Sydney to take on new look - Melbourne Herald Sun

**clean** · 17th March 2008, 12:44 PM

Originally Posted by Mike_B

Well it is possible compared to the team that played the EF v Collingwood.

We're without Dempster and Schneider (traded) and Everitt, Fosdike, Richards(?) and Malceski (injured).

So if we look at that, Kennelly and Mattner in for Dempster and Malceski, still leaving 4 openings (the ones below are NOT direct swaps). Keep in mind that Barlow played, so lets assume that he will keep his spot.

Grundy in for Richards
Moore in for Schneider
Bird in for Fosdike
Jack in for Everitt

Would like to see Crouch out as well and have the "swap" of Jack for Crouch and White for Everitt.

Whatever happens, we will need to see some new faces in the Rd 1 lineup or we won't have 22 on the field!

Yes I agree with your comments, but what is going to happen to the likes of Matt O'Dwyer - who will be the rookies upgraded to the list to replace the two long term injured ?? Matt should be a great chance..........

**bennyfrou** · 17th March 2008, 12:46 PM

Originally Posted by clean

Yes I agree with your comments, but what is going to happen to the likes of Matt O'Dwyer - who will be the rookies upgraded to the list to replace the two long term injured ?? Matt should be a great chance..........

Well, I read soemwhere that because we have two players on the veteran list (i.e outside the senior list) that the Elevate a rookie for someone on the long term injury list does not apply to us this year. Can anyone confirm if this is correct?

Rotten luck for Matty if it is true, he's gonna be a Gun!

**liz** · 17th March 2008, 01:26 PM

Originally Posted by bennyfrou

Well, I read soemwhere that because we have two players on the veteran list (i.e outside the senior list) that the Elevate a rookie for someone on the long term injury list does not apply to us this year. Can anyone confirm if this is correct?

Rotten luck for Matty if it is true, he's gonna be a Gun!

No, that's not correct.

A club can always elevate someone to the senior list if there's a long term injury (salary cap permitting). However, if you have either one or no 'outside veterans', you don't have to wait for a LTI to elevate a rookie. You can nominate them to play regardless of the injuries.

There's no point, though, in elevating a rookie until you're about to play him (or at least want to name him as an emergency). Jack, Bird and Moore are ahead of him at the moment (and should be, based on form) and competition for spots for smaller players is going to increase as the likes of Fosdike, Crouch, Schmidt and Laidlaw get over their injuries. O'Dwyer needs to keep doing what he's been doing well into the season before he comes under consideration, I suspect. And even then he faces competition from Smith, Brabazon (who the Swans said last Monday they expect to debut this year) and hopefully Veszpremi.

**DST** · 17th March 2008, 07:32 PM

Originally Posted by ernie koala

I'm dreamin, but what the hell.........
Jack in....Bevan out
Moore in....Schnieder out (gone)
Bird in......McVeigh out
Mattner in....Mathews out
Buchanan in....Fosdike out (inj)
White in.....Everit out ( Inj)

I don't have an issue with most of that, but for a team that lacks a bit of run and pace McVeigh is a certainity to be playing round 1.

We will be going in with 5 players who are either debuting or who have played less than 5 games. That is enough for the team as a whole to carry.

DST

**originalswan** · 17th March 2008, 08:03 PM

Apologies if this has been asked but does anyone know of Schmidt's position? Is he injured? Will he play?

If not then there's another change.

**Benevolent Ert** · 17th March 2008, 11:29 PM

Not a change because he didn't play in the Elim final
Not 100% sure but I believe he's had an interrupted pre-season, and won't be ready for Rd 1 - not in the seniors anyway

**liz** · 17th March 2008, 11:54 PM

Still a few weeks away, so I've heard.

**sharp9** · 18th March 2008, 09:33 AM

Originally Posted by DST

I don't have an issue with most of that, but for a team that lacks a bit of run and pace McVeigh is a certainity to be playing round 1.

We will be going in with 5 players who are either debuting or who have played less than 5 games. That is enough for the team as a whole to carry.

DST

But McVeigh has no run and no pace...what are you talking about? He Never runs and carries (like Malceski and Goodes for example) and is average to slow on the burst. He's an endurance athlete (so they say).

I think you are confusing young with fast.

**DST** · 18th March 2008, 10:02 AM

Originally Posted by sharp9

But McVeigh has no run and no pace...what are you talking about? He Never runs and carries (like Malceski and Goodes for example) and is average to slow on the burst. He's an endurance athlete (so they say).

I think you are confusing young with fast.

Mcveigh has very very good run and carry (see beep test and time trial results).

His issue at present is using that ability to carry the ball, he certainly works hard to get into position and create space what he needs to do now is run and carry the ball which he is very capable of doing.

DST

**DST** · 18th March 2008, 12:44 PM

Originally Posted by Dr Diabolical

Those tests suggest he is good at running - not the 'carry' part (or 'disposal' part as you mention).

Disposal is not his strong point in his game, but it is adequate to play at senior level.

McVeigh needs to be encouraged to us his greatest strengths in his running capacity and stamina to go forward of the play and carry the ball. The more he feels comfortable doing that part of the game the better he will be in distributing it.

DST