It does beg the question though doesnt it...you tend to think of players geting better...not worse ?

There is no try..there is only do !!

Dappa..please refrain from ever speaking of those colours here

Sure. I do agree with that to a point. What I am trying to impress on the great immovable object is that if we DO need to offload players, why are we ditching the only ones who have actually showed something in recent memory? You see, we could all get on the back of whatever players are down on form in the last 3 rounds of the year, or we could show a little faith... That's what I'm doing. Particularly in PJs case... and, strangely enough, that's what the footy department is doing, despite his recent run of bad form. Funny that my view matches that of the clubs, and yet RR is right and everyone else is either completely wrong, or only a little bit wrong.

Oh. And my apologies. I should know better. RR... *clears throat* It's not all red and blue.... (that better?)

I did not assert that at any time and you only look silly for trying to counter a view that was not made at all particularly by me.

*Sigh* Go back again RR. And at the same time have a look at our list. With the big four oldies gone (besides Robbo) there are precious few players on the list that are 25+... and only a handful between 21 and 25. You may not have SAID only keep the younguns, but with the delistings you mention, that's what we'd be left with... Try to keep up.

Fair dinkum, you can say I look silly all you like, when you start acknowledging my statements instead of trying, like a pre-schooler to (what was it you said) "chide" me... we might get somewhere.

I didnt think PJ's 2008 was that good. He still cant ruck. Bell has yet to show that he can consistently compete at an AFL level. And I have never said Bate has fatal flaws. You are making it up again.

And that's fine mate, really, that you think that. Did I ever say he could ruck? No. But as usual you've managed to evade the point yet again. In my view, he still makes a good account of himself. I happen to be in the Freak mould here where I say rucking is over-rated. I'd rather have a -25 yo ruckman kick a couple and offer a target as well as 15-20 possessions, than have a 25+ yr old ruckman get 20-25 meaningless hitouts, and get an average of 6 possessions... Why? Because PJ has kicked a few in his time, and I'm CERTAIN that any coach would be thrilled to see M.Jamar on his team-sheet on game day.

On Bell... I'll say it for the third time. He played nearly 22 good rounds in '07... And if wasn't for a certain Collingwood jerk, he would have gotten through the lot and been sensational in a bad year. Now RR I want you to listen here. You don't need to argue this point with me. They are the facts, and no amount of you expressing your so-called opinion is going to change anything. Not here and not anywhere, no matter what people tell you. If you want to look and see someone who looks "silly" go over your posts and look to see how many minds you have changed with your ever-shifting "philosophies." Bell may not be a great player, but one of the other players currently wearing red and blue are either. We could do a lot worse than Bell in 2010.

Now. On Bate: This is from you...

"Check post #36. There were issues about Bate and Dunn which emerged in their first and 2nd years. Dunn and to a lesser extent Bate have not addressed those issues."

So I used the word "fatal flaws" instead of "issues." My apologies. The point still applies. Bate and to a lesser extent Dunn have showed good form. I don't think either of us think they will go... But I will say that if Dunn went, I wouldn't be upset for TOO long.

Dappa, are we seeking to have a list that is AFL standard or better? Then I dont know why you are defending Bell. it makes no sense.

Oh Jesus. Please, PLEASE read the posts. I'll say it ONCE MORE for you. Bell is CERTAINLY AFL standard. I simply don't agree with you. No-one gives a flying [censored] that you think he isn't, any more than they care that I think he is! You're really not telling anyone anything they don't know. Bell is HATED by fans, but somehow the footy department want to keep him. COULD IT BE that they see the need to maintain SOME sort of maturity? Could it be that they think they need to cling to players of that age so that we don't have ANOTHER drop in a couple of years, as we don't have players of a certain age group? Could it be that they rate his attitude, kicking, fitness and size as very important? Maybe they rate him because HE ACTUALLY PLAYED SOME GOOD FOOTY!!!! If you're going to flat out ignore this again, then I just give up on you.

BTW, they have been on the list each for seven years. They are not kids. Its not a matter of "potential". They are both struggling to consistently perform at AFL level. Bell has had 3 games at Casey and struggles at VFL level. I have held this all along that PJ is not a ruckman's bootlace.

