TOPIC:

words don't describe how big this game is......22 v 22.....ok SD boys.... 25 v 22 in EF favour, but hey umps are umps!! Interesting to see who comes in for Duffy and Bayliss......see no Ibottsen for Freo......though probably still achillles heeled no doubt.......SD are a dangerous team when on fire.....got lots of potential goal kickers, thus EF defence need to be tight as they have been all year(bar the SF game!!)

Interesting to see EF for points are the most in the league......reckon EF look better with more talls than smalls up front though.....Perham, Young and Howson provide some marking contests which hopefully the likes of Dick, Cronan, Henson etc can gain from......two very strong mids go face to face.....two good defences go against two forward lines which potentially can kick a winning score......all adds up to a cliffhanger.....better for EF if they did lose they lose cheaply......though a win would be worth 2 wins considering the % gain v WP 'B" team last week.

reserves may be up against it.....Symonds and K Trpoiano out....Tyler to ruck....Mack to come from the ammos......christ if Macdougall goes down EF may be looking to getting Paul Harding out of his retirement home to ruck!!

colts need to win.....but really win big and hope Peel keep Subi's colts honest.....oh well 3 important games for all grades and two important games for SD too......

One of the Swans players that worries me is Geapen(?) - the bugger always seems to kick the crap out of us.

58shark wrote: One of the Swans players that worries me is Geapen(?) - the bugger always seems to kick the crap out of us.

Just remember the 'he' bats for the other side & u will b fine...

SFFC4ever wrote:

58shark wrote: One of the Swans players that worries me is Geapen(?) - the bugger always seems to kick the crap out of us.

Just remember the 'he' bats for the other side & u will b fine...

WTF are you on about??????? and how is it relevant to this conversation?

mikeh wrote:

SFFC4ever wrote:

58shark wrote: One of the Swans players that worries me is Geapen(?) - the bugger always seems to kick the crap out of us.

Just remember the 'he' bats for the other side & u will b fine...

WTF are you on about??????? and how is it relevant to this conversation?

Forget him mate, the bloke is a tool

Swandog wrote:

mikeh wrote:

SFFC4ever wrote:

58shark wrote: One of the Swans players that worries me is Geapen(?) - the bugger always seems to kick the crap out of us.

Just remember the 'he' bats for the other side & u will b fine...

WTF are you on about??????? and how is it relevant to this conversation?

Forget him mate, the bloke is a tool

bit rough on Geappen there Swandog.......unlike you to be homophobic big fella!!

See I thought it was sffc4ever not swandog ... Anyway I am sure it was tongue in cheek stuff.

Hard to pick a winner here peoples. But Swans by a nose.

Although I walked away from this game today disappointed with the loss & our poor skills, I was satisfied that Swans were undisputedly the better team today & thoroughly deserved to win & take their spot back in the 4. The boys have done well to win their previous 5 games to give themselves a chance of winning a place in the finals but unfortunately they were not good enough today.

I thought it was in the skills - all day pup. I reckon 3 out of every 5 passes ended up as turn overs. They also insisted on the long bomb. How many times did they bomb it in to Bradley who had 2 taller players on him? Swans were very good on the transition and had too many out there for us. Still, there's next week and I'll do something I haven't done since I got married - go to church and pray for a miracle