If we don't have a midfielder better than Tambling I will never go to another MFC game.

Whilst I agree to an extent, last season Tambling did prove to be a better footballer than the reputation that precedes him.

He did even cause some journalists to consider if he was a more astute pick than Buddy Franklin.

Whilst that was incredibly off the mark, the fact he prompted such a response (albeit from the most desperately ignorant of sources) shows he has something.

Edited October 15, 200915 yr by Keyser Söze

Firstly, what's to stop Richmond picking up Ball at pick 19 in the ND?? I realise they now have a youth policy but if they're desperate for Ball (and he nominates for the ND) they should select him at pick 19.

Secondly, Luke Ball will stay at St Kilda. The MFC have been [censored] out of luck since 1965 so I expect the trend to continue.

Firstly,

Ball must be prepared to go into the uncertainties of ND. While Richmond have 19, MFC have picks 11 and 18 and other C;ubs earlier picks that could be used to choose Ball. It might not be the club of Ball's choice.

Also it means that Richmond will not have pick 19 to use for another young player. They would prefer PSD 2 but I cant see how they can exercise if MFC are firm on PSD 1.

Secondly,

Possibly he will stay at StK but not for the wrist slashing reason you give. There is a significant amount of humble pie on both sides to address and both parties need to decide whether they can repair the damage. But there appears to be some bad blood from both sides.

Pay it no mind friends.

He will be at St Kilda or Melbourne. I don't give weight to any scenario that sees Richmond picking him up in the PSD.

The ND is a miniscule chance and frought with uncertainty. I highly doubt he will go that path.

It could easily take 5 years for these kids to RELALY find their feet, at which time Ball would be 30.

What ? Midfielders don't take that long to have a significant impact. And that's what we're talking about here. Not their best, but making a real difference to our fortunes.

Judd, Hird, Voss and Cooney all won Brownlows within their first 5 years. Deledio has won 2 Best & Fairests by the age of 22. Murphy and Gibbs just finished in the top 3 in their B&F and both are yet to reach their fifth years. Bernie Vince won the Crows B&F this year in his 4th. A mature Rich finished 6th.

I think you greatly underestimate the impact that Scully, Grimes and Trengove can have within 2 years. They may be at their best in 5+, which I know you'll say is your point, but you're misreading the impact that they can, and I believe will have, early in their careers. Coupled with the improvement expected from Frawley, Jurrah, Sylvia, Morton, Maric and a host of others and there's much to be optimistic about relatively soon.

Some will accuse me of putting too much pressure on the likes of Scully too soon, but that's not the case. It's just understanding what sort of impact the best mids coming into the system can and do have within a relatively short period of time. Especially the ones that you realistically consider have a high probability of being stars.

Edited October 15, 200915 yr by Hannibal

Who have we got that can compete with Cousins, Cotchin, Foley and Deledio at the present time?

MFC have performed like a 3rd world midfield for the past 3 years.

The promise is indeed brght with Grimes, Morton, Sylvia, Blease, Strauss, Jones, Scully and Trengove (in expectation). And I expect the MFC to surpass the Tigers within 2 to 3 years time

But at this point in time, MFC are crud in the midfield.

The below is who i think Melbourne have that closely resemble to equal talent to the above mentioned:-

Cousins & Green

Cotchin & Morton

Foley & Jones or Moloney

Deledio & Silvia

Tambling & Davey

And to add to the youngsters you mentioned - Petterd, Maric, Bennell, Jetta, McKenzie & Dunn

So to answer your question, yes, i do think that Melbourne have a better midfield than Richmond.

The fact that we nearly beat them with a second tier side (when trying to lose) says something about Richmond. I'm not saying that atm the Dees have a great midfield (anything but) but it is better than Richmond's.

Also you have to remember that they have got rid of Tuck this year.

The amazing thing about this article is that it has the nerve to suggest that Richmond (midfield or not) may be a more appealing home for Ball..

...only a halfwit could suggest that Richmond will not finish on the bottom of the ladder by a long way next year.

The amazing thing about this article is that it has the nerve to suggest that Richmond (midfield or not) may be a more appealing home for Ball..

...only a halfwit could suggest that Richmond will not finish on the bottom of the ladder by a long way next year.

He just stated that Melbourne's midfield is raw - which is true. WE have loads of young talent (Morton, Grimes, Scully, Trengrove, Strauss, Blease etc) but they are not proven at AFL level yet. Where COusins, Deledio, Tambling, Foley are proven to be quality players. Don't need to look into it too deeply they are probably having a crack but want Melbourne and Ball to make up their minds so they can start chasing who they want to get in the PSD.