[censored]. PJ is a sub-25 200cm (thereabouts) ruckman. EVERY decent ruckman needed time, and some of the best didn't play great footy til they were post 25. Again, ignore all you want, we'll see who looks "silly." And again, I'll reiterate, PJ is CERTAINLY not a good ruckman. I'd still hold onto him, because of everything else he does. Usually. As for Bell, These 3 VFL games that you say he "struggled" in? He wad a broken finger up until 3 weeks ago... Then he was knocked out a couple of weeks ago. According to the coach, he's not yet match-fit. And yet according to him he did what was expected. If you're making from that that he's not up to it, then fair dinkum, you go out and play a game and we'll have a bit more of a listen then. Wrecker is a GREAT player, and he's taken a LOT of time to get back from injury.

No it isnt. Its foolish to continue with them. Play them if necessary while we have injuries but know their fate at year end. PJ needs to make it as a ruckman. He hasn't. As this opposition coach at another AFL club advised me about PJ. He is the sort of player who will "tickle your nuts" that he will make it but ultimately wont deliver. The tickling is over. Hard decisions will be made.

Yes it is. It is not foolish to continue with them. You can bang your drum all you like, RR. You're just saying "It's isn't, because it isn't..." And I'm the one who looks stupid? And anyway, PJ has oodles of time. Has played games where he's gotten taps. And like I said, has done a LOT more around the ground than your golden boy has in ALL his years in the side. One thing about ALL this is that you're willing to stick it into Bell and PJ who are younger and have played better footy than Jamar... and are injured, where Jamar has showed NOTHING in his time at MFC and is ALSO injured!!! Oh... and now we know why you think so little of PJ. Some other opposition coach says some passing comment, and that's gospel right? Well I'll tell you what. I'll just stick to what I see with my own two eyes... I never took you for one who would use a little but of (nearly) namedropping.

Once again where did I say about now? You are looking silly again. I dont think the length of the rebuild is the issue. Its what you cut at year end. We have to keep improving our list. Blokes like Bell, PJ and possibly Dunn just dont cut the mustard and should go. Your suggestion of the 8 teenagers is your idea and I think you are smarter than to suggest that.

Wow. How do you write that much and NEVER actually read? I meant now, because you're asserting that they're gone NOW. That you have written them off NOW. You're just predicting what will happen at years end. How is that any different? And the 8 teenagers? Where did I EVER suggest that? It was a rhetorical question... Or did that escape your infallable vision too?

I didn't and you look s....

Yup. That stings RR. That's really proving your point really well there. I'm no occo. Everyone else seems to be able top grasp what I write, and what's more, they allow everyone their own point of view. So how about this eh? When you start READING my posts, I'll start replying to yours again. And for the record, I tried at first to say that I wouldn't dwell on every sentence you wrote, and yet here we are, a thesis later. Again. And have gotten nowhere. I really hope you do go over your posts and try to see them from other peoples' eyes. You have opinions for the sake of having opinions. And you come on here not to add, but to disagree with everything, and everyone you see. Why?

Sure. I do agree with that to a point. What I am trying to impress on the great immovable object is that if we DO need to offload players, why are we ditching the only ones who have actually showed something in recent memory? You see, we could all get on the back of whatever players are down on form in the last 3 rounds of the year, or we could show a little faith... That's what I'm doing. Particularly in PJs case... and, strangely enough, that's what the footy department is doing, despite his recent run of bad form. Funny that my view matches that of the clubs, and yet RR is right and everyone else is either completely wrong, or only a little bit wrong.

DD as it happens I tend to agree that PJ is the preferred keeper..and for other reasons the most likely.

I look at our list . The likes of Cheney, Grimes, McNamara. Interesting types like Bail. Bennel and Jetta. Maric. Watts to come.. Jurrah eventually.. Strauss and Blease. Spencer and McKenzie. Throw in our stalwarts and there just isnt much room for any NQR let alone some.

I keep asking myself which of them ( nqr's ) are redeemable and which aren't. I think with the looming merry go round that will happen as a result of strangled drafts who could be off-loaded ( traded ) for something/anything before use by date ( or before real limits of ability known)

Whilst some faith effort and time must be put into all playerssome have already shown possibly and/or probably the extent of their repetoire.

Some have mentioned the change in fortunes may be as a result of the new type of game plan instituted by Bailey. Well if thats the case and some of these players arent working out then I can only surmise that teh newer recruits have ben selected as being a probable better fit. So again if some of these nqr's ,21-25's etc arent singing in tune with the maestro you are really left with no alternative other than to exchange them ?

Oh. And my apologies. I should know better. RR... *clears throat* It's not all red and blue.... (that better?)

