Birchall v Suckling

Discussion in 'AFL' started by broge, Jul 18, 2011.

  1. broge

    broge New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi guys,

    Need some help splitting these two for my shaw replacement. Slightly leaning towards birchall for some reason.

    Thoughts??
     
  2. DC

    DC Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    635
    Likes Received:
    0
    Tough Call.

    Which one is less likely to get rested?
     
  3. Kel

    Kel Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    556
    Likes Received:
    186
    Suckling cheaper $424,800 v $436,500 and averages more 97 v 95 and has a lower BE 102 v 152. Not sure if that helps decision making? Wouldn't have thought either would be up for a rest with the Hawks injury list at the moment.
     
  4. NumberWonGuns

    NumberWonGuns New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    0
    Neither of the two will be getting rested. As Kel mentioned the injury crisis doesnt give Clarko the luxury of resting key players(especially down back) so both will play out the remainder of the season with the clubs last bye just gone. If it was me i'd be going with Suckling. Birchall at times will be required to do a lock down role on key forwards whereas Suckling gives the Hawks much needed rebound out of there defensive 50
     
  5. bjaensch

    bjaensch New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    308
    Likes Received:
    0
    I already have Suckling and am looking at Birchall as an additional back and/or replacement should an injury occur. Both would be good additions, probably Suckling over Birchall very slightly IMHO

    my 2 cents, YMMV etc, etc
     

Share This Page