For many who want Michael Gardiner to play

[Finna]

Roo struggled up forward on the weekend and could be used further up the ground. Roo doesn't have to be in the square. He can roam the ground and provide his usual intensity and pressure around the ground while getting into the game.

McEvoy and Gardi could rotate deep in the forward line. Ben is a very good contested mark and could provide a good target. He is a good kick for goal and both Gard and Ben could bring our small forwards into the game.

I am sure both will play, how they line up I am not so sure but the aim will be to work mummy over.

McEvoy, Gardi, Kosi, and maybe even Blake, will rotate through the ruck - although I think armo should replace Blake.

I ain't the coach and don't profess to be an expert but I am certain both Gardi and Macca will play.

Will be very interesting to see what occurs.

[Shaggy]

Setanto's problem is his running. He is only good for very short bursts.

Roo on the other hand is burning off opponents over 2 hours. Its extraordinary what he does and it allows RL to play his 7 man back line because generally he is taking the spare man out.

Daley Thompson thought Roo could be an olympic 400 m runner whereas you think he is nearly as good as Setanto lol.

[plugger66]

Setanto's problem is his running. He is only good for very short bursts.

Roo on the other hand is burning off opponents over 2 hours. Its extraordinary what he does and it allows RL to play his 7 man back line because generally he is taking the spare man out.

Daley Thompson thought Roo could be an olympic 400 m runner whereas you think he is nearly as good as Setanto lol.

Yep thats the way to discuss things. Make thing up. It is obvious to most that Rooy is struggling to run through injury. That is why he isnt taking as many marks on the lead and probably why he isnt playing up the ground more. Of course Rooy is a better runner when fit but we are talking this year not next year or last year. It certainly looked like Setanta matched him last week. Anyway the point is both are tall forwards who can run much faster than the 3 other lumberers of the Saints and the 2 of Carlton.

[Shaggy]

Setanto's problem is his running. He is only good for very short bursts.

Roo on the other hand is burning off opponents over 2 hours. Its extraordinary what he does and it allows RL to play his 7 man back line because generally he is taking the spare man out.

Daley Thompson thought Roo could be an olympic 400 m runner whereas you think he is nearly as good as Setanto lol.

Yep thats the way to discuss things. Make thing up. It is obvious to most that Rooy is struggling to run through injury. That is why he isnt taking as many marks on the lead and probably why he isnt playing up the ground more. Of course Rooy is a better runner when fit but we are talking this year not next year or last year. It certainly looked like Setanta matched him last week. Anyway the point is both are tall forwards who can run much faster than the 3 other lumberers of the Saints and the 2 of Carlton.

Why would I make things up. You over rate Setanto and under rate Rooey as far as run goes.

IMO Roo's run is still there but his turn is not. Personally I would put him CHB to dominate and give him a break in his later years.

I know you do not like change but I thought of you in third quarter when the saints had Roo, Kosi, Zac and BJ all as the forwards.

Regardless a swap Kreuzer and MG off the field does not make any difference IMO in run for the respective sides which you have been spamming the past two days.

[plugger66]

Setanto's problem is his running. He is only good for very short bursts.

Roo on the other hand is burning off opponents over 2 hours. Its extraordinary what he does and it allows RL to play his 7 man back line because generally he is taking the spare man out.

Daley Thompson thought Roo could be an olympic 400 m runner whereas you think he is nearly as good as Setanto lol.

Yep thats the way to discuss things. Make thing up. It is obvious to most that Rooy is struggling to run through injury. That is why he isnt taking as many marks on the lead and probably why he isnt playing up the ground more. Of course Rooy is a better runner when fit but we are talking this year not next year or last year. It certainly looked like Setanta matched him last week. Anyway the point is both are tall forwards who can run much faster than the 3 other lumberers of the Saints and the 2 of Carlton.

Why would I make things up. You over rate Setanto and under rate Rooey as far as run goes.

IMO Roo's run is still there but his turn is not. Personally I would put him CHB to dominate and give him a break in his later years.

I know you do not like change but I thought of you in third quarter when the saints had Roo, Kosi, Zac and BJ all as the forwards.