Accepted. I know you mean no harm.

*Sigh* Go back again RR. And at the same time have a look at our list. With the big four oldies gone (besides Robbo) there are precious few players on the list that are 25+... and only a handful between 21 and 25. You may not have SAID only keep the younguns, but with the delistings you mention, that's what we'd be left with... Try to keep up.

Fair dinkum, you can say I look silly all you like, when you start acknowledging my statements instead of trying, like a pre-schooler to (what was it you said) "chide" me... we might get somewhere.

By stating that I only want to play 18 to 21 year olds which is not the case you do look silly. I note you have pushed it back to 25yos. Very sensible to do that. Far smarter.

The players I have earmarked at year end are players who cannot get on the park fit and have a history of injury. Good players they once were but they provided nothing now. Wheatley and Whelan are in their last years. Maybe you cant work that out but there body is telling that. Junior has been a great player but the quicker game has passed him by. i did not think he would have another year this year. Its the end now.

No good have these players around if they are on the medico's bench or dont justify their position,

And that's fine mate, really, that you think that. Did I ever say he could ruck? No. But as usual you've managed to evade the point yet again. In my view, he still makes a good account of himself. I happen to be in the Freak mould here where I say rucking is over-rated. I'd rather have a -25 yo ruckman kick a couple and offer a target as well as 15-20 possessions, than have a 25+ yr old ruckman get 20-25 meaningless hitouts, and get an average of 6 possessions... Why? Because PJ has kicked a few in his time, and I'm CERTAIN that any coach would be thrilled to see M.Jamar on his team-sheet on game day.

You were lauding him last year as the best 2nd ruck in the AFL. He clearly wasn't and now you are backing away from that. Sensible.

For the record, a dominant ruckman is overrated but having a competitive ruckman at the centre contests and the fall of the ball is critical. He fails hands down . And the record, PJ does not kick a couple and offer a target. McIntosh and Fraser both kick plenty on him because he has poor defensive skills. He is a 200 cm rover that does not impact enough games either in the ruck or up forward. I dont know why you want to be critical of Jamar. PJ and Jamar are both ordinary. Its funny that PJ has played 2nd fiddle to three MFC ruckman at different times who are all bog ordinary. He's got you fooled.

On Bell......

You are on the record as saying this about Bell. "If we had a list that resembled AFL standard, he would be the guy you'd want to see gone."

I dont know why you bother with all the other stuff. That says it all.

Now. On Bate: This is from you...

"Check post #36. There were issues about Bate and Dunn which emerged in their first and 2nd years. Dunn and to a lesser extent Bate have not addressed those issues."

So I used the word "fatal flaws" instead of "issues." My apologies. The point still applies. Bate and to a lesser extent Dunn have showed good form. I don't think either of us think they will go... But I will say that if Dunn went, I wouldn't be upset for TOO long.

Thanks for proving my point. Bate has been terrible this year and there may be circumstances so I will cut him some slack but he is a limited footballer that I wonder what upside there is with him going forward. Glad you agree on Dunn.

Oh Jesus. Please, PLEASE read the posts. I'll say it ONCE MORE for you. Bell is CERTAINLY AFL standard. I simply don't agree with you. No-one gives a flying [censored] that you think he isn't, any more than they care that I think he is! You're really not telling anyone anything they don't know. Bell is HATED by fans, but somehow the footy department want to keep him. COULD IT BE that they see the need to maintain SOME sort of maturity? Could it be that they think they need to cling to players of that age so that we don't have ANOTHER drop in a couple of years, as we don't have players of a certain age group? Could it be that they rate his attitude, kicking, fitness and size as very important? Maybe they rate him because HE ACTUALLY PLAYED SOME GOOD FOOTY!!!! If you're going to flat out ignore this again, then I just give up on you.

You are on the record as saying this about Bell. "If we had a list that resembled AFL standard, he would be the guy you'd want to see gone." Flip Flop Flip Flop.

[censored]. PJ is a sub-25 200cm (thereabouts) ruckman. EVERY decent ruckman needed time, and some of the best didn't play great footy til they were post 25. Again, ignore all you want, we'll see who looks "silly." And again, I'll reiterate, PJ is CERTAINLY not a good ruckman. I'd still hold onto him, because of everything else he does. Usually. As for Bell, These 3 VFL games that you say he "struggled" in? He wad a broken finger up until 3 weeks ago... Then he was knocked out a couple of weeks ago. According to the coach, he's not yet match-fit. And yet according to him he did what was expected. If you're making from that that he's not up to it, then fair dinkum, you go out and play a game and we'll have a bit more of a listen then. Wrecker is a GREAT player, and he's taken a LOT of time to get back from injury.