Firstly, what's to stop Richmond picking up Ball at pick 19 in the ND?? I realise they now have a youth policy but if they're desperate for Ball (and he nominates for the ND) they should select him at pick 19.

Secondly, Luke Ball will stay at St Kilda. The MFC have been [censored] out of luck since 1965 so I expect the trend to continue.

Same reason as MElbourne picking him up with pick 18 - the clubs are not headed in that direction and want youth.

The below is who i think Melbourne have that closely resemble to equal talent to the above mentioned:-

Cousins & Green

Cotchin & Morton

Foley & Jones or Moloney

Deledio & Silvia

Tambling & Davey

And to add to the youngsters you mentioned - Petterd, Maric, Bennell, Jetta, McKenzie & Dunn

So to answer your question, yes, i do think that Melbourne have a better midfield than Richmond.

The fact that we nearly beat them with a second tier side (when trying to lose) says something about Richmond. I'm not saying that atm the Dees have a great midfield (anything but) but it is better than Richmond's.

Also you have to remember that they have got rid of Tuck this year.

Really?

I mean, did you really feel the need to do that lame comparison thing??

The below is who i think Melbourne have that closely resemble to equal talent to the above mentioned:-

Cousins & Green

Cotchin & Morton

Foley & Jones or Moloney

Deledio & Silvia

Tambling & Davey

And to add to the youngsters you mentioned - Petterd, Maric, Bennell, Jetta, McKenzie & Dunn

So to answer your question, yes, i do think that Melbourne have a better midfield than Richmond.

The fact that we nearly beat them with a second tier side (when trying to lose) says something about Richmond. I'm not saying that atm the Dees have a great midfield (anything but) but it is better than Richmond's.

Also you have to remember that they have got rid of Tuck this year.

At the moment we dont.

Cousins is a game breaker and game winner with the capacity to amass up to 40 possessions and use them well, Green is honest with clean skills and is not in that class.

Cousins puts them in front atm. At this exact time we have no one of that class.

But the promise we have plus Scully, Trengove and co. should see our midfield overtake Richmond within the next 2 years.

Tuck had been playing with Coburg this year and was delisted. Not an issue.

Petterd, Maric, Bennell, Jetta, McKenzie & Dunn have few credentials in the midfield to boast about.

That a was a truly dunce-worthy performance by Jon Ralph. The only 'decision' Richmond have to make regarding Luke Ball is whether to take him in the ND if he chooses to try his luck in there. Ralph's assertion that he could 'choose' Richmond over Melbourne in the PSD despite Melbourne being able to match his financial requirements was absurd. As its been all along, Ball can re-sign with the Saints, try his luck in the ND or come to Melbourne in the PSD. I can only hope that the Richmond brainstrust are wasting precious brain cells on how to get Ball in the PSD rather than focusing on something constructive.

As for the argument over the respective midfields, which one would you rather take? Cousins is their best and can't have long to go, I like Foley and Cotchin, Tambling despite his improvements this season is ordinary, and I hate to think of the treatment Delidio would get on here if he was a Melbourne player. I don't see a whole lot to be positive about for them, but maybe that's because I don't watch them closely. Then again, the more astute Richmond supporters I know have indicated that they have very little to look forward to in the next few years.

Or, you could take the midfield with abundant promise, and set to acquire the two standout elite talents from this year's draft to complement the stockpile of young talent brought to the club in the last few drafts. Any advantage Richmond has over us in the midfield is set to be overrun very swiftly.

Really?

I mean, did you really feel the need to do that lame comparison thing??

If you were to read the post i replied to, there was a clear question of who have we got that can compete with Cousins, Cotchin, Foley and Deledio at the present time?

Read the whole thing mate before shooting your mouth off. I simply answered the question ffs

The amazing thing about this article is that it has the nerve to suggest that Richmond (midfield or not) may be a more appealing home for Ball..

...only a halfwit could suggest that Richmond will not finish on the bottom of the ladder by a long way next year.

Half-wit I am then, but maybe that's half more than some.

Richmond's midfield is superior to ours right now and they have pick 3 in this draft.

At Melbourne Luke Ball would be our best midfielder and get the most opposition attention - he'd be the human shield as our midfield grows up.

I can see why this has limited appeal.

At Richmond he'd be one among Cousins, Deledio, Foley and Cotchin

I can see how that would be more appealing

But I agree there'd be no way he could get to Richmond without our consent. I agree that there's something disagreeable about drafting aplayer who says he doesn't want to be at our club but there's somthing equally disagreeable about bending to this attitude when the rules give us the right to pick him. What if Trengove said he didn't want to leave South Australia or Scully said he loves Richmond and only wants to play for them?

