On Jamar, each to their own. I know that I want to see us lose at least 4 players, and after the obvious JMac etc etc, Jamar is the first name on that list. Given you're not the only one who's happy with him, I think it's starting to look like he's staying. Or perhaps will be traded should the situation arise. When I see his tapouts contribute to a big winning difference in the centre-breaks then I'll take notice.

Given we have a shortage of talent in the rucks, why would we seek to trade away a supposed fringe line player in a bottom dwelling club? What would we realisticallyget and who would we fall back onto ruck??

Meesen is a question mark and injured, Spencer is 19 and raw and PJ..... in your own words he isnt a ruckman. After his QBW effort (and not an isolated one), I am stuffed what he brings to the side. No doubt you were pleased with performance.

And the same sword you apply to Jamar about tapping to a winning midfield should apply to PJ as well. At least, Jamar gets his hand on the ball unlike....

And did you consider that the problem might not be whos tapping but the midfield it goes to. The stats this year are very very underwheming on the MFC midfield as Sheahan in the HS points out.

And to make it clear, I am not much of a fan of Jamar or PJ but at least the former can do something in the centre.

The decision at year end whether Jamar or PJ will be kept on will be line ball.

Your condemnation of Jamar and your satisfaction with PJ is bizarre.

I had an interesting chat with bailey at the aftergame function monday regarding cale, well actually my missus did. We know Cale, he's a good mate of my sisters, so my gf marched up to bailey and asked him why on earth he was playing him in the backline. She is a collingwood fan and compared it to mick's idea of playing thomas off a hb flank.

Bailey had a laugh and told her quite simply that in the future, as cale develops as a player he will be subjected to tags most weeks. he said he needed to learn how to drop to a hb in an effort to break such tags and was keen to expose him to the role so he wouldn't be a fish out of water. He added it would also help cale to develop defensive pressure, his disposal skills under pressure and accountability.

Speaking with cale later on in the night, he echoed db sentiments.

The things we don't know and [censored] about why is he playing x on the back line, forward line and playing different roles during the year well that's teaching and that is what DB is doing I am glad that the football department is staying on true to it's course and will not buckle to please some jurno's or supporters views when not if we come through the fog (on and off field) we will return to the old feared days of playing the demons.

Given we have a shortage of talent in the rucks, why would we seek to trade away a supposed fringe line player in a bottom dwelling club? What would we realisticallyget and who would we fall back onto ruck??

I'll say it again. Because I don't believe the club, or any club that's bottoming out, is going to try to recruit a star ruckman with important first round picks. There is widely held belief that the position of "ruckman" is not as important as it once was. The only decent ruckmen going around these days are really just very tall midfielders. Nobody talks about big hit-out numbers. Sandilands is only spoken about when he gets a lot of the ball. Cox is regarded as the best because he's a possession winner first.

Personally, I'm not like Grant Thomas who had ZERO respect for ruckmen. But I'm about halfway there. I think a decent ballwinner, and someone who can play tall is the first option.

Meesen is a question mark and injured, Spencer is 19 and raw and PJ..... in your own words he isnt a ruckman. After his QBW effort (and not an isolated one), I am stuffed what he brings to the side. No doubt you were pleased with performance.

Meesen and Spencer are both young. You couldn't possibly write Spencer off yet. He's done enough when you consider his age. And what does "question mark" mean when you talk about Meesen? He played a bit of good footy and got injured. What more is there to say? He did enough with what little time he was given. Simple...

And if you're going to rabbit on about this topic the way you do, have the decency and respect for a fellow poster to quote me properly, and in context. This pisses me off no end Rhino. When I said PJ "was not a ruckman" I was referring directly to how he contests in the ruck, which I believe is good enough to break even. If you're SO upset about his hitouts, consider the fact that he's gotten his fair share this year, particularly when the job was left to him alone. What PJ does with the ball around the ground (though not too impressive in his last couple of games) is absolutely good enough to go with the top ball-winning, athletic ruckmen like Cox. To prove it, I remember the last time we had this discussion, PJ came out the next week and played an identical game to Cox... In Perth. Where were you then? And where were you in the few weeks following? It's easy to snipe at the bloke if you're waiting in the wings for a whole MONTH for the guy to play a bad game or two so you can jump on his back again.

As for his "QBW" effort, those performances have not been the norm with him. Again. His Month leading up to the last fortnight were exemplary, and you were nowhere to be seen. You are a fairweather supporter. And of you want to be taken seriously on this topic I suggest you acknowledge the good football PJ has played so far... Likewise I'll do the same now with Jamar...

He took a couple of marks and got a lot of (ineffective) hitouts. There.

And the same sword you apply to Jamar about tapping to a winning midfield should apply to PJ as well. At least, Jamar gets his hand on the ball unlike....

WHAT?!!!!!!

PJ racks up 20+ possessions whenever given the opportunity and is younger and less experienced! I can't remember a single game where Jamar has done this. On the weekend they had similar stats in the possessions... Where are your eyes? How many games in his LIFE has Jamar had where he was damaging by foot or hand. PJ may not have had a blinder with delivery, but he has in both last season and this season. The only two seasons so far that he's been free of injury enough to appear.

And did you consider that the problem might not be whos tapping but the midfield it goes to. The stats this year are very very underwheming on the MFC midfield as Sheahan in the HS points out.

Of course I have. But it's still the same midfield. I watch, and I see just as many taps going to advantage from both ruckmen. I can think of very few ruckmen who regularly give first use to their players. If that ever even happens. Put Sam Mitchell in our midfield, and he'd make a ruckman out of EITHER player. The only difference would be PJ would be a ruckman who's capable of getting 20+ touches

And to make it clear, I am not much of a fan of Jamar or PJ but at least the former can do something in the centre.

Oh? Well bugger me if he has, I'm yet to see it.

The decision at year end whether Jamar or PJ will be kept on will be line ball.

Oh really? And who said this? Bailey? Stynes? Predergast? PJ has played 11 out of 11 games this year. He will be on the list next year (unless we trade for a good price, just like any other player) and will likely have played 11 games by this time. Your postulations that his retention are "line-ball" are a complete mystery to me. Did he kill someone near and dear to you? As for Jamar, he's likely to be kept too... I'd rather he wasn't, but that's not my call.

Your condemnation of Jamar and your satisfaction with PJ is bizarre.

Your inability to read the simplest of dot points is... well... getting tiresome.

- Jamar has not, and likely will not EVER learn to win possessions and make a difference to a game of football. The last two weeks, where he won a lot of hitouts, still made no difference to the club's fortunes.

- He is an average player who is now in his prime, and by default, may settle in the side playing the same game he always has. Winning 30-odd ineffective taps that an improving midfield turn to gold, and get 6-14 possessions that do nothing...

- PJ has, in the last 6 weeks, shown he CAN be a presence in a game of football. He also played some fantastic games last year that you seem hell-bent on ignoring.

- He wins his fair share of taps, not as many as Jamar, but like Mark would be made to look good by a developing midfield. Given the opportunity he's shown in his few chances that with the right matchup he can run with big players in forward lines, and he can take a mark... and KICK STRAIGHT!!! in the forward line. Jamar's kick, when he actually gets it to his boot, is among the ugliest in the side.

Never has so much been written and so little said. Jamar is better in the middle, PJ looks good around the ground and picks up possessions. It's a simple debate. What do you want your ruckman to do? Pick up cheap touches or win/neutralise the ruck contest. Clearly Jamar has shown an ability to win more ruck contests. Those, like me, who feel that that is a pretty important quality for our first choice ruckman to have, will choose Jamar over PJ regardless of how athletic the latter is. If PJ was able to have more impact in the ruck contests he may have a medium term career as a 2nd ruck option. This year has shown that his development has stalled somewhat when it comes to his core business - winning the ruck contests! Two decades of Stynes and White have confused Melbourne supporters. We've forgotten what a good ruckman does first and foremost. If we had a ruckman that did both, we'd have Dean Cox and as we know, there's not many of those around. Have a look at the premiership teams over the past 8 - 10 years. The formula is simple; two big logs that compete hard at the ruck contest and give their midfield a better than even chance of winning the flag.

You really need to read the first line of that quote of mine.

I did. Then I commented on it.

So while McLean's ratio, in turning thrusts forward into scores, is not as good as Davey or Bate (add to that his 14 goals and it shows him in a much better light than popular opinion) it is still better than Jones and Moloney.

Needless to say, all three have to deliver the ball better.

So we agree on McLean. I see we also agree on Bate. I think he's really improved on his first month or so when I thought he was pretty poor.

I did. Then I commented on it.

So we agree on McLean. I see we also agree on Bate. I think he's really improved on his first month or so when I thought he was pretty poor.

I agree to an extent: McLean needs to deliver the ball better, and he is part of why we are losing games.

The midfield is constantly being beaten; out-run (losing the Inside 50 count) and out-competed (losing contested possesions).

Moloney, Jones, and McLean butcher the ball. I love the way these three go about their footy but they can get all the clearances in the world, but if they con't get it into another MFC player's hands, it is worthless.

Mike Sheahan had a bit of a blunt hatchet in today's Hun but the premise is right - our midfield is our problem, not according to popular opinion on this board, the forward line.

I think Grimes should be put in the guts, and all of the following should be told their position is under threat if they continue to not value their disposal (as surely Valenti, McKenzie, Petterd, and Dunn would like a run in the guts): Junior, Jones, McLean, and Moloney.