Oh whats that PJ a ruckman now? You said this about Bell...."If we had a list that resembled AFL standard, he would be the guy you'd want to see gone." And I agree. The rest is backpedalling and contradictory.

Wrecker was a very good player but his body gave out some years ago. Its a sad finish to fine career.

Yes it is. It is not foolish to continue with them. You can bang your drum all you like, RR. You're just saying "It's isn't, because it isn't..." And I'm the one who looks stupid? And anyway, PJ has oodles of time. Has played games where he's gotten taps. And like I said, has done a LOT more around the ground than your golden boy has in ALL his years in the side. One thing about ALL this is that you're willing to stick it into Bell and PJ who are younger and have played better footy than Jamar... and are injured, where Jamar has showed NOTHING in his time at MFC and is ALSO injured!!! Oh... and now we know why you think so little of PJ. Some other opposition coach says some passing comment, and that's gospel right? Well I'll tell you what. I'll just stick to what I see with my own two eyes... I never took you for one who would use a little but of (nearly) namedropping.

Who is my golden boy?? As I have said if we could Jamar and PJ would both go. Neither one makes the other better. i dont know why you go on about it. Another little bit of silliness??

Btw, I didn't namesdrop. I wouldn't. I told you because I thought you might want to know since you have tried a silly lampoon of my opinions, I provided this comment as another point of view from an opposition coach who has watched and assessed PJ. I thought it would give you another perspective which you clearly dont want to know about. Oh well.

Wow. How do you write that much and NEVER actually read? I meant now, because you're asserting that they're gone NOW. That you have written them off NOW. You're just predicting what will happen at years end. How is that any different? And the 8 teenagers? Where did I EVER suggest that? It was a rhetorical question... Or did that escape your infallable vision too?

As I have repeatedly said....at year end. You look silly again for doing that. The 8 teenagers was a dull effort to diminish my point of view. Did not work

Yup. That stings RR. That's really proving your point really well there. I'm no occo. Everyone else seems to be able top grasp what I write, and what's more, they allow everyone their own point of view. So how about this eh? When you start READING my posts, I'll start replying to yours again. And for the record, I tried at first to say that I wouldn't dwell on every sentence you wrote, and yet here we are, a thesis later. Again. And have gotten nowhere. I really hope you do go over your posts and try to see them from other peoples' eyes. You have opinions for the sake of having opinions. And you come on here not to add, but to disagree with everything, and everyone you see. Why?

Oh dear.

If you cant take the challenging of views and it bothers you so much DD...well the choice is yours. Have a pleasant evening.

welcome back Y_M! you can never keep a good serial pain in the ass down.

See the Frawley thread.

I think that if given the opportunity to string a few games together this year, he will give everyone a bit of a shock.

Hopefully he can get himself back.

and play where ? and replace who? our backline is becoming settled , spend rest of year at casey before being delisted at years end

Fair enough.

He was a player that continually butchered the ball which undermined his ability to break the lines. We kept him too long.

Just your opinion!

Just your opinion!

Fact ... if you're asking for my opinion.

Ward would continually break lines and run into space, only to undo his good work by a misplaced kick, or worse, one straight to the opposition. Turnover king.

Just your opinion!

And mine.

Interesting thread, with some interesting viewpoints.

I'll add mine, for what it's worth:

- Daniel Bell is living on borrowed time. No awareness and can't turn. Love his endeavour and his discipline and they're qualities that may give him some value when the Gold Coast comes calling. However, we've got better options in Bennell, Strauss and Frawley in his position now.

- Lynden Dunn is in a similar situation to Bell, except that I think he's more of a genuine footballer. That is, he reads the play a whole lot better and his skills are more natural. He's got issues with putting his head where it might get squashed, but he plays a natural forward's game, he's got a huge tank and he's got height. Again, these are qualities that might see the GC come calling. He's the sort of player that we could afford to lose for compensation without greatly affecting the quality of our side.

- PJ's lost me this year. An inability to compete in the ruck, around the ground as a follower OR up forward makes me despair. I wouldn't be at all surprised if he got the boot at the end of the season. I thought he'd shown some encouraging signs last year but he's taken several steps backwards, if that was possible.

