Gardi !!!!

[saint tash]

Going tall because Thornton is out. o'Hailpin won't play back so if "we" play a tall forward line it may catch them out.

If nothing else, I appreciate the quotation marks on "we"
Thank you.
Let's hope Maxwell can squeeze back into the side, all of the other finalists have their fingers crossed with you

Do I take that as a slight kiss and make up?

I'll certainly take the thank you. Thank you.

[Quixote]

IMO, it's not a farewell game, it's a test for Finals.

Gardi will start and Ben will be sub to give him a rest and I wouldn't be surprised to see Gamble or Smith come in for Blake.

Kosi will do a fair bit of rucking plus we've also got that other ruck out there - I think his name is Third Man.

[dragit]

Going tall because Thornton is out. o'Hailpin won't play back so if "we" play a tall forward line it may catch them out.

If nothing else, I appreciate the quotation marks on "we"
Thank you.
Let's hope Maxwell can squeeze back into the side, all of the other finalists have their fingers crossed with you

Do I take that as a slight kiss and make up?

I'll certainly take the thank you. Thank you.

I wanna make out with you so bad...

[saintsRrising]

Face -off

Gardi v Blake


Most likely finals scenarios...if we keep winning is:

Swans

Cats

Pies

Gardiner matches up well against those team's rucks.

This week

Playing him gives Ross a chance to see where he is at...either as back up in case Ben goes own, or to be played in tandem with him.

One thing to remember with Gardi is if he finds form , is that he is a very, very good player.

[plugger66]

Face -off

Gardi v Blake


Most likely finals scenarios...if we keep winning is:

Swans

Cats

Pies

Gardiner matches up well against those team's rucks.

Sorry but I dont see how Blake and MG are fighting for the same position. Blake cand and will play back if he plays. MG can only play in one spot and that is the ruck and with 3 interchange that just doesnt work IMO.

[jays]

good luck to the guy could be his last game

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

Going tall because Thornton is out. o'Hailpin won't play back so if "we" play a tall forward line it may catch them out.

When does that work if they cant mark on a lead?

When they can mark overhead.
And BTW they can mark on the lead, although I dare say we have Roo and Kosi there for that.

[plugger66]

Going tall because Thornton is out. o'Hailpin won't play back so if "we" play a tall forward line it may catch them out.

When does that work if they cant mark on a lead?

When they can mark overhead.
And BTW they can mark on the lead, although I dare say we have Roo and Kosi there for that.

Well Kosi cant mark on a lead either and MG cant take a contested mark forward or if he does it will be one. Stupid idea. Has never worked and will never work.

[linz]

Great move. We need a good big man in the finals to take the pressure off Big Mac. It allows for far more flexibility. It may fail if Gardiner isn't fit but we need to take the punt 'cause 2nd or in between to 16th means the same to me.

[plugger66]

Great move. We need a good big man in the finals to take the pressure off Big Mac. It allows for far more flexibility. It may fail if Gardiner isn't fit but we need to take the punt 'cause 2nd or in between to 16th means the same to me.

Love you to explain the flexibility to me. Where does MG play when not rucking?

[dragit]

Great move. We need a good big man in the finals to take the pressure off Big Mac. It allows for far more flexibility. It may fail if Gardiner isn't fit but we need to take the punt 'cause 2nd or in between to 16th means the same to me.

Love you to explain the flexibility to me. Where does MG play when not rucking?

I can feel that you are really upset about this plugs, let's wait and see who runs out on Saturday night...

[linz]

Great move. We need a good big man in the finals to take the pressure off Big Mac. It allows for far more flexibility. It may fail if Gardiner isn't fit but we need to take the punt 'cause 2nd or in between to 16th means the same to me.

Love you to explain the flexibility to me. Where does MG play when not rucking?

Never kicked a goal has he Plug?

[plugger66]

Great move. We need a good big man in the finals to take the pressure off Big Mac. It allows for far more flexibility. It may fail if Gardiner isn't fit but we need to take the punt 'cause 2nd or in between to 16th means the same to me.

Love you to explain the flexibility to me. Where does MG play when not rucking?

Never kicked a goal has he Plug?

I doubt it as a forward.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

Going tall because Thornton is out. o'Hailpin won't play back so if "we" play a tall forward line it may catch them out.

When does that work if they cant mark on a lead?

When they can mark overhead.
And BTW they can mark on the lead, although I dare say we have Roo and Kosi there for that.

Well Kosi cant mark on a lead either and MG cant take a contested mark forward or if he does it will be one. Stupid idea. Has never worked and will never work.

