If this comes to fruition (MacDonald at PSD#1), one things for certain regarding the 2010 list, the competition for spots will get a "helluva" lot hotter...

True.

It also means that Bailey has a lot more versatility with how he uses/develops Grimes and to a lesser extent Strauss and Bennell over the next few years.

My, you can be tiresome.

Too many glib remarks and patronising asides.

No-one appreciates the dismissiveness BB59...

may I suggest you get off your high horse.. you..whose comments are often nothing..but a nothingness in itself.

look in the mirror for glib !!

Strangely i was actually discussing two players.. you like play with mud ?

I'm one of those who think that a lot of supporters are being too hard on Rivers..He's a leader whose ability to read the play and fill the hole is exceptional.He's now fronting up for his first pre-season in 3-4 years........................

Anyway I don't think its valid to compare him to McDonald. Rivers plays as a tall defender - whereas MacDonald is a utility back best suited to a running role.

I'm with you on that. Rivers' biggest problem is his kicking, which MacDonald supposedly is better at, but they play different roles. Rivers still has a spot in defence if MacDonald comes into the team.

I'm hoping this pre-season really helps Rivers out.

If this comes to fruition (MacDonald at PSD#1), one things for certain regarding the 2010 list, the competition for spots will get a "helluva" lot hotter...

Which would be a factor coming under consideration by the FD.

It would also tell Bell where he's at.

Edited November 19, 200915 yr by titan_uranus

Are any that propose Rivers in a pocket suggesting he's on the second forward...or putting him on the thrird ? He cant play on 1st or second forwards... he's shown that. Macdonald plays tall. He can and has taken 1st and second forwards...Its arguable as to just how successful thats been . Fev ate him, but possibly wont again. ( If Macdonald studies Tarrants tactics he could get him ) Macdonald has pace and positioning ...something Jared lacks,, Riv has to pre-empt. ( and hes quite good at it ) but limits him for roles. Too slow now for CHB.

Yes Riv plays a spoiler.. and somewhat limited to that.. that is in itself the upside to someone like Joel. I think Bails is more and more leaning to versatility. Jared will need to show more strings. BP ? deathnell !!

Jared will need to show more strings. BP ? deathnell !!

Let me get this right. MacDonald has bypassed the ND and you are already sounding out the end to Rivers football career ?

Are any that propose Rivers in a pocket suggesting he's on the second forward...or putting him on the thrird ? He cant play on 1st or second forwards... he's shown that. Macdonald plays tall. He can and has taken 1st and second forwards...Its arguable as to just how successful thats been . Fev ate him, but possibly wont again. ( If Macdonald studies Tarrants tactics he could get him ) Macdonald has pace and positioning ...something Jared lacks,, Riv has to pre-empt. ( and hes quite good at it ) but limits him for roles. Too slow now for CHB.

Yes Riv plays a spoiler.. and somewhat limited to that.. that is in itself the upside to someone like Joel. I think Bails is more and more leaning to versatility. Jared will need to show more strings. BP ? deathnell !!

This is complete rubbish bub. Some of your worst work.

Rivers is not limited to spoiling. He consistently peels off his opponent to help Frawley and Warnock with theirs. He zones well in the 50, he isn't afraid to push up the ground (despite his kicking) and he reads the play brilliantly so that he makes more contests than not.

He's not too slow for CHB, but he doesn't have to play there, as we have Frawley and Warnock. Rivers is ideally suited to a third tall.

MacDonald is OK, but gives away too much height to be playing tall.

You don't like Rivers. Fine. But basically nothing you've said in this post is accurate.

Are any that propose Rivers in a pocket suggesting he's on the second forward...or putting him on the thrird ? He cant play on 1st or second forwards... he's shown that. Macdonald plays tall. He can and has taken 1st and second forwards...Its arguable as to just how successful thats been . Fev ate him, but possibly wont again. ( If Macdonald studies Tarrants tactics he could get him ) Macdonald has pace and positioning ...something Jared lacks,, Riv has to pre-empt. ( and hes quite good at it ) but limits him for roles. Too slow now for CHB.

Yes Riv plays a spoiler.. and somewhat limited to that.. that is in itself the upside to someone like Joel. I think Bails is more and more leaning to versatility. Jared will need to show more strings. BP ? deathnell !!

I'm not sure what it is you have against Rivers but if he gets a a full preseason in he'll have you eating your words.

This is complete rubbish bub. Some of your worst work.

Rivers is not limited to spoiling. He consistently peels off his opponent to help Frawley and Warnock with theirs. He zones well in the 50, he isn't afraid to push up the ground (despite his kicking) and he reads the play brilliantly so that he makes more contests than not.

He's not too slow for CHB, but he doesn't have to play there, as we have Frawley and Warnock. Rivers is ideally suited to a third tall.

MacDonald is OK, but gives away too much height to be playing tall.

