Demonland Player of the Year

[H_T 3,043]

...we're all guilty of having at least one 'love child' aren't we, Jaded?

I thought PJ had a consistent game after IMO an outstanding 1st quarter. He didn't flash in and out of the game like many of his teammates, which is why he got into my votes this week. He seemed to rack up possies at will all day, and his finishing skills were a feature. It was a pleasant contrast to the bullocking and grunt work of Jamar, though IMO, Jamar still went missing for too long a period of time to be considered for votes.

Martin was fantastic in the first half, but seemed to fade (as expected from a guy in his 3rd game) as Freo got rolling. In hindsight, i'd probably give Martin the 2 and PJ 1, but as i said earlier, its so hard to give votes when i'm not at the game because you've got really no idea whats going on around the ground. For this reason I find it a lot harder to give votes to defenders when watching it on TV...

Doggo.....you must of loved that chase down on the Shermanator!

[John Dee 445]

On Footy Classified, both coaches had given Bruce 1 vote.

All i can say is...what can i say

The coaches go 5, 4, 3, 2, 1; as Bruce got 1 vote, that means only one coach voted for him.

[Doggo 32]

Doggo.....you must of loved that chase down on the Shermanator!

I can feel my pants tightening up now just thinking about it...

[realist 2]

I could say simply that a player's ability should not be considered when adjudging how well he played in a game, and therefore your remark fairly misses the point.

I'm not having a go at Bruce, merely saying that out of 9 supporters ratings, only one gave him a vote and even that was the sixth best melbourne player.

I find it odd that he would be judged the 5th best on the entire ground after the game he had.

Now if you have something useful to add, i'd like to hear it. And yes, i realise coaches know more about footy than we do, but i still find it an odd/interesting one

Could it be that the voters were 1) Not at the game and based their opinions on the TV. and 2)Were not privy to the instructions given by both the coaches.

P.S Did you not notice the spray given to Dodd at quarter time . Was supposed to be tagging Bruce in the first.

Were you aware he was tagged by Cowley for the rest of the game.

This was obvious even on the TV.

[45HG 1,539]

1) What are you getting at? and 2) what's your opinion on what i brought up?

If you agree with their decision then fair enough, i just found it odd that any Melbourne player would be deemed as being effective in a game we were so inept in for such a period of time.

I didn't feel he was the 5th/6th most influential player on the ground, and i also feel leadership was possibly the thing we lacked the most in this match.

Again, not having a go at Bruce, but just making a note that not many of us (one or two) rated his game vaguely in the top 6 for Melbourne, yet the coaches felt he was good.

[realist 2]

1) What are you getting at? and 2) what's your opinion on what i brought up?

If you agree with their decision then fair enough, i just found it odd that any Melbourne player would be deemed as being effective in a game we were so inept in for such a period of time.

I didn't feel he was the 5th/6th most influential player on the ground, and i also feel leadership was possibly the thing we lacked the most in this match.

Again, not having a go at Bruce, but just making a note that not many of us (one or two) rated his game vaguely in the top 6 for Melbourne, yet the coaches felt he was good.

So whose opininion has more relevence?

The supporters from the outside

or

Both the coaches knowing what was expected from their players

Pretty obvious answer!!!!

[45HG 1,539]

OK, i'm glad i can note that you have no opinion, and to ignore your future posts.

I never said the coaches were wrong, nor that they are irrelevant, but merely was discussing my interpretations of the game in relation to how others saw it.

This is a forum, that is what this is for. Your lack of insight or a coherent argument is not helping your discussion here

[realist 2]

OK, i'm glad i can note that you have no opinion, and to ignore your future posts.

I never said the coaches were wrong, nor that they are irrelevant, but merely was discussing my interpretations of the game in relation to how others saw it.

This is a forum, that is what this is for. Your lack of insight or a coherent argument is not helping your discussion here

Iam glad your insight is more informed than both the coaches!!

[45HG 1,539]

Wow, your ineptitude continues to grow.

Where did i state that i knew more than the coaches and that they were wrong? Can you see where i said i was merely stating my own interpretations on a footy forum?

Or is that too hard?

[realist 2]

On Footy Classified, both coaches had given Bruce 1 vote.