Gee you're talking some s***. As if Kosi can't mark on the lead and of course Gardi can take a contested mark (especially against someone smaller and lighter, which is who he'd be likely to be up against on the weekend). I seem to recall one in particular against Geelong in the aforementioned game in round 14, 2009.

[plugger66]

Going tall because Thornton is out. o'Hailpin won't play back so if "we" play a tall forward line it may catch them out.

When does that work if they cant mark on a lead?

When they can mark overhead.
And BTW they can mark on the lead, although I dare say we have Roo and Kosi there for that.

Well Kosi cant mark on a lead either and MG cant take a contested mark forward or if he does it will be one. Stupid idea. Has never worked and will never work.

Gee you're talking some s***. As if Kosi can't mark on the lead and of course Gardi can take a contested mark (especially against someone smaller and lighter, which is who he'd be likely to be up against on the weekend). I seem to recall one in particular against Geelong in the aforementioned game in round 14, 2009.

Rubbish. Kosi doesnt mark on a lead and MG kicked those goals when floating forward as a ruckman. Anyway that was 2 years ago. Footy has changed and MG is worse. We certainly can this week but it wont be through having a tall forward line. That will be a hinderance but hopefully our mids can win it for us.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

Face -off

Gardi v Blake


Most likely finals scenarios...if we keep winning is:

Swans

Cats

Pies

Gardiner matches up well against those team's rucks.

Sorry but I dont see how Blake and MG are fighting for the same position. Blake cand and will play back if he plays. MG can only play in one spot and that is the ruck and with 3 interchange that just doesnt work IMO.

Just open your mind a TINY little bit and think outside the very small square you tend to think in and you'll be able to see that while they may not be fighting for the same exact spot on the field, you are in fact allowed to juggle the team a little bit, and with both being reasonably tall and relatively slow, we probably only have room for "x" amount of "tall and slows" and they are probably the two "least essential" to the team.
If it turns out that with them both there we have one too many "tall and slows", then it would come down to which one of the two you go with, even though they're not going to be playing in the same spot. Then it will likely come down to a "horses for courses" situation, where you look at who you're playing and where you need the "tall and slows" that week. This week, we need very few of them in the backline, given the speed and mobility of Betts, Garlett and Walker, especially.

[plugger66]

Face -off

Gardi v Blake


Most likely finals scenarios...if we keep winning is:

Swans

Cats

Pies

Gardiner matches up well against those team's rucks.

Sorry but I dont see how Blake and MG are fighting for the same position. Blake cand and will play back if he plays. MG can only play in one spot and that is the ruck and with 3 interchange that just doesnt work IMO.

Just open your mind a TINY little bit and think outside the very small square you tend to think in and you'll be able to see that while they may not be fighting for the same exact spot on the field, you are in fact allowed to juggle the team a little bit, and with both being reasonably tall and relatively slow, we probably only have room for "x" amount of "tall and slows" and they are probably the two "least essential" to the team.
If it turns out that with them both there we have one too many "tall and slows", then it would come down to which one of the two you go with, even though they're not going to be playing in the same spot. Then it will likely come down to a "horses for courses" situation, where you look at who you're playing and where you need the "tall and slows" that week. This week, we need very few of them in the backline, given the speed and mobility of Betts, Garlett and Walker, especially.

I have no idea what you are on about? Can you explain to us who understand footy what you mean? What has the backline of ours got to do with our rucks. Id rather your silly idea of dropping guys who had one bad game in 10 being dropped than having 3 ruckmen in the side especially when we can only have 3 now on the bench.

[PJ]

Tommy must be wondering what he has to do !!

What to get a gig as the No 1 tap ruckman?

[PJ]

2 observable weaknesses in the current team

Hit outs
Aerial dominance

[linz]

Face -off

Gardi v Blake


Most likely finals scenarios...if we keep winning is:

Swans

Cats

Pies

Gardiner matches up well against those team's rucks.

Sorry but I dont see how Blake and MG are fighting for the same position. Blake cand and will play back if he plays. MG can only play in one spot and that is the ruck and with 3 interchange that just doesnt work IMO.

Just open your mind a TINY little bit and think outside the very small square you tend to think in and you'll be able to see that while they may not be fighting for the same exact spot on the field, you are in fact allowed to juggle the team a little bit, and with both being reasonably tall and relatively slow, we probably only have room for "x" amount of "tall and slows" and they are probably the two "least essential" to the team.
If it turns out that with them both there we have one too many "tall and slows", then it would come down to which one of the two you go with, even though they're not going to be playing in the same spot. Then it will likely come down to a "horses for courses" situation, where you look at who you're playing and where you need the "tall and slows" that week. This week, we need very few of them in the backline, given the speed and mobility of Betts, Garlett and Walker, especially.