Regardless a swap Kreuzer and MG off the field does not make any difference IMO in run for the respective sides which you have been spamming the past two days.

Tell me you are joking. Thinking of a name on a computer when guys were forward for about 10 minutes in a game. You are not listening. Rooy is obviously struggling with injury so he isnt running as much. Anyway the point is MG and Kreuzer didnt play in the same positions Saturday night and 90% of people at the game would agree with that.

[Shaggy]

Thinking of a name on a computer when guys were forward for about 10 minutes in a game. You are not listening. Rooy is obviously struggling with injury so he isnt running as much. Anyway the point is MG and Kreuzer didnt play in the same positions Saturday night and 90% of people at the game would agree with that.

You are correct that MG and Kreuzer played in different positions. But Carlton brought on a runner for Kreuzer and then we brought in a runner. I suspect the normal person understands that when both teams substitute runners for slower talls its a like for like. You obviously dont.

I seriously think you try to dumb this site.

[Junction Oval]

Etihad is a much smaller ground than the MCG and I think that if Gardi pulled up ok, he will play and unfortunately Macca will miss out on this one. Kosi is a reasonable back-up ruckman.

Ross seems very nervous about what Mumford can do, so Gardi will play.

Armo will come in and possibly Gamble on the smaller ground, for Blake.

[PJ]

Just to add to the debate - Collingwood are also likely to play 2 specialist ruckmen. Leigh brown has gone from the 2nd ruck spot.

I think RL has more than just Mummy to think about.

[To the top]

I thought I saw Riewoldt going back into defence against North Melbourne?

But maybe I was wrong because he is so injured he could not have covered that amount of ground.

So, he of the trillion posts who never sleeps, why play Riewoldt if he is as injured as you maintain and he can not bring the required defensive pressure?

Where we have our problem is that Milne (and also Schnieder), whilst a clever footballer around goal, is not quick and therefore does not apply chase, harrassing pressure.

That is why Peake is periodically used now as he is. Trouble is that he is also so valuable with his leg speed everywhere around the ground.

But the key question is, if Riewoldt and his abilities to perform are as described by the individual who lives on this site, why play him?

And, when we ruck Koschitzke and McEvoy is on the bench, leaving Riewoldt as our only attacking player over 180cm, how does Riewoldt handle that - given also we have 7 back and only 4 forward?

Like he did in the first half v. Carlton when he had no forward support?

Or do we put Goddard forward - when his presence around the ground is vital to us hence only cameos forward as v. Carlton in the third quarter?

Or do we try Dawson forward again - leaving Blake as a KPP defender? I think not.

What I can tell you from a certain club's inner sanctum is that they consider St Kilda far more dangerous with a hard and experienced body at the ruck contests along with McEvoy.

They have got what they expected from Gardiner - and they saw him first hand at Skilled Stadium.

Hence my call that Gardiner was a certainty v. Carlton - because that was the message.

And for the information of he of a trillion posts, I quoted information conveyed at Skilled Stadium after the VFL match (I was not there) - that it was acknowledged that Cahill has potential (he had played exceptionally well also kicking 3), is close and would be closer if he had not missed 90% of the season with injury - and Smith was also in contention (later confirmed by him being named as an emergency v. Carlton).

Plus Gardiner was a certainty.

So I would suggest that what was told to me was pretty close to the mark - as I knew it would be.

[Bernard Shakey]

Gardy will play and Zac will watch.

[Spinner]

I thought I saw Riewoldt going back into defence against North Melbourne?

But maybe I was wrong because he is so injured he could not have covered that amount of ground.

So, he of the trillion posts who never sleeps, why play Riewoldt if he is as injured as you maintain and he can not bring the required defensive pressure?

Where we have our problem is that Milne (and also Schnieder), whilst a clever footballer around goal, is not quick and therefore does not apply chase, harrassing pressure.

That is why Peake is periodically used now as he is. Trouble is that he is also so valuable with his leg speed everywhere around the ground.

But the key question is, if Riewoldt and his abilities to perform are as described by the individual who lives on this site, why play him?

And, when we ruck Koschitzke and McEvoy is on the bench, leaving Riewoldt as our only attacking player over 180cm, how does Riewoldt handle that - given also we have 7 back and only 4 forward?