All i can say is...what can i say

Your words Your post!!!

[Bobby McKenzie 2,383]

I could say simply that a player's ability should not be considered when adjudging how well he played in a game, and therefore your remark fairly misses the point.

I'm not having a go at Bruce, merely saying that out of 9 supporters ratings, only one gave him a vote and even that was the sixth best melbourne player.

I find it odd that he would be judged the 5th best on the entire ground after the game he had.

Now if you have something useful to add, i'd like to hear it. And yes, i realise coaches know more about footy than we do, but i still find it an odd/interesting one

OK I'll simply change the word 'ability' to 'performance on the day'.Therefore my remark now doesn't miss the point. Fair enough?

[45HG 1,539]

Your words Your post!!!

What can i say, implying it did not fit what i myself felt. You should probably make some shot at analysis yourself at some stage.

That would have been a better thing to say Bobby, for what it's worth who would you have rated as Melbourne's top six on Sunday? You too realist

[Bobby McKenzie 2,383]

What can i say, implying it did not fit what i myself felt. You should probably make some shot at analysis yourself at some stage.

That would have been a better thing to say Bobby, for what it's worth who would you have rated as Melbourne's top six on Sunday? You too realist

My best were

6 Jamar

5 Chris Johnson

4 Bruce

3 Miller

2 Davey

1 Bate

But as you know Jerry, it is only MY opinion!

[45HG 1,539]

So can i ask, if you didn't even have Bruce as our best player, why would you not blink an eyelid when coaches do?

I suppose you can say for yourself that you're "not a good judge of performance on the day" as you put it

[Bobby McKenzie 2,383]

So can i ask, if you didn't even have Bruce as our best player, why would you not blink an eyelid when coaches do?

I suppose you can say for yourself that you're "not a good judge of performance on the day" as you put it

As I said Jerry, it is only my opinion. if the coaches reckon Cam played better than I thought what's the problem? It's their opinion against mine. QED

[45HG 1,539]

Then why the issue with me when i expressed i didn't think he was our best either? It was just my opinion

And who's Jerry?

[Bobby McKenzie 2,383]

Then why the issue with me when i expressed i didn't think he was our best either? It was just my opinion

And who's Jerry?

Sorry '45hotgod' I meant you not Jerry! You took a tiny sample of 9 people and because only one had Bruce in their best that meant that the coaches view was surprising to you. Rather too small a sample to work on. What about newspapers who had Bruce in their best?

[45HG 1,539]

Yeah don't get me wrong, i'm not saying anyone's opinion is right or wrong.

I just found it interesting (and yes, at first surprising) that really none of us found Bruce to be influential, yet the coaches did. Having never really had much experience coaching, and not being at the game, i'd be interesting to hear why they felt he was up there as it would be a good lesson i think.

The sample wasn't the reason for my surprise at seeing Bruce in their bests, it was merely my link between the best players of the game thread, and that of our coach. I'd be equally as surprised if everyone here had him as their best Melbourne player, as in my opinion he wasn't. (As in i wasn't using those 9 to back anything up, just as a mirror view to this thread to see how we as supporters vote, and if it is indeed useful)

[realist 2]

So can i ask, if you didn't even have Bruce as our best player, why would you not blink an eyelid when coaches do?

I suppose you can say for yourself that you're "not a good judge of performance on the day" as you put it

Because they are aware of ALL the facts.

We are not

[45HG 1,539]

Wow, more useless input

[45HG 1,539]

Did anybody know there was a "melbourne player of the year" voting system on the Dees website?

It reckons it's been going for over a year, but i swear this is the first time i've seen it

[H_T 3,043]

Did anybody know there was a "melbourne player of the year" voting system on the Dees website?

It reckons it's been going for over a year, but i swear this is the first time i've seen it

yes. I've known since i joined.

[the pearl 36]

Did anybody know there was a "melbourne player of the year" voting system on the Dees website?

It reckons it's been going for over a year, but i swear this is the first time i've seen it

What a pity you found it and filled it with meaningless posts!

[45HG 1,539]

Excuse me?

What a pity you made such an incoherent, unnecesary remark, with no dialogue or helpful insight