*smile* Omitted. WHY?

[zacs56]

Re: schulz Omitted. WHY?

Every one and myself said he should go at the end of last year , but R F C could not find anyone silly enough to take him .
He done bugger all last week as a matter of fact he has done bugger all since he has been at the club .

 

[IanG]

Re: schulz Omitted. WHY?

Actually if you'd watched the Coburg game last week you'd know that's not true. Polak was outstanding last week with 20+ possessions and 13 marks, whilst Schulz bobbed up here and there. Graham Polak is too valuable a player to have running around in the reserves.

Actually if you'd watched the coburg game you'd know that Schulz was close to BOG, he was a rock at CHB and held the defence together. Polak played well but Schulz was slightly better.

Let's just see what transpires tomorrow. I suspect they have a role earmarked for Polak that they believe he is able to carry out better than Sarge. Geelong don't have a heap of match ups for Shulz to be honest.

No just Mooney or Hawkins, either of which he's better suited to than McGuane, Moore or Thursty.

 

[momentai]

Re: schulz Omitted. WHY?

I will be surprised if he doesn't take Mooney, possibly to come in for King. Is he over a broken wrist? Or Mcmahon.
B Mcguane Thursfield Hyde
HB King/Mcmahon Schulz Moore
C Tambling White Richardson
HF Tuck Brown Edwards
F Bowden Deledio Morton
Rsimmonds Johnson Foley
Res Newman Polak Riewoldt Pattison.

 

[TigerMasochist]

Re: schulz Omitted. WHY?

Polack to CHF to create an aerial contest and allow the likes of Bowdo, Browny and Jaaack to work more at ground level.
Yowie may be just a bit to lumbering for the backline in the wet today. I thought he played well at the Burgers but against the Cats in the wet we are going to need pack run and carry.

 

[French Tiger]

Re: schulz Omitted. WHY?

So long as it doesn't undermine his confidence, or make him feel like he's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. He's out of contract at season's end. Hate for him to walk to Port Adelaide....

Couldn't agree more.I like the option that he can either go forward or back & his kicking out of defence with depth & accuracy is a change from what we have been used to with Gaspar & Kellaway etc

 

[Judge Smailes]

Re: schulz Omitted. WHY?

If it's wet, I'd like *smile* - he is much more "blue collar" than Polak, better value at ground level.

 

[Tames]

Re: schulz Omitted. WHY?

If it's wet, I'd like schulz - he is much more "blue collar" than Polak, better value at ground level.

You mean he will give away more frees

 

[Phar Ace]

Re: schulz Omitted. WHY?

If it's wet, I'd like schulz - he is much more "blue collar" than Polak, better value at ground level.

You're kidding arn't you - Schulz is about the worst player in the league below his knees - and the wet today would have seen him play an all time worst game - one decision the match committee got very right, and the inclusion of Cotchin, wasn't he good for a first up!

 

[Streak]

Re: schulz Omitted. WHY?

I have no idea on why *smile* got dropped.

But I assume that Polak got brought in because he could cover in the ruck and the conditions were likely to suit a more mobile ruckman who could contribute around the ground.

 

[Tigermad2005]

Re: schulz Omitted. WHY?

Another of Terry's good moves.

 

[the claw]

Re: schulz Omitted. WHY?

You're kidding arn't you - Schulz is about the worst player in the league below his knees - and the wet today would have seen him play an all time worst game - one decision the match committee got very right, and the inclusion of Cotchin, wasn't he good for a first up!

yep agree the trouble is i dont think polhak is much chop when the ball hits the ground either.

ya know its funny people think between these two we can solve a problem when in fact if you could roll the best of both into one it still wouldnt be good enough.

 

[TigerForce]

Re: schulz Omitted. WHY?

You're kidding arn't you - Schulz is about the worst player in the league below his knees - and the wet today would have seen him play an all time worst game - one decision the match committee got very right, and the inclusion of Cotchin, wasn't he good for a first up!

Schulz - worst player in the league below his knees ?? I don't think so.