You don't like Rivers. Fine. But basically nothing you've said in this post is accurate.

You've got it , Titan .The comparison is spurious anyway - because Rivers and MacDonald are not competing for the same position

Roost It knows what he's talking about as well

Stumbled across this gem in JACKATTACK's stats link:

Career Highlights

31 disps (20 kicks 11 hballs) and 12 marks in Rd 15 43-pt win over Geelong at the Gabba (11 Jul 2009)

33 disps (14 kicks 19 hballs) and 11 marks in Rd 9 16-pt loss to St Kilda at Etihad Stadium (24 May 2009)

I'd be very happy to get him with pick #1 in the PSD.

You'd think that we'd only take a 24-25 year old if he had outstanding leadership qualities - or topped us up in a position of need. It's not as if we are short of options for a mid sized defender.He may. of course, be an exceptional bloke - but other than that I can't get too excited about picking him up.

You'd think that if he is on a promise for the psd , he'd at least be training with us by now.

( Did you see him at the club, Darren?)

Yes he was there yesterday. I saw him. I was at the club looking for you to discuss football matters.

You've got it , Titan .The comparison is spurious anyway - because Rivers and MacDonald are not competing for the same position

Roost It knows what he's talking about as well

What does 'spurious' mean Hoopla?

This is complete rubbish bub. Some of your worst work.

Rivers is not limited to spoiling. He consistently peels off his opponent to help Frawley and Warnock with theirs. He zones well in the 50, he isn't afraid to push up the ground (despite his kicking) and he reads the play brilliantly so that he makes more contests than not.

He's not too slow for CHB, but he doesn't have to play there, as we have Frawley and Warnock. Rivers is ideally suited to a third tall.

MacDonald is OK, but gives away too much height to be playing tall.

You don't like Rivers. Fine. But basically nothing you've said in this post is accurate.

Hardly rubbish.. some of you Im affraid give far too many stars to Rivers..hes an adequate player wihtout being anything special.. He nearly was once before repeated injuries knobbled him. Hes never been the same since...thats a shame. He was supposed to be our great hope at CHB...those that dispute this either have very short memories..or blinkered outlooks. He IS too slow for CHB..he gets exposed terribly these days by a decent forward. Rivers can play a good negativ egame...but though some have a different opinion mine is that its pretty well limited to that. Some of his decision making and disposal it attrocious for a guy of his experience. Granted he is a like many and confidence comes into play. If he gets through the preseason and through the NAB campaign fit and fighting can revisit this then. He hasnt done it for a while has he !

Yes he can read play well...thats his forte... he plays a very Hollywood type of game but Biz was better at it. He is limited really to flanking roles.. and as such there are others about to nibble at his feet.

Theres a reason he languished in the twos for longer than his injuries dictated and thats largely attitude.

As others rightly point.. with Frawley and Warnock...not to mention Garland we have the taller forwards covered...so if Macdonald is coming on board...Rivers might want to make each week his best efforts.

I dont dislike him at all... just want the best players out there...and hes just adequate...If were to seriously advance we need to be very good.

seems unpalatable for some..so be it

MacDonald gives us the flexibility to counter different forward set-ups. We've pretty much got tall forwards covered, but we'd struggle against smaller mobile forward lines. He might make it easier to vary our defence structure slightly game-by-game according to who we're against.

MacDonald gives us the flexibility to counter different forward set-ups. We've pretty much got tall forwards covered, but we'd struggle against smaller mobile forward lines. He might make it easier to vary our defence structure slightly game-by-game according to who we're against.

Very much so. His pace will be an assett. He tends to use the ball a lot more than say... others might.

Should we get him it will be interesting to see how Bails trials him out in the NAB etc. Theres a lot of offence in this defence player

Very much so. His pace will be an assett. He tends to use the ball a lot more than say... others might.

Should we get him it will be interesting to see how Bails trials him out in the NAB etc. Theres a lot of offence in this defence player

If the ball is coming in to the backline and we need someone to mark it I would rather that someone be Rivers, he has a very good pair of hands.

Riv is a very good player who has suffered by the overall lack of ability we have had up the ground. I recall when Ingerson first came across to Melbourne and he had to play virtually every position in the backline and looked very ordinary, but as we slowly built some talent around him he blossomed and became a very good player.

I think you'll find Rivers will be a much better player when he doesn't have to take responsibility for every opposition forward.

I think you'll find Rivers will be a much better player when he doesn't have to take responsibility for every opposition forward.

in all fairness he hardly does that now.. i will grant that the StKilda game got a bit weird in the second half...and thats 'weird' even by our season 09 standards, but that aside his , and I raise this again, possibly confidence( read realted to fitness ) plays a big role. He seldom now takes a contested mark.. probably wiesly opting for the knuckles. This becomes often too limiting in the effect of play. Those that will now interject with...well would you prefer an opposition mark ? No.!! and point taken.

with frawley , warnock and garland he DