judge everything through the lens of rheir tough guy faded glory. From a time when men were men. And tbe pathetic double standard of then talking about mental healrh is truly pathetic. And for god sakes carey has some gall questioning someones morals

No

He might well post on Demonland

I find this sort of stuff so frustrating. It is all over social media (and frequently demonland) and is now common in the media where news and commentary gets mixed up. The two dot points above ARE NOT FACTS. They are your opinion, pure and simple. And mixing them up with actual FACTS is a very common approach these days, where alternative facts have become the norm. The only FACTS we can be certain of is that Schofield hit Oliver's jaw with his elbow and that Oliver said himself he did not stage and fell because he was surprised. Both FACTs are irrefutable. In terms of the second it is possible that Oliver is lying (though it remains a fact that he said he didn't stage). I for one choose to take him at his word. Others can do as they please.

Agree. We looked tired in the first quarter and as you say really missed Jones and Watts. They really should have put a gap on us but instead we came in level. That is where they lost the game i reckon. And again in the last a similar situation. They should have got out to a four goals lead but didn't make us pay. Great effort to stay in the hunt from our boys. We only really had one period where were on top. Also gutsy from Goody to leave TMac up forward. He must have been sorely tempted given their bigs were really hurting our backs. OMacs youth and relative lack of strength really was apparent. But he backed Frost and Omac in. A match winning decsion given TMacs performance.

So in essence you are saying he staged. How about we take the young man at his word. That he didn't stage. That he was hit (flush on the chin, which when i first saw i missed). That he got a shock. Wasn't expecting it. And went to ground I have little doubt Oliver asked to speak to Richo and Darcy to make sure it was clear he didn't stage and probably most of all refute any suggestion he was soft. Only to be have old dinosaurs point how glancing the blow was, implying that if he didn't stage he was soft for dropping (you could almost hear their thoughts - 'unlike us, who were warriors and never even flinched when hit') Rance staged. he wasn't hurt by Buddy. He went to ground hoping to milk a free kick. And got one Not much chance of Oliver avoiding a 'reputation as a stager' if, even his own fans don't take him at his word.

Agree. On all points. That was an excellent set up to ANB and he also made a great choice last week setting up a Garlett goal last week, when it would have been easy taking a less obvious (but less effective) option. Which is great because i was worried that he was a hard working player who was a bit limited in terms of vision as previously he has taken the wrong option, most notably his choice to shoot for goal against Freo rather tan than cross to jetta, who was running through the cente corridor and who is suspect harmes did not see. Harmes's biggest asset is he always puts in 110% and you have to love that (and i'm sure his coaches do).

Jeffy assumed it was a free to him. As did the wc player i reckon. As everyone else did. Remarkable they paid for it too high given how many high tackles they let go these days - the hibberd one being a great example from last night.

Yep. I was weirdly confident we would win in that last minute. We are the real deal

Just checked sportsbet. They now have it at 2.10 and 3.5. That is a huge drop in odds. And unusual. There is rstely such a drop on gameday

I keep reading this thread title as APEX

On monday we had back AND front coverage of the age (big pictures). Headline on front page, with a photo of viney hugging a teammate, was CHAMPAGNE FOOTBALL VERSUS PREMEIRSHIP HANGOVER

Played on a trumpet