The Team - Round 10 vs Sydney

Madden · Post by **Madden** » Thu May 31, 2007 5:24 pm

Interesting omissions.

In:
Laycock
Bolton
Welsh

Out:
Camporeale
Cole
Dyson

Fletcher Ryder Michael
McVeigh Bolton Stanton
Peverill Watson Slattery
Welsh Lucas Davey
M.Johnson Lloyd Hird
Hille McPhee Winderlich

J.Johnson Monfries Laycock Houli

Camporeale Johns Nash

lozza89 · Post by **lozza89** » Thu May 31, 2007 5:29 pm

Why the f*** does Bolton and Laycock come back in! For f*** sakes. They do not add ANYTHING to the team. They don't improve the team in any way. I do not see why they keep persistsing with them, especially Bolton

Crazyman · Post by **Crazyman** » Thu May 31, 2007 5:29 pm

Don't mind Laycock and Welsh in. Bolts is only there to play on Goodes, but I would have preferred another quicker player in the side for the extra run...

Sismis · Post by **Sismis** » Thu May 31, 2007 5:41 pm

Horses for courses. This is a good team.

I'm glad Dyson, Campo and Cole have been ommited. Shows we are not rewarding mediocre efforts.

Great to see Welsh back, I love him up forward take strong grabs and can work at ground level. I hope he gets up for it.

McVeigh, Slatts and Davey are the key to this game. If Welsh doesn't get up I would love to see Nash in there as well. If we can nullify them in the center we will be a real chance provided we kick straight .

Madden · Post by **Madden** » Thu May 31, 2007 5:53 pm

I think Dyson was very, very stiff to be omitted in a team that desperately needs some speed.

KaaN10 · Post by **KaaN10** » Thu May 31, 2007 6:01 pm

Hislop!!!

tom9779 · Post by **tom9779** » Thu May 31, 2007 6:01 pm

lozza89 wrote:Why the f*** does Bolton and Laycock come back in! For f*** sakes. They do not add ANYTHING to the team. They don't improve the team in any way. I do not see why they keep persistsing with them, especially Bolton

Bolton is there to do the job on Goodes. And he plays him pretty well.

tom9779 · Post by **tom9779** » Thu May 31, 2007 6:03 pm

Staggy wrote:I think Dyson was very, very stiff to be omitted in a team that desperately needs some speed.

Isn't Nash a very similar player to Dyson? I'd say Sheeds might see him as the player to take on his role.....

Suprised no Hislop, meant to be a hard nut, and its the contested possies we really have to compete hard against the swans for....

swoodley · Post by **swoodley** » Thu May 31, 2007 6:16 pm

KaaN10 wrote:Hislop!!!

Saw on BomberBlitz that Matty Knights was on SEN (yesterday/today) and said that Hislop needs to show some consistency and discipline. Maybe that's why he's not getting a game yet.

ZRS · Post by **ZRS** » Thu May 31, 2007 6:23 pm

Sismis wrote:Horses for courses. This is a good team.

I'm glad Dyson, Campo and Cole have been ommited. Shows we are not rewarding mediocre efforts.

Great to see Welsh back, I love him up forward take strong grabs and can work at ground level. I hope he gets up for it.

McVeigh, Slatts and Davey are the key to this game. If Welsh doesn't get up I would love to see Nash in there as well. If we can nullify them in the center we will be a real chance provided we kick straight .

agree sis, with all of the above

BenDoolan · Post by **BenDoolan** » Thu May 31, 2007 6:36 pm

I saw the Bolton selection coming from a mile away. Great to see Nash is close to selection. They obviously think a lot of him because he's only been back on the track for 5 minutes.....

tom9779 · Post by **tom9779** » Thu May 31, 2007 7:12 pm

BenDoolan wrote:I saw the Bolton selection coming from a mile away. Great to see Nash is close to selection. They obviously think a lot of him because he's only been back on the track for 5 minutes.....

reading the bendigo match reports, it sounds like nash has cleaned up in the twos.

pear · Post by **pear** » Thu May 31, 2007 7:23 pm

Laycock's last chance for mine

jimmyc1985 · Post by **jimmyc1985** » Thu May 31, 2007 7:39 pm

This was probably the obvious team. All 3 obvious omissions were made, although i'd agree with others that Dyson was probably the stiffest of the trio to be dropped. His career seems to be on the tenterhooks.

Great that we dropped Camporeale. Hopefully if a few more young guys step up, Campo won't even figure in future selection considerations for the senior side.

Richard Cole may as well pack his bags and head off to a country league now. Getting dropped after three weeks when he supposedly needed game time to get match fitness indicates to me the coaching staff don't see much in him.

As for the ins, well, who didn't see Bolton coming? Most obvious 'surprise' selection in history. Fair enough, i'm happy for him to play the odd game here and there if he gets a specified job he can execute (i.e. shut down Goodes) - what i don't want to see is Bolts being left in the team for weeks on end.

This game should suit the 'Cock - neither Jolly or Everitt are going to expose him around the ground for speed, and the SCG is small so he shouldn't get too tired running between contests (assuming he still lacks fitness). He needs to show something.

And good to see Welsh back in. His inclusion was a no-brainer on his form this year.

Oh, and Nash on the emergencies is good news.

Rossoneri · Post by **Rossoneri** » Thu May 31, 2007 7:40 pm

Sismis wrote:
I'm glad Dyson, Campo and Cole have been ommited. Shows we are not rewarding mediocre efforts.

Clearly we are if Bolton and Laycock are back in the team.

jimmyc1985 · Post by **jimmyc1985** » Thu May 31, 2007 7:41 pm

What vomiting agent did you use Rosso? Or did you just go the old fingers down the back of the throat trick when you heard Bolton is in?

Rossoneri · Post by **Rossoneri** » Thu May 31, 2007 8:10 pm

His inclusion was enough.

I dont have anything against Bolts himself, I think he is an ok player. However, if we are re-building, why not give the job of playing on goodes to a younger player?

If Bolts was playing most matches (and deserving it at the time), the I wouldnt have a problem with it. But to play him simply to play on Goodes is pointless.

Its like when we played Matthew Banks to play on Rocca. The guy played 4 games, 3 of them against Collingwood.

bombercol · Post by **bombercol** » Thu May 31, 2007 8:17 pm

It does seems that Campo and Cole are at the crossroads.

Dunno about Bolton, would've had Bradley in there before him on Bendigo form.

Should be a good game.

DYSON#2 · Post by **DYSON#2** » Thu May 31, 2007 8:35 pm

sammy lonergan injured?

Sismis · Post by **Sismis** » Thu May 31, 2007 9:46 pm

Rossoneri wrote:His inclusion was enough.

I dont have anything against Bolts himself, I think he is an ok player. However, if we are re-building, why not give the job of playing on goodes to a younger player?

If Bolts was playing most matches (and deserving it at the time), the I wouldnt have a problem with it. But to play him simply to play on Goodes is pointless.

Its like when we played Matthew Banks to play on Rocca. The guy played 4 games, 3 of them against Collingwood.

If we were 3-6 I'd agree, put a young guy in to have a crack,. BUT we are one game out of the top four and this is going to be a very tight year. In this case the strategic move outweighs the development argument.

Laycock is in simply for back up purposes. As Kev pointed out today his deveolpment so far has been disapointing., however if he can smash into Everit and Jolly a few times that is few times Hille doesn't have to.