Hale not named in reserves

Remove this Banner Ad

Maybe old age is affecting my sight more than I realise, but I can't see Hale named in either NB or Tasmania (not sure who he is drafted to). Both Green and McMahon are named. Given both teams play after the game tonight, what games are the selectors playing? Will be interesting to see who runs out tonight.
 
Maybe old age is affecting my sight more than I realise, but I can't see Hale named in either NB or Tasmania (not sure who he is drafted to). Both Green and McMahon are named. Given both teams play after the game tonight, what games are the selectors playing? Will be interesting to see who runs out tonight.

If they do play Hale then you think they would be smart enough to list him in the twos to help the bluff that he won't play.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

If they do play Hale then you think they would be smart enough to list him in the twos to help the bluff that he won't play.

You don't get it obviously. They are not naming him in the 2's so that Sheeds thinks we are tricking him into believing he's playing in the 1's. Thus Sheeds thinks he's playing in the 2's, while Laids knows he's playing in the 1's. What a trick. Reverse psychology at its finest.

You need to get with the whole mindgame business GK:D.


In all seriousness, I think he'll play. He'll be a lot more productive with the way we are moving it into the forward line. Hale for Br***.
 
You don't get it obviously. They are not naming him in the 2's so that Sheeds thinks we are tricking him into believing he's playing in the 1's. Thus Sheeds thinks he's playing in the 2's, while Laids knows he's playing in the 1's. What a trick. Reverse psychology at its finest.

You need to get with the whole mindgame business GK:D.


In all seriousness, I think he'll play. He'll be a lot more productive with the way we are moving it into the forward line. Hale for Br***.

Doh - how could I have missed that - now I understand - ummmmm - so is he playing?
 
You don't get it obviously. They are not naming him in the 2's so that Sheeds thinks we are tricking him into believing he's playing in the 1's. Thus Sheeds thinks he's playing in the 2's, while Laids knows he's playing in the 1's. What a trick. Reverse psychology at its finest.

You need to get with the whole mindgame business GK:D.


In all seriousness, I think he'll play. He'll be a lot more productive with the way we are moving it into the forward line. Hale for Br***.

Brown wont be dropped, Laidley is still in love with him. He got a mention in another article this morning how it was important that our patched up forward line continues to fire. Brown was the first he mentioned bobbing up and kicking 4 a couple of weeks back. Only way Brown will go out is if he is injured.

["We've had different guys over the past month bob up and kick three or four goals. Leigh Brown has done it, Corey Jones has done it one week, Brent Harvey and Matthew Campbell have also done it and we have to keep doing that, keep looking for the right mix," Laidley said..]
 
Brown wont be dropped, Laidley is still in love with him. He got a mention in another article this morning how it was important that our patched up forward line continues to fire. Brown was the first he mentioned bobbing up and kicking 4 a couple of weeks back. Only way Brown will go out is if he is injured.

["We've had different guys over the past month bob up and kick three or four goals. Leigh Brown has done it, Corey Jones has done it one week, Brent Harvey and Matthew Campbell have also done it and we have to keep doing that, keep looking for the right mix," Laidley said..]

Maybe not, but those observant to notice Hale's name not listed for Tassie will also notice Brown's name listed, despite being named in the Roos starting 18.
 
Hale for Br***.

I hear ya, but I dont he will be dropped, not this week anyway.

There must be something that Brown adds to the team that the match committee like. They are not stupid enough to keep playing him without reason. there must be goals that he keeps acheiving that we are unaware of.

Even Nathan Buckley mentioned at the start of the year that Brown was the key to our team. Whether its his versatility or what I dont know. All we see from the outside looking in is an uncommitted, lethargic guy with a reputation that exceeds his output. One that continually falls over when the hard ball is there to be won. One thats scared of a contest.

I dont know why they continue to play him but there must be reasons.
 
Maybe not, but those observant to notice Hale's name not listed for Tassie will also notice Brown's name listed, despite being named in the Roos starting 18.


I think thats another Brown.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

This is not a troll but i heard the adam simpson may be a bit sore and didnt train. is this correct? would this have anything to do with hale maybe coming in?
 
This is not a troll but i heard the adam simpson may be a bit sore and didnt train. is this correct? would this have anything to do with hale maybe coming in?

Possibly. Simmo rarely misses a game though.
 
["We've had different guys over the past month bob up and kick three or four goals. Leigh Brown has done it, Corey Jones has done it one week, Brent Harvey and Matthew Campbell have also done it and we have to keep doing that, keep looking for the right mix," Laidley said..]

Must have been the week we played University. I didn't make it along to that game.
 
Must have been the week we played University. I didn't make it along to that game.

He kicked 3 v Brisbane in round 4
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Hale not named in reserves

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top