If I were Richomd, I would be talking MFC down at every opportunity and encouraging him to go with Punt Rd. If I were Ball, I wouldn't do that.

If it's game time he wants, he can't go past Melbourne IMO.

If you were to read the post i replied to, there was a clear question of who have we got that can compete with Cousins, Cotchin, Foley and Deledio at the present time?

Read the whole thing mate before shooting your mouth off. I simply answered the question ffs

My apologies in that case.

It looked like one of those posts that spout:

OK! So Scully will be our Cousins, Trengove can be our Bartel and I reckon Maric can be our Ablett, then Bruce is kinda like Voss and Wonnaemirri is a carbon copy of James Hird!

So We've practically got an all-star midfield for the next decade! ad nauseum...

Sorry, the above grammar is probably not quite reflective of a true post of that nature.

soz your not to bad jus thout it woz a crap post lol

Did'nt giv u enuf credit ... etc.

At Melbourne Luke Ball would be our best midfielder and get the most opposition attention - he'd be the human shield as our midfield grows up.

I can see why this has limited appeal.

At Richmond he'd be one among Cousins, Deledio, Foley and Cotchin

I can see how that would be more appealing

Or maybe you could spin it that Luke Ball is a competitive beast who'll thrive on taking responsibility and want to take the opposition heat.

Even for a seemly level headed guy like Ball, there's got to be some ego in there wanting to be the man.

Or maybe you could spin it that Luke Ball is a competitive beast who'll thrive on taking responsibility and want to take the opposition heat.

Even for a seemly level headed guy like Ball, there's got to be some ego in there wanting to be the man.

That's definitely possible and I hope it's the case.

I guess right now only he knows what he's thinking, but we'll find out.

Either way I could understand his reasoning.

If it's game time he wants, he can't go past Melbourne IMO.

I don't think that's much of a selling point. It's not like he's going to be squeezed out of Richmond's midfield and forced to spend time on the bench.

If he's set on leaving St.Kilda he doesn't want to come to us through the PSD he'll have to go into the ND

He's the right age to go to West Coast, fits in with Cox / Glass / Kerr window and they have 22 and 23 but I'm not sure if he suits Subi.

I'd expect him to go to Essendon or North at 24, 25, 26 if not he'll probably make it to the Pies at 30.

If Richmond has more appeal than us then we truly are a basket case. I don't know why we need to compare midfields both are crap, it couldn't possibly be a selling point for either club.

What ? Midfielders don't take that long to have a significant impact.

I think you misunderstood me. Or rather, I wasn't clear enough.

- By "kids" I don't mean just the midfielders. I'm like you. I think given the landscape of our current midfield is such that Trengove and Scully could play 22 games next year, and could develop at the pace of a Judd... who was elite, some say, by his second season. But that's STILL a big call, and it STILL only applies to midfielders. Our forwards have a LONG way to go. Definitely at least 3 years.

- By "could" I mean literally COULD. It's certainly glass-half-full, but that's a point of view shared, so some say, by DB. We keep hearing the 4-6 years number...

So when it comes to Ball, if the 4-6 year window theory is to be believed, he will be 28-30 by the time we're threatening. I say 5 just to split the difference.

Don't get me wrong. He's of the RIGHT age group, but still older than the PERFECT age. In an ideal world you'd recruit all 23 year old stars, as that;s the time a footballer makes their name.

Actually H, you'll find I'll be putting as much pressure on Scully/Trengove as you. I think even if they're battered and bruised and hit from pillar to post, they'll stand to gain a great deal from it, and they'll STILL allow the Moloney, Jones, Grimes types a lot more room to move. It may not happen overnight, but I think it'll happen a lot sooner than the pessimistic types think...

This talk of Richmonds midfield being better than our at the moment is astounding. Any of you actually seen Richmonds midfield in action?

Deez mid > Rich mid

This talk of Richmonds midfield being better than our at the moment is astounding. Any of you actually seen Richmonds midfield in action?

Deez mid > Rich mid

Have you seen the MFC midfield in action?

I don't think that's much of a selling point. It's not like he's going to be squeezed out of Richmond's midfield and forced to spend time on the bench.

Maybe not much of a selling point, but...

Cousins, Deledio, Foley, Cotchin.

v

Moloney, Jones, Sylvia, ?

He would definitely start in Melbourne's midfield in 2010 IMO. He might in Richmond's.

Have you seen the MFC midfield in action?

have you seen the tigers midfield in action? didnt we do everything in a power to lose to the tigers 3mnths ago, yet we still won, credit were credits due.