Pre-match: Pies v North - all comments here...

melliot · Post by **melliot** » Fri Apr 14, 2006 10:06 pm

I reckon:

Watt for Tarrent ( has the pace to match and have matched up previously)
Brown for Rocca (height and strength to match)

Hay is a hasbeen. In his last year at the Hawks was used to play on the least of the dangerous forwards (i.e. HFF). Hardly played on the dangerous Key forward.

However I think the talent and ability is in the Pies favour!

cfc2009-10-11-12 · Post by **cfc2009-10-11-12** » Sat Apr 15, 2006 12:14 am

In: Burns, Wakes, CCloke
Out: Richards, Licuria, O'Brien

I think Harry is a little unlucky this week to get dropped but seeing the way he plays and his attitude, it will just spur him on more to get a regular gig.

As for Richards i just dont think that he can cut it around the grounds and would prefer to have CCloke there instead, even he runs around like a dinosaur at times but at least he can go forward and take a few grabs and could stretch the Kangaz defence.

Looking forward to getting out heart soul back in the centre but still question marks remain over his endurance.

HShaw deserves his spot and i think that the more senior time he gets the better it will be for his development and im hoping that he will be a big part of our backline for many years, he has the ability.

I think this game may turn out to be one of those kick it sideways games until you find space then go forward but Collingwood would have learnt alot from the 1st round game which showed against Hawthorn.

Fire Up · Post by **Fire Up** » Sat Apr 15, 2006 12:58 am

cfc2009-10-11-12 wrote:In: Burns, Wakes, CCloke
Out: Richards, Licuria, O'Brien

I think Harry is a little unlucky this week to get dropped but seeing the way he plays and his attitude, it will just spur him on more to get a regular gig.

As for Richards i just dont think that he can cut it around the grounds and would prefer to have CCloke there instead, even he runs around like a dinosaur at times but at least he can go forward and take a few grabs and could stretch the Kangaz defence.

Looking forward to getting out heart soul back in the centre but still question marks remain over his endurance.

HShaw deserves his spot and i think that the more senior time he gets the better it will be for his development and im hoping that he will be a big part of our backline for many years, he has the ability.

I think this game may turn out to be one of those kick it sideways games until you find space then go forward but Collingwood would have learnt alot from the 1st round game which showed against Hawthorn.

burns an c2 didnt get picked so there goes that. licca wont be dropped nor will richards.

loki04 · Post by **loki04** » Sat Apr 15, 2006 11:51 am

-magpies are 2 good- wrote:
cfc2009-10-11-12 wrote:In: Burns, Wakes, CCloke
Out: Richards, Licuria, O'Brien

I think Harry is a little unlucky this week to get dropped but seeing the way he plays and his attitude, it will just spur him on more to get a regular gig.

As for Richards i just dont think that he can cut it around the grounds and would prefer to have CCloke there instead, even he runs around like a dinosaur at times but at least he can go forward and take a few grabs and could stretch the Kangaz defence.

Looking forward to getting out heart soul back in the centre but still question marks remain over his endurance.

HShaw deserves his spot and i think that the more senior time he gets the better it will be for his development and im hoping that he will be a big part of our backline for many years, he has the ability.

I think this game may turn out to be one of those kick it sideways games until you find space then go forward but Collingwood would have learnt alot from the 1st round game which showed against Hawthorn.
burns an c2 didnt get picked so there goes that. licca wont be dropped nor will richards.

yet Richards should be , on form atleast.

favourites 2008 · Post by **favourites 2008** » Sat Apr 15, 2006 3:15 pm

killer wrote:why isn't burns named?

Cheers

Cos his dominating at williamstown. lol

Anyone have the full sides, the ones which will play?

jonesy86 · Post by **jonesy86** » Sat Apr 15, 2006 5:32 pm

i know that morrison, j cloke and h shaw played at willy so im guessing only change to collingwood is wakes in for shaw

burnsy17 · Post by **burnsy17** » Sat Apr 15, 2006 5:57 pm

Burns apparently went well at Willy today - So did C Cloke and Davies.... all 3 of which should be playing at Collingwood, not Willy IMO....

collingwoodjoe · Post by **collingwoodjoe** » Sat Apr 15, 2006 6:48 pm

Burns got about 18 touches in the first half! ... and then 3 touches in the second... sound like he isn't quite over the virus yet, will probably be in next week.
From what I heard Heath didn't play for Willie so he will not nessecerily be the one to make way for Wakes.

DaVe86 · Post by **DaVe86** » Sat Apr 15, 2006 10:27 pm

Hay should be in...im not shaking in my boots but he is a handy player for them

Scmods · Post by **Scmods** » Sat Apr 15, 2006 10:40 pm

Since I'm here, might as well have my say :p

This is a hard game to tip. Both teams are hot and cold. If the Pies play like they did last week, they could very well win. IMO the Roos defence isn't that strong, so if Anthony can have another 'on' week, the Pies'll win. But then again Wakelin could struggle to hold Nathan Thompson. In the middle, I think the Pies have the edge with Fraser a better ruckman than Hale. If Buckley can get enough of it in the middle, his quality delivery into the forward line could expose the Roos slightly weaker defence.

I say Pies, just.

loki04 · Post by **loki04** » Sat Apr 15, 2006 10:46 pm

DaVe86 wrote:Hay should be in...im not shaking in my boots but he is a handy player for them

I think hay didn't quite pull up right so he missed out , but then again Laidley could be trying to out fox MM with mind games.

bokka · Post by **bokka** » Sun Apr 16, 2006 7:26 am

Pies by 6 unless the unlikely event that Sav kicks 6.
After last week, the side has attained mid to lower-mid order status. This is a chance to climb a rung or 2 in the pecking order, ie increase to mid to higher-mid level (I'm not talking about the ladder).

STOKA35 · Post by **STOKA35** » Sun Apr 16, 2006 11:12 am

we need to control harvey, grant, simpson
they are there keys to win the match keep them below 15 possesions each, and we will win.
-also if rocca and tarrant touch the ball like last week we should win
easily
-also if we come with the right attitude (like hawthorn yesterday) that will help as well.

melliot · Post by **melliot** » Sun Apr 16, 2006 2:13 pm

AFL site says that Waklin in for Maxwell. Maxwell, C1 and Morrision are the emergencies.

Roos have dropped Petrie and Pratt. Sav, Petrie and Makepeace are the emergencies.

Surley, Presti will take Thompson. If Sav plays surley Wakes will take him anyway. Prestie is more likely to match Thompsons speed on the lead than Wakes? In any switch Presti should take the FF and Wakes CHF.

Maxwell is unlucky to be dropped over O'Brian IMO. Big Suprise! I like our balance though. Just think Maxwell is more acomplished ATM and served an apprentiship already. Not sure what Obrian gives over Nick? bit more pace perhaps?

DaVe86 · Post by **DaVe86** » Sun Apr 16, 2006 6:10 pm

SUprised Petrie is out, but if he is then im more than happy with the squad although i think Maxwell is a better option than Wakelin because he can play small and is in good touch.

This is an unofficial Bulletin Board - owned and run by its users. We welcome all fans of the Mighty Collingwood Football Club.

Pre-match: Pies v North - all comments here...