- Brock McLean is clearly crocked with what looks to be a groin complaint. He's struggling to kick over 30m at the moment and it's a bit sad to watch. I suspect he's managing himself through it because he's sick and tired of NOT playing football. I still contend that Brock is the best kick to a leading forward in our side and he's a clearance machine. Great qualities, both.

However, Brock needs more pace around him to work at his best. Davey in the mids is a start, Bennell will be important and Grimes should take some heat off him, even though Jack's not quick. Brock was a potential star in a game that relied more on stop-start footy than the merry-go-round zone stuff that we see today. If he ends up with a career like Jude Bolton's, I think all parties should be grateful. I, for one, think that's where he's headed. A very good, ordinary player who can have big days.

- Buggered if I know where Matthew Bate's going. He's valuable as a third forward, playing deep, because he can take a grab and he's very quick with his hands when he gets hold of the footy. It's the getting hold of it part that he's struggling with. He's got pace when he gets moving, but it can take a while. High half-forward could be an option, working in tandem with Miller and delivering to the likes of Robbo and Watts. Searing left boot when he wants to deliver to a forward's chest. Not a midfielder, but I reckon Bailey and co see enough in him to persist.

- Buggered if I know where Matthew Bate's going. He's valuable as a third forward, playing deep, because he can take a grab and he's very quick with his hands when he gets hold of the footy. It's the getting hold of it part that he's struggling with. He's got pace when he gets moving, but it can take a while. High half-forward could be an option, working in tandem with Miller and delivering to the likes of Robbo and Watts. Searing left boot when he wants to deliver to a forward's chest. Not a midfielder, but I reckon Bailey and co see enough in him to persist.

This is where I disagree. He's not a great contested grab and playing deep doesn't suit him. He' much better as a third tall playing high and using his hard running.

This is where I disagree. He's not a great contested grab and playing deep doesn't suit him. He' much better as a third tall playing high and using his hard running.

I agree, to a point. I suppose I think he's got some value playing deep forward as a third tall because he'll make the opposition worry. He requires a good third defender to mark him.

You're right about his struggles with a contested grab, but I can see him playing that Robbo-style role when we have two tall targets (Watts/Butcher) for the opposition defences to worry about. He becomes a problematic player in that scenario when played deep.

If he is forced to play as a second tall, he's certainly better off playing high half-forward, as you suggest and I opined.

Regardless, I'm still buggered if I know whether he'll make a fist of any of those roles.

deegirl on 'Ology says of McKenzie and Valenti:

These two will be elevated from the rookie list.

Posted here as this sort of decision would indicate a direction to which the topic can be further framed. Or not.

deegirl on 'Ology says of McKenzie and Valenti:

Posted here as this sort of decision would indicate a direction to which the topic can be further framed. Or not.

That would suggest that both will play this week.

We may have a bit of dead wood but because we have such a young list I can't see us culling hardly anyone. I can only see us having 3 picks and promoting Spencer due to the ordinary ruckman we have.

I can't see us trading because I can't see us trading a player under pick 35. StKilda got Ray at 40 have Dunn, Bate and Sylvia done anything to say they are worth more than a top 40 pick? and that's if we don't get the priority if we do we won't go over pick 20. Bate is under contract and as long as Sylvia doesn't go backwards he should stay Dunn may have a problem but I think they should give him another year to prove himself.

Unless McDonald, Bruce and\or Robertson are seriously injured they will go around again.

I'm pretty sure Newton, Meeson and Johnson are contracted.

Wheatley and Whelan are about 1 injury away from giving it away.

Bell has to be on shakey ground he has been there longer than any of our 1st rnd draft picks and still doesn't look like getting a game but I'm pretty sure Bailey loves him.

If Meeson or Johnson showed that they could actually win a hit out then Jamar would be gone but they don't so he is a big chance to stay his comeback from injury will tell us a lot.

I wish I could fit Valenti into the list but I just can't see where he fits in.

The only player I think is certain to get the sack is rookie Zomer.

If I was a betting man I would say that Whelan, Wheatley, Bell and Jamar may not be around next year. Valenti very unlucky, Healey, McKenzie and Hughes to stay as rookies.

We may have a bit of dead wood but because we have such a young list I can't see us culling hardly anyone. I can only see us having 3 picks and promoting Spencer due to the ordinary ruckman we have.

So you see many delistings coming up then?