I have no idea what you are on about? Can you explain to us who understand footy what you mean? What has the backline of ours got to do with our rucks. Id rather your silly idea of dropping guys who had one bad game in 10 being dropped than having 3 ruckmen in the side especially when we can only have 3 now on the bench.

I trust and agree with Ross and his selection committee on these team selections despite your opinions Plugger. They seem to have a reasonable understanding on match-ups with the opposition and our player fitness and positional strengths. Far more than me. (and possibly you too!!)

Hopefully you won't show too much glee if Michael Gardiner fails to perform well on Saturday night.

[plugger66]

Face -off

Gardi v Blake


Most likely finals scenarios...if we keep winning is:

Swans

Cats

Pies

Gardiner matches up well against those team's rucks.

Sorry but I dont see how Blake and MG are fighting for the same position. Blake cand and will play back if he plays. MG can only play in one spot and that is the ruck and with 3 interchange that just doesnt work IMO.

Just open your mind a TINY little bit and think outside the very small square you tend to think in and you'll be able to see that while they may not be fighting for the same exact spot on the field, you are in fact allowed to juggle the team a little bit, and with both being reasonably tall and relatively slow, we probably only have room for "x" amount of "tall and slows" and they are probably the two "least essential" to the team.
If it turns out that with them both there we have one too many "tall and slows", then it would come down to which one of the two you go with, even though they're not going to be playing in the same spot. Then it will likely come down to a "horses for courses" situation, where you look at who you're playing and where you need the "tall and slows" that week. This week, we need very few of them in the backline, given the speed and mobility of Betts, Garlett and Walker, especially.

I have no idea what you are on about? Can you explain to us who understand footy what you mean? What has the backline of ours got to do with our rucks. Id rather your silly idea of dropping guys who had one bad game in 10 being dropped than having 3 ruckmen in the side especially when we can only have 3 now on the bench.

I trust and agree with Ross and his selection committee on these team selections despite your opinions Plugger. They seem to have a reasonable understanding on match-ups with the opposition and our player fitness and positional strengths. Far more than me. (and possibly you too!!)

Hopefully you won't show too much glee if Michael Gardiner fails to perform well on Saturday night.

They know 1000% more than me. No doubt. I just dont see any upside of 3 ruckmen. Happy to be proven wrong but I hope we dont have 3 ruckmen in the finals. Will not work. This is surely a thank you MG game.

[PJ]

There is almost no chance of a thank you MG game - would not be on RL's radar in any shape or form. He's proven in the past there is no place for emotional selections. This would be part of developing finals strategies.

[SaintPav]

2 observable weaknesses in the current team

Hit outs
Aerial dominance

Do you mean hit outs or centre clearances? Maybe you mean hit outs to advantage?

Aerial dominance? You usually take more marks when you have more possesions. Macas doing ok there.

[saintsRrising]

Face -off

Gardi v Blake


Most likely finals scenarios...if we keep winning is:

Swans

Cats

Pies

Gardiner matches up well against those team's rucks.

Sorry but I dont see how Blake and MG are fighting for the same position. Blake cand and will play back if he plays. MG can only play in one spot and that is the ruck and with 3 interchange that just doesnt work IMO.

Not sure if you watched the Kanga game last week or not.....but Kosi did not play No 2 ruck...Blake did.

Pretty sure that Blake has often played as No 2 ruck.

Pretty sure Gardi plays ruck.

Pretty sure both are tall or tallish...and none too quick. While both are different both IMO are up for the No2 ruck....

Can't see them both playing in a finals match.

If Gardi comes in and burns...he may then squeeze Blake out.


Against the big Mummy...who is in great form....Lyon would be tempting to have Gardiner in support.

Midfield has been a HUGE problem all year for us...and so if our ruck gets beaten like it did against Mummy, the Saints will be exposed.

[Dr Spaceman]

There is almost no chance of a thank you MG game - would not be on RL's radar in any shape or form. He's proven in the past there is no place for emotional selections. This would be part of developing finals strategies.

The idea of a farewell match when there are games left to play makes no sense in any event. 

So we say goodbye to Gardi on Saturday night and then Big Mac gets injured at training and MG goes around again the following weekend.  :? 

Seems clear Ross is having a look at what he's got available just in case he needs to go down this path: