Selection puzzle...

[Sanctorum]

I haven't been following the discussion on this forum about the replacement of Paddy McCartin for Nick Riewoldt v Collingwood, but I can't work out the selectors' logic. I am not at all unhappy about Paddy making his debut and playing regularly, I do rate him as a future "Gun". But I could not believe that the selectors made this move in the expectation that Paddy would be able to play the role that Roo has in the team this year, where he plays up and down the ground, much like Matthew Richardson did for the Tigers in his final few years, and which I feel is ideal for him at this stage of his career. To my mind the selectors should have added another tall, say Hickey, to take on the running tall role (and help out Billie), at the expense of Saad or Schneider.

This takes nothing away from Paddy's debut game, I just felt that it added additional pressure on the young bloke that could have been alleviated if Hickey had been included. I hope the selectors lean from this and play both McCartin and Hickey against the Blues on Saturday.

[plugger66]

I haven't been following the discussion on this forum about the replacement of Paddy McCartin for Nick Riewoldt v Collingwood, but I can't work out the selectors' logic. I am not at all unhappy about Paddy making his debut and playing regularly, I do rate him as a future "Gun". But I could not believe that the selectors made this move in the expectation that Paddy would be able to play the role that Roo has in the team this year, where he plays up and down the ground, much like Matthew Richardson did for the Tigers in his final few years, and which I feel is ideal for him at this stage of his career. To my mind the selectors should have added another tall, say Hickey, to take on the running tall role (and help out Billie), at the expense of Saad or Schneider.

This takes nothing away from Paddy's debut game, I just felt that it added additional pressure on the young bloke that could have been alleviated if Hickey had been included. I hope the selectors lean from this and play both McCartin and Hickey against the Blues on Saturday.

Im unsure what you mean. Did you want both Hickey and McCartin to play? Or just Hickey?

[loris]

Sanctorum......... if you read one of tony74's posts (can't recall which one it was in) he explained the situation. Paddy was named as an emergency, to cover for Bruce. There was a chance Bruce wouldn't be able to play as he had been ill during the week. So Paddy was to be Bruce's replacement if he didn't make the grade.

Roo wasn't expected to get injured at the final moment when warming up. So with Roo pulling the pin, Paddy as the emergency was in to replace Roo and not Bruce.

Tony74 also said in that post that Bruce then had to play even though he was suffering from something, because Roo was ruled out. If they had had their druthers.............. Bruce would have not played at the last minute and it was more like for like if Paddy had replaced him.

The Roo injury upset their plan at the last moment. That's how I read tony74's explanation.


PS ......tony74 is one to listen to on this site!!

[Saint wagga]

I haven't been following the discussion on this forum about the replacement of Paddy McCartin for Nick Riewoldt v Collingwood, but I can't work out the selectors' logic. I am not at all unhappy about Paddy making his debut and playing regularly, I do rate him as a future "Gun". But I could not believe that the selectors made this move in the expectation that Paddy would be able to play the role that Roo has in the team this year, where he plays up and down the ground, much like Matthew Richardson did for the Tigers in his final few years, and which I feel is ideal for him at this stage of his career. To my mind the selectors should have added another tall, say Hickey, to take on the running tall role (and help out Billie), at the expense of Saad or Schneider.

This takes nothing away from Paddy's debut game, I just felt that it added additional pressure on the young bloke that could have been alleviated if Hickey had been included. I hope the selectors lean from this and play both McCartin and Hickey against the Blues on Saturday.

Im unsure what you mean. Did you want both Hickey and McCartin to play? Or just Hickey?

I get the impression readin the original post, that Sanctorum wanted both Hickey and McCartin to play. at the exprense of a small forward. Correct me if i'm wrong sanctorum.

Sanctorum......... if you read one of tony74's posts (can't recall which one it was in) he explained the situation. Paddy was named as an emergency, to cover for Bruce. There was a chance Bruce wouldn't be able to play as he had been ill during the week. So Paddy was to be Bruce's replacement if he didn't make the grade.

Roo wasn't expected to get injured at the final moment when warming up. So with Roo pulling the pin, Paddy as the emergency was in to replace Roo and not Bruce.

Tony74 also said in that post that Bruce then had to play even though he was suffering from something, because Roo was ruled out. If they had had their druthers.............. Bruce would have not played at the last minute and it was more like for like if Paddy had replaced him.

The Roo injury upset their plan at the last moment. That's how I read tony74's explanation.


PS ......tony74 is one to listen to on this site!!

I think the only forward on our list with even 50% the tank of Rooey is Josh Bruce when not crook. He seems to cover lots of territory, and would be by far best placed to play the high forward role, whilst McCartin and Hickey/Pierce arent' nearly as mobile as the urban cowboy, could play the deeper forward role/ resting ruck...to what effect. We wont know until we try.

[plugger66]

I haven't been following the discussion on this forum about the replacement of Paddy McCartin for Nick Riewoldt v Collingwood, but I can't work out the selectors' logic. I am not at all unhappy about Paddy making his debut and playing regularly, I do rate him as a future "Gun". But I could not believe that the selectors made this move in the expectation that Paddy would be able to play the role that Roo has in the team this year, where he plays up and down the ground, much like Matthew Richardson did for the Tigers in his final few years, and which I feel is ideal for him at this stage of his career. To my mind the selectors should have added another tall, say Hickey, to take on the running tall role (and help out Billie), at the expense of Saad or Schneider.

This takes nothing away from Paddy's debut game, I just felt that it added additional pressure on the young bloke that could have been alleviated if Hickey had been included. I hope the selectors lean from this and play both McCartin and Hickey against the Blues on Saturday.

Im unsure what you mean. Did you want both Hickey and McCartin to play? Or just Hickey?

I get the impression readin the original post, that Sanctorum wanted both Hickey and McCartin to play. at the exprense of a small forward. Correct me if i'm wrong sanctorum.

Sanctorum......... if you read one of tony74's posts (can't recall which one it was in) he explained the situation. Paddy was named as an emergency, to cover for Bruce. There was a chance Bruce wouldn't be able to play as he had been ill during the week. So Paddy was to be Bruce's replacement if he didn't make the grade.

Roo wasn't expected to get injured at the final moment when warming up. So with Roo pulling the pin, Paddy as the emergency was in to replace Roo and not Bruce.

Tony74 also said in that post that Bruce then had to play even though he was suffering from something, because Roo was ruled out. If they had had their druthers.............. Bruce would have not played at the last minute and it was more like for like if Paddy had replaced him.

The Roo injury upset their plan at the last moment. That's how I read tony74's explanation.


PS ......tony74 is one to listen to on this site!!

I think the only forward on our list with even 50% the tank of Rooey is Josh Bruce when not crook. He seems to cover lots of territory, and would be by far best placed to play the high forward role, whilst McCartin and Hickey/Pierce arent' nearly as mobile as the urban cowboy, could play the deeper forward role/ resting ruck...to what effect. We wont know until we try.

Well I doubting any club would drop a player less than an hour before the game and I doubt it was the night for both Hickey and McCartin. With the late change it was McCartin to try and keep a similar structure.

[Saint wagga]

Agreed PLugger - i thought the original post was looking at hypotheticals for life without Roo. As for friday night. Certainly, Mccartin was the only option and according to the selection committee, ranked 4th best KP forward at present.

[Sanctorum]

Thanks for the responses. Yes, I would have liked to see Hickey in the team against the Pies at the expense of either Schneider or Saad, not just to take the pressure off McCartin but to do some of the work that Roo now performs around the ground, and to support Billy Longer at the stoppages. The other option for Roo's role against Carlton is to give this to Josh Bruce, leaving McCartin and Membrey to contest the ball in the forward 50.

Having said all that, I am very happy with the way the Saints are rebuilding in 2015 and hope that they keep playing the new recruits - the 2nd quarter against the Suns was the best for years and proves that the team is on the right track.

[gringo]

What I found painful was the story suggesting that we wouldn't play Paddy until he is really ready so we don't Jack Watts him. That night we play him then put him in the next week as well. Malt Mickhouse is a weak as piss crack pot, he will target Mc cartin then demand an apology for being a geriatric because his wife is overly emotional.

[plugger66]

What I found painful was the story suggesting that we wouldn't play Paddy until he is really ready so we don't Jack Watts him. That night we play him then put him in the next week as well. Malt Mickhouse is a weak as piss crack pot, he will target Mc cartin then demand an apology for being a geriatric because his wife is overly emotional.

Rooy got injured in the warm up and they said they would play the best players from the seconds. They did exactly what they said they would do.

[Con Gorozidis]

What I found painful was the story suggesting that we wouldn't play Paddy until he is really ready so we don't Jack Watts him. That night we play him then put him in the next week as well. Malt Mickhouse is a weak as piss crack pot, he will target Mc cartin then demand an apology for being a geriatric because his wife is overly emotional.

Didn't we make a big media thing about how 'hes here for a career' etc. We grand standed and then chucked him anyway with two hours notice. Was a bit off.
Anyway from what I saw last week - it wouldnt surprise me if he comes out and takes 10 marks this week. He was in the right places a fair bit. He needs to stay on the move. Hes dangerous on the move.

[Jacks Back]

What I found painful was the story suggesting that we wouldn't play Paddy until he is really ready so we don't Jack Watts him. That night we play him then put him in the next week as well. Malt Mickhouse is a weak as piss crack pot, he will target Mc cartin then demand an apology for being a geriatric because his wife is overly emotional.

Didn't we make a big media thing about how 'hes here for a career' etc. We grand standed and then chucked him anyway with two hours notice. Was a bit off.
Anyway from what I saw last week - it wouldnt surprise me if he comes out and takes 10 marks this week. He was in the right places a fair bit. He needs to stay on the move. Hes dangerous on the move.

Paddy also needs some of that grippo stuff.

[Con Gorozidis]

What I found painful was the story suggesting that we wouldn't play Paddy until he is really ready so we don't Jack Watts him. That night we play him then put him in the next week as well. Malt Mickhouse is a weak as piss crack pot, he will target Mc cartin then demand an apology for being a geriatric because his wife is overly emotional.

Didn't we make a big media thing about how 'hes here for a career' etc. We grand standed and then chucked him anyway with two hours notice. Was a bit off.
Anyway from what I saw last week - it wouldnt surprise me if he comes out and takes 10 marks this week. He was in the right places a fair bit. He needs to stay on the move. Hes dangerous on the move.

Paddy also needs some of that grippo stuff.

And no tape on his fingers! That didnt work.

[Dr Spaceman]

Maybe he still had a little bit of salad roll on his mitts