Like he did in the first half v. Carlton when he had no forward support?

Or do we put Goddard forward - when his presence around the ground is vital to us hence only cameos forward as v. Carlton in the third quarter?

Or do we try Dawson forward again - leaving Blake as a KPP defender? I think not.

What I can tell you from a certain club's inner sanctum is that they consider St Kilda far more dangerous with a hard and experienced body at the ruck contests along with McEvoy.

They have got what they expected from Gardiner - and they saw him first hand at Skilled Stadium.

Hence my call that Gardiner was a certainty v. Carlton - because that was the message.

And for the information of he of a trillion posts, I quoted information conveyed at Skilled Stadium after the VFL match (I was not there) - that it was acknowledged that Cahill has potential (he had played exceptionally well also kicking 3), is close and would be closer if he had not missed 90% of the season with injury - and Smith was also in contention (later confirmed by him being named as an emergency v. Carlton).

Plus Gardiner was a certainty.

So I would suggest that what was told to me was pretty close to the mark - as I knew it would be.

No offence but sentences are not the same as paragraphs. I seriously cannot read that.

[gringo]

Someone get Plugger his medication. He is obsessing about MG.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

If Gardiner gets a run over Ben this week Maverick, you'd think Blake retains his spot just in case?

I am quite surprised by this thread, that plugger didn't agree with two dedicated ruckmen, it's not like his expressed this sentiment already.

Luckily you have said Rooy shouldnt be Captain just once on this site. I actually wanted to know what others thought and why they wanted 2 ruckmen.

I'm pretty sure she didn't start two different threads on the same topic, within a few days of each other, on top of discussing it on however many other threads.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

Someone get Plugger his medication. He is obsessing about MG.

No, really?
How many posts would he have written regarding Gardi, since the team was announced on Thursday night? 100? It wouldn't surprise me.

He's been able to ease off on his anti-Tommy crusade, now that's it's massively unlikely that he will play this year and now it's Gardi's turn.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

Who are the 'big name' ruckmen?

My memory might be failing me but over the past dozen or so weeks hasn't Big Ben done reasonably well/ok against
Goldstein twice (being considered for AA)
Cox/Natanui
Jolly
Ottens

He got 'towelled up' by Mumford but was apparently one of those suffering the gastro, so I'm prepared to cut him some slack for that game.

In those two games against Goldstein, Mac had 45 hitouts to Goldstein's 80, so I wouldn't be writing home about those two games, as far as his ruckwork went. He tends to still get spanked by the very best, but pretty much breaks even with the rest, now.

I agree that we were too top heavy in the 1st half on Saturday night (I think we had the tallest backline ever, for one thing- no-one under 6 foot 2 for much of the night!), and I think it helped that one of Gardi or Ben was subbed off, but it also helped that we started to use the ball much more efficiently going forward and that Carlton seemed to take the foot off the gas. Gardi was stiff to get subbed off, though, as he had a terrific first half, especially possession wise, but Ben then had a really good second half, possibly due to the perceived extra pressure to retain his spot. Competition for spots is very healthy.

That was on a bigger ground and against a quicker team than this weeks game, though, so I think it's less of a risk to play both Ben and Gardi this week. Saturday night is likely to be a slog and it's unlikely to hurt to have an extra big body out there. That's the only game we have to concern ourselves with at this stage.

[plugger66]

I thought I saw Riewoldt going back into defence against North Melbourne?

But maybe I was wrong because he is so injured he could not have covered that amount of ground.

So, he of the trillion posts who never sleeps, why play Riewoldt if he is as injured as you maintain and he can not bring the required defensive pressure?

Where we have our problem is that Milne (and also Schnieder), whilst a clever footballer around goal, is not quick and therefore does not apply chase, harrassing pressure.

That is why Peake is periodically used now as he is. Trouble is that he is also so valuable with his leg speed everywhere around the ground.

But the key question is, if Riewoldt and his abilities to perform are as described by the individual who lives on this site, why play him?

And, when we ruck Koschitzke and McEvoy is on the bench, leaving Riewoldt as our only attacking player over 180cm, how does Riewoldt handle that - given also we have 7 back and only 4 forward?

