Search results for query: *

1. Steele (No brainer) 2. Butler 3. Clark 4. Marshall 5. Membrey 6. Jones 7. Ryder

Seeing we didn't get a 50 for the blatant Cotchin incident on Jones and seeing we missed the shot I reckon it would have been worth risking a reversal by starting an all in brawl as a statement that we weren't going to cop it. Could have changed the game. It's a final, you take risks.

We had a turnaround year and could have gone further if we hadn't had such bad luck in the last 7 days. Put Ryder, Carlisle and Long in last night's side and we win. And put Gresham in we win easily. Add to that the shocking decisions re the Arc, the unpaid 50s and the generally dirty tactics of...

It was Peter Hudson

Not long until game time. I just want to say that I have followed the Saints since Alan Jeans first year as coach in 1961. Seen it all. 65 disappointment, 66 Triumph, 71 bad luck, 97 unbelievably overrun, 2009 the year it was ours and 2010 the unlucky bounce. This current group excites me beyond...

It's also John Lennon's (80th) birthday so you are in pretty good company there, mate. Have a great one!

1. Riewoldt 2. Baldock 3. Harvey 4. Daylight

Good summary, and good point about the speed of our new look back line. It's become a weapon for rebound attack.

We need that guy there tonight!

Marshall rucked alone in Rd 4 and was actually beaten by Nankervis. But we still won the game by 26. So the ruck is not so important here. We won that game with speed and that's what we will need to do again.

Not really that much of a "downgrade". Firstly, Savage for Long is pretty much 50/50. Ryder would normally be a huge loss but this game won't be won or lost in the ruck and Marsh will add some speed. Battle will cover Carlisle's loss. It's a horses for courses selection.

I think it's almost certain that's who will come in. Not a bad replacement lot either. This game wasn't made for someone like Paddy (didn't play in our Rd 4 win against Richmond) so the only real loss has been Carlisle. Battle can cover that.

Hind will get a contract. Why would we let him go? Moves like lightning and has a lot of upside. Really just starting out. A 150 game player.

They are.

Yes, that's the sort of speed and wildcard move we're going to need to beat Richmond. Hind to half back replacing Long. Roll the dice.

Take a look at the Richmond board's preview thread on this game. They are clearly not even taking us seriously. And that's exactly what we want!

His head said "I think I'll do better at Freo". So how did that work out, Ross?

We need to move on from that. Long can be replaced and I reckon Ratts has that under control. This game is ours! Let's move on from that. I'm sure Ratts has. We will win this - No Richmond Bogan Is Going To Hold It Over Us!

Ratts will have the answer. He's 100% smarter than the Dim one.

Here it is. Why load up with talls in a night game @ Metricon? Tigers think big to stretch Saints to breaking point - https://www.afl.com.au/news/515105

Richmond looks like going tall to take advantage of the fact we won't have Ryder and Carlisle. Good, that suits us. This game will be won or lost by fast smalls not lumbering ruckmen.

We CAN do this!

I hope that's a joke!

To be expected. Doesn't matter; it just gives Ratts an opportunity to be even more inventive in who he plays and how he goes about bringing Richmond down. And it galvanises the team. Them against us. Backs to the wall. Give 'em hell Saints!

He kicks it further?

Savage for Long is a no brainer. Roberton for Carlisle is a massive risk. Will he stand up after so much missed time? Then again, the alternatives are Marsh (not known as a defender) or a debutant like Claravino, who is a Carlisle lookalike but untried and unknown. Yep, let's hope Battle gets...

Regardless of whether Long and Battle play, we can do this. Paddy didn't play in our Rd 4 win over Richmond - he was a late "withdrawal" replaced by a small fast forward (Kent) because that's how Ratts saw us beating them, with speed not height. Marshall can ruck alone so I expect Ratts to bring...

If we can get Long off then fine, he plays. If not, no big deal. He is replaceable. Ryder and Carlisle are more difficult to replace. Obviously Battle goes in if fit. If not then Marsh. For the the other two I think Hind is a must for his sheer speed. And then - wait for it - Parker for the X...

Ridiculous decision but we must soldier on and, in the words of Alan Jeans, "step up at the crossroads".

If no assessment was required it's surely low impact.