Changes for Round 16 vs Richmond

Remove this Banner Ad

Lester and McStay out
Gardiner back in and you'd have to go Crisp as reward and like for like. Could always go Robbo as well, and he could run with Cotch as he normal does a run with type role

Harsh on McStay, he had a rough night but i liked what i saw. Only out because he needs to make way for Gardiner. Can't wait to see a Gardiner v Dustin Martin re-match.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I think Mayes might need a rest or to go back into the ressies to find some form. Has looked out of sort of late. Paps is another who could benefit from a week off to recharge.

I would definitely not drop Mcstay. I know he made a couple of bad errors but he was far from the worst debutant I've seen. It wouldn't be good to drop him for his confidence after just the one chance.

Crisp probably deserves his chance as he first one to come in.

I feel like Leppa would love to give Archie a go before the seasons out. With Leuey soon to push back into the seniors could this week be a good opportunity?

I somewhat agree with Mayes needing a rest, but he played a role on Saturday Night to drag a defender out of the forward 50 with him when we were going forward. His positioning was great on the half forward flank, he just wasn't our finishing option so he didn't get much of the ball.

Not too sure on the extent of Lester's injury, but I predict O'Brien to come back in and possibly Gardiner for McStay. Apart from that, no further changes required, the team balance looked great - Harwood is looking more like the hard nut defender that Leppa wants, Martin has consolidated his chance of another contract and Patfull has adapted to his new role as a loose man drifting off the oppositions small forward. The only real issue is the composure and size of our kids - Close, Paparone, Mayes, Aish, Taylor, McStay, Clarke - they can all put on another 5-10kg each and will become major assets. The most pleasing sign is our kids have all the fundamentals right and are willing to back their skills and fitness, this is where the game is going and Leppa has drafted accordingly.
 
Bloody great win on the weekend guys, i was cheering for you just as hard as i cheer for the tiges haha (north are a pack of campaigners)

Sorry to intrude i just had to say it, goodluck on the weekend
 
Crisp is an enigma. Liked the look of him in his first year but has since fallen out of favour it seems. Has god pace, size and likes to get the hard balls but something must be wrong. Thought for sure he would have played a few more games after almost 2 years in the ressies ironing out his game. Wouldn't mind bringing him in replace of Lester and play him onball or on the wing.

Changes:
Out: Lester (inj?)
In: Crisp

I'd rather get another game into McStay as it was a hard game for a first gamer.
 
The precedent of failing to reward players in the right age bracket, showing consistent form. The flow on effect is damaging.
Crisp played ok in a losing side but still missed too many targets and the odd tackle to "demand" selection. IMO Golby was a better player on quality of play. I would add Beamer as well but he does indeed look injured as suggested by others. Those are my observations right or wrong so with that I see "failure to reward" anywhere.
 
I thought McStay went ok for his first run, they have a big and experienced forward line. The kick at the end was unfortunate, but I bet he doesn't do it again.

Really nice touch Browny walking off with McStay at the end of the night. McStay looked like a starry eyed kid (which he kind of is).
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Named in the best three weeks running.
Yes but the best still have to prove they are up to the next level. Fitz I have no issues with his endeavour and he may well get rewarded but I think that your comment about "precedent" is why I am engaging in this conversation. Selection panels from my viewing do not always view things the way the average punter does. Using Crisp as an example I have no idea what was asked of him game plan wise. With that in mind he may well have done all or nothing asked of him.
 
Yes but the best still have to prove they are up to the next level. Fitz I have no issues with his endeavour and he may well get rewarded but I think that your comment about "precedent" is why I am engaging in this conversation. Selection panels from my viewing do not always view things the way the average punter does. Using Crisp as an example I have no idea what was asked of him game plan wise. With that in mind he may well have done all or nothing asked of him.
I think a question that might also assist in this conversation would be, has Crisp been playing a similar role in the ressies, specifically on Saturday against Aspley? If so and if well then the like for like replacement can be put forward. The next question to ask would be was Lester brought into the squad for a horses for courses role specifically against north?

I'd like to see Crisp get a run against the tigers but I think the hard at the ball attitude of Robertson might see him get nod.

McGrath - a permanent sub for the next couple weeks?
 
I don't think Close and Lisle can play in the same side and for mine, Close has gone way past Lisle and is the much better option.

You are probably right. Still holding out that Lisle may come good, did fairly well in the ressies last week.
 
Steve Morris offered a week by the MRP. Bad out for them given he would've been on one our mozzies.
 
I thought McStay went ok for his first run, they have a big and experienced forward line. The kick at the end was unfortunate, but I bet he doesn't do it again.

Really nice touch Browny walking off with McStay at the end of the night. McStay looked like a starry eyed kid (which he kind of is).
At least he didn't do a Jason Roe. Remember the time he played on from a kick-in, forgot to kick it at all. Got about 20 metres before the umpire pulled him up.:oops:
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top