Like he did in the first half v. Carlton when he had no forward support?

Or do we put Goddard forward - when his presence around the ground is vital to us hence only cameos forward as v. Carlton in the third quarter?

Or do we try Dawson forward again - leaving Blake as a KPP defender? I think not.

What I can tell you from a certain club's inner sanctum is that they consider St Kilda far more dangerous with a hard and experienced body at the ruck contests along with McEvoy.

They have got what they expected from Gardiner - and they saw him first hand at Skilled Stadium.

Hence my call that Gardiner was a certainty v. Carlton - because that was the message.

And for the information of he of a trillion posts, I quoted information conveyed at Skilled Stadium after the VFL match (I was not there) - that it was acknowledged that Cahill has potential (he had played exceptionally well also kicking 3), is close and would be closer if he had not missed 90% of the season with injury - and Smith was also in contention (later confirmed by him being named as an emergency v. Carlton).

Plus Gardiner was a certainty.

So I would suggest that what was told to me was pretty close to the mark - as I knew it would be.

Man of a million words when ten would surfice. A mate of yours at Geelong tells you something and you get one out of 3 right and say you are close. 2 of of 3 aint bad, one is a fail. It is 33% fail even in your million words. i may have a trillion post but my 20 word posts say a hell of a lot more than your 1000 word nothing. To prove you know nothing is you harping on about Milne. It is so boring and even worse completely wrong. Yep Rooy went into defence after a goal against North for about 15 seconds. Proves what? I tell what it proves, nothing. Did I say he was crippled. No. I said he has an injury and cant run as he normally does. A blind person could see that. You must be important. You have our clubs inner santum and another club. Again just made up. MG will probably play next game but I would love you to tell me how the side was going with 2 ruckmen in the 21. I will tell you. Terrible and that was against a side who werent interested. You lack of footy knowledge means you see MG playing well but dont realise that the side isnt. Unlike you I want the side to play well and if that means Rooy is dropped I dont care. I think half the reason you want MG to play is to finally prove you got something right.

[SaintPav]

Someone get Plugger his medication. He is obsessing about MG.

No, really?
How many posts would he have written regarding Gardi, since the team was announced on Thursday night? 100? It wouldn't surprise me.

He's been able to ease off on his anti-Tommy crusade, now that's it's massively unlikely that he will play this year and now it's Gardi's turn.

It's an importnat topic so nothing wrong with so many posts on it. What would you rather discuss? Tommy Walsh? Ross' contract?

[dragit]

Hence my call that Gardiner was a certainty v. Carlton - because that was the message.

And for the information of he of a trillion posts, I quoted information conveyed at Skilled Stadium after the VFL match (I was not there) - that it was acknowledged that Cahill has potential (he had played exceptionally well also kicking 3), is close and would be closer if he had not missed 90% of the season with injury - and Smith was also in contention (later confirmed by him being named as an emergency v. Carlton).

Plus Gardiner was a certainty.

So I would suggest that what was told to me was pretty close to the mark - as I knew it would be.

Sorry old chap but I don't recall you saying that anyone was a certainty, you did say that you would like to see Gardiner, Cahill and Smith in the side…

[matrix]

i hope he plays
and i hope he dominates
and i hope we win

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

Here, here.

[WinnersOnly]

Gardiner is considerably more effective than McEvoy.

He matches McEvoys effort around the ground and his rucking and hits outs to advantage were brilliant on Saturday night. The other thing he brings is aggression, you can see the players walk taller around him.

For me there is no decision if we want any sucess in this finals series - GARDINER by a long long way !

I will repeat it again McEvoy - will never be a great tap ruckman as he has no leap, is not strong enough to hold his ground and has no agression in his play!

[dragit]

I will repeat it again McEvoy - will never be a great tap ruckman as he has no leap, is not strong enough to hold his ground and has no agression in his play!

Do you want Dan's spade?

[degruch]

For me there is no decision if we want any sucess in this finals series - GARDINER by a long long way !

I'd agree, if it weren't for match fitness being an issue. If we can drag him through the next few, he should be fine for the GF.