Rnd.3 V Richmond.

[ugg]

In McLean
Out Franklin Ling

Emg Bell Melican Stephens Hayward

In Eggmolesse-Smith
Out Rioli Ross

Emg Ross Rioli Ralphsmith Chol

[Thunder Shaker]

Richmond have Daniel Rioli out, replaced by Derek Eggmolesse-Smith. That player must have a few interesting nicknames.

[barry]

Do not pick Sinclair unless Hickey is out.

My thoughts exactly.

[Bangalore Swans]

McLean is in for Buddy. Ling omitted as the sub. Does anyone know who is taking Ling's place?

I would have preferred Heywood to play as a defensive forward over McLean. The agility of the Richmond backline could exploit our tall forward line.

Someone explain to me how Wicks gets a game over Stephen’s (boy of boy, goodness gracious me).

[Mark26]

I would have preferred Heywood to play as a defensive forward over McLean. The agility of the Richmond backline could exploit our tall forward line.

Someone explain to me how Wicks gets a game over Stephen’s (boy of boy, goodness gracious me).

I don't mind McLean coming in. He was solid against the Lions. I would like Heyward and Ling to play too, but everyone is playing well at the moment.

What's the angst with Wicks? I think his aggression, tackling, effort, shots for goal etc have been great. I agree that Stephens needs to come in, but who do you omit? Maybe Blakey?

[mcs]

I would have preferred Heywood to play as a defensive forward over McLean. The agility of the Richmond backline could exploit our tall forward line.

Someone explain to me how Wicks gets a game over Stephen’s (boy of boy, goodness gracious me).

Because Wicks is a small forward and Stephens is a midfielder...

Wicks brings a lot of forward line pressure and that is something we will need against the Tigers. He had an excellent pre-season and hasn't played poorly in either game.

If people want Stephens in the team, the obvious one for him to replace (in terms of team balance) would have been Blakey.

- - - Updated - - -

For once we are in agreement . Check my pulse !

Hahaha - we've never disagreed on the basis of picking your best team. Just who might constitute that best team, that's all

- - - Updated - - -

For once we are in agreement . Check my pulse !

Hahaha - we've never disagreed on the basis of picking your best team. Just who might constitute that best team, that's all

[Aprilbr]

McLean for Buddy was predictable unless they went for mobility over marking strength with Hayward.

Blakey was a little lucky to hold his game but some forget that he played reasonably well in Round One. I note that Anderson of Gold Coast who is of similar height and build to Blakey is playing well for the Gold Coast on the wing. Let's hope that Blakey can similarly adapt to this position. Blakey has to better exploit his height advantage over opponents by taking marks on the centre line. Then he will be very dangerous.

I'm sure that some of the promising types who cannot get games at present like Stephens will get their chance in coming weeks.

[Bangalore Swans]

I don't mind McLean coming in. He was solid against the Lions. I would like Heyward and Ling to play too, but everyone is playing well at the moment.

What's the angst with Wicks? I think his aggression, tackling, effort, shots for goal etc have been great. I agree that Stephens needs to come in, but who do you omit? Maybe Blakey?

Wicks is doing well but I think Florent could play his position and offer some midfield rotation. Florent is a beautiful kick at goal. This will allow Stephen’s to come in.

I’ll keep Blakey in because I think he will develop into an outstanding versatile player. He showed as a junior that he could play forward, midfield or back. He’s a player I feel is worth backing.

[The Runner]

Wicks is doing well but I think Florent could play his position and offer some midfield rotation. Florent is a beautiful kick at goal. This will allow Stephen’s to come in.

I’ll keep Blakey in because I think he will develop into an outstanding versatile player. He showed as a junior that he could play forward, midfield or back. He’s a player I feel is worth backing.

You don't understand and appreciate what Wicks does if you think Florent could do it

[liz]

You don't understand and appreciate what Wicks does if you think Florent could do it

Wicks's attributes are more obviously suited to Wicks's role than are Florent's.

Florent's attributes are more obviously suited to Florent's role than are Stephens's - at least at the moment. He might have ambitions to become an inside mid (inside/outside if he takes Parker's advice) but I've seen little to suggest he's there yet.

Stephens will get his chance, maybe as soon as next weekend. I reckon he's a good shot to spend Saturday night having a one-on-one tutorial next to Longmire on the bench.



PS I generally try to bite my tongue on grammar and spelling matters. I know they might just be typos. But there have been some repeats that are getting on my nerves.

It's Stephens. Not Stephen's.
And Hayward. Not Heyward.

[Mark26]

You don't understand and appreciate what Wicks does if you think Florent could do it

I also think Florent has been playing a little more defensively too. He has pushed right back a few times in the last couple of games, whereas Wicks tends to play higher up the ground. I don't think it's an "or" proposition between them. They're both playing well so they stay. We should look elsewhere if Stephens and co. are to come in.

[Ludwig]

PS I generally try to bite my tongue on grammar and spelling matters. I know they might just be typos. But there have been some repeats that are getting on my nerves.

It's Stephens. Not Stephen's.
And Hayward. Not Heyward.

Thanks Liz. You just saved me from needing a tongue transplant.