Also first afl game for a long time. He'll be a handy back up as he gets used to the pace of the game again.Nobody was expecting Max Gawn. He’s similar to Soldo. Competes in an agricultural style. Tried hard against the underrated Witts
I thought he was ok, better than some have been saying. There were a lot of questionable bounces that were allowed to remain.
I took from Yze's post game presser that Balta will be assisting Nank when he's back which I assume must mean Naismith needs to step aside once the skipper is back?Can he and Nank play in the same team? I doubt it (but they will try and learn).
Yeh, that one in the last qtr was a shocker. And Witts was allowed to push any opponent out two-handed in the back.Absolutely. The center bouncing today was garbage. People are saying how Kitts owned us, but I thought the crap they were bouncing early favoured his bigger bodied ruck style.
No coincidence for mine that when they started to throw the ball up, Naismith looked much better.
Nah, we just always have the opposition ruckman play there best games against us.One of the best VFL ruckmen against one of the best AFL ruckmen. We shoudn't be surprised with the result of that battle.
with the sub rule; ive always been partial to the idea of playing 2 genuine rucks- (especially early in the season when players are cramping- and then more horses for courses based on the long armed beasts like Gawn & Witts) for the first 2.5 quarters and then subbing one out for a smaller runner. Obviously doesnt always work when injury hits.... but just my 10 cents worth for the next 2-3 games; as i feel Nank and Naismith could be very good for us rotating off the bench. One will have a few petrol tickets left to ruck with Balta for the last 1.5 quarters.Can he and Nank play in the same team? I doubt it (but they will try and learn).
He was ok, played against an A grade ruck. But I was disappointed in his marking.
If Balta is going to play in the forward line he needs to be our 2nd ruck, i thought that before Friday and I still think it now (tho i get why Ryan played with our injuries.)with the sub rule; ive always been partial to the idea of playing 2 genuine rucks- (especially early in the season when players are cramping- and then more horses for courses based on the long armed beasts like Gawn & Witts) for the first 2.5 quarters and then subbing one out for a smaller runner. Obviously doesnt always work when injury hits.... but just my 10 cents worth for the next 2-3 games; as i feel Nank and Naismith could be very good for us rotating off the bench. One will have a few petrol tickets left to ruck with Balta for the last 1.5 quarters.
i don't understand this at all...?Ivan Maric said at the pre game function that the club wanted to pay for flights for Naismith's mum to fly to the GC from Gundegai but the AFL wouldn't allow it.
That’s what I’m trying to work out.i don't understand this at all...?
how does the AFL overrule a club who wants to do this?
makes no sense
i don't understand this at all...?
how does the AFL overrule a club who wants to do this?
makes no sense
I don't want Nankervis as a forward for significant periods of a game while Balta rucks. I'd prefer to have Lynch and Balta causing headaches in the forward line, and Nank interchanging with Naismith.If Balta is going to play in the forward line he needs to be our 2nd ruck, i thought that before Friday and I still think it now (tho i get why Ryan played with our injuries.)
That means Naismith wont play with Nank.