kidley and thaiday in!

[B-dos]

I'm a bit 50/50 on this.

While i hear what people are saying in that we play well as a team when Johns is allowed to control the play and history tells us we can win the big games with a johns/kidley combination, im not entirely confident with Johns form of late and i wonder whether we should put all our eggs in his basket.

The benefit of having Mullen on the park along side Johns is that we have two strong attacking options and we can keep the other team guessing. With a johns/kidley combo everyone knows who will be making the plays and if Johns isnt at his best we may struggle. That said, Mullen is on the bench so we have a back up and i dont doubt johns will pull out some magic when we need it.

 

[Burwood]

The part of the article that I didn't understand was the makeup of our bench. It claimed that Mullen would have one spot, Tanner another as Reynoldson would regain his spot at lock, Smith (returning from broken jaw) and Davico will take two other spots AND Lowrie and Abraham will fight it out for another. Wouldn't that make it a 5 man bench??

If our bench is Mullen, Smith, Davico and Tanner, then I think that we'll be seeing Kidley used in the backrow, presumably at Lock.

 

[antonius]

I'm a bit 50/50 on this.

While i hear what people are saying in that we play well as a team when Johns is allowed to control the play and history tells us we can win the big games with a johns/kidley combination, im not entirely confident with Johns form of late and i wonder whether we should put all our eggs in his basket.

The benefit of having Mullen on the park along side Johns is that we have two strong attacking options and we can keep the other team guessing. With a johns/kidley combo everyone knows who will be making the plays and if Johns isnt at his best we may struggle. That said, Mullen is on the bench so we have a back up and i dont doubt johns will pull out some magic when we need it.

I'm with you on this, I think you start with the players that are in form, and that's Mullen and Seage. The doubt that the Mullen Johns combo brings to oppostion sides would make Johns all the more dangerous, because he would get that little more time and space to create something. ATM Milton is out of form and he isn't fit, he could cost us a tight game at the back. I love watching him play, but in finals footy I like the idea of Seage at the back, Seage is also a good attacking option and plays well in broken play. He is also returning the ball much better than Milton ATM.

 

[Holla if ya hear me]

I can fully understand the debate here and there are points to everones view.The only solution is to allow the experienced men to take the field and see how the game flows...id love to see Mullen in the starting squad but there is merit in allowing him bench time and then injecting himself into the game when the big forwards are tired and he can turn them around with his long kicks[which i think is better than johns}he is quick and this is also a good option here
Milton-well id think that seage is the better option but then where do you play milton?..its a dilema that we havent had for ages

Also..i found a video of robbie o davis last agame against Tigers.There is a player there called Tanner..and he look big..Now for some reason he looks small..i dont get that
One the other side of the coin..i think tanner should make way for reynoldson.and if logic suggests that experience is the way to go..then Daniel Abraham HAS to get the nod either in the starting side or bench

 

[Holla if ya hear me]

bench.Mullen Smith Davico Abraham..18th man=Seage

 

[Boxer]

Milton-well id think that seage is the better option but then where do you play milton?..its a dilema that we havent had for ages

Seage is the far better option.
As for Milton, I'd think it's pretty obvious, he plays Premier League.

 

[Yosh]

Well if Mullen is on the bench im cool with that. However, if Hagan doesnt use the bench rotation properly we can get owned. I would be so angry if Mullen only gets like 20 mins game time, while tanner gets nearly half a game.

Around a month ago i would of been rooting for Carmont being dropped for Kidely into centres, but Carmont is been on fire lately. Punishing defence, runs hard and fast, however he still does lack that last pass to his winger. He just cant set up his winger. He should play wing next year...

 

[Jono078]

Believe it or not, the stats read that Kurt Gidley is almost as deadly as Johns in the oppositions 20 - the only place where Kidley usually shares the playmaking duties.

Kidley is a great defender too. Mullen can come on for impact with Kurt moving back to lock.

I'd like to know what Kidley's conversion rate is inside the oppositions 20 though.. He got plenty of try assists by throwing the ball around alot, and he makes a few errors in their 20 which releases pressure from them which will be a huge blow for us in the finals.

And plus he hasnt exactly been in good form lately.

But if both Kidley and Thaiday can play their best on the day I wont have any arguments. But I beleive we should go with the 'safer' options.

 

[Gene Krupa]

I'm with you on this, I think you start with the players that are in form, and that's Mullen and Seage. The doubt that the Mullen Johns combo brings to oppostion sides would make Johns all the more dangerous, because he would get that little more time and space to create something. ATM Milton is out of form and he isn't fit, he could cost us a tight game at the back. I love watching him play, but in finals footy I like the idea of Seage at the back, Seage is also a good attacking option and plays well in broken play. He is also returning the ball much better than Milton ATM.

I'm in complete agreement with that!

 

[benno]

Team hasnt been named yet lads n lasses...media hype is all it is cause newy papers got nothin to write about!!...wait till we know the fitness of thaiday next week..then we'll know....

kids and mullen ..not a problem with it...i think its a smart move.........dont hit me!!

 

[keeney]

Seage had a blinder last week. Was safe as can be under the high ball, and positions himself to hit those gaps in attack. He even bagged a try for his efforts.

Thiaday is simply not a player designed to be a fullback under the high ball. He is a 5/8 IMO. And I would play him at 5/8 opposite Mullen when Joey retires (but that is me).

Way to change your tune.