adcock v drummond

LF · February 04, 2011, 01:50:39 PM

i`m pretty sure this has been asked before but i couldn`t find it.
looking at either drummond or adcock for my backline because they are so cheap.i can`t remember which one is more injury prone.

Blueboys · February 04, 2011, 01:54:38 PM

both are cheap! Get both! ;D

LF · February 04, 2011, 01:57:02 PM

i have considered this blueboys but i`m trying not to overload with players from the same team.

brodman_18 · February 04, 2011, 01:59:29 PM

Brisbane have favourable bies. Both in the non-league comp weeks

Fletch74 · February 04, 2011, 02:25:58 PM

Don't get Drummond in DT. He's only good in SC.

LF · February 04, 2011, 02:27:21 PM

i`ve gone with adcock.

Fletch74 · February 04, 2011, 02:31:25 PM

Right decision LF

Windigo · February 04, 2011, 05:50:41 PM

Adcock.

Really unlucky last season. I think it was bad luck with all his injuries and not a case of him being an, "injury prone," player.

Really should average around 85+ like 2009.

j959 · February 04, 2011, 05:52:32 PM

Quote from: Fletch74 on February 04, 2011, 02:25:58 PM
Don't get Drummond in DT. He's only good in SC.

+1

Drummond for SC
Adcock for DT

is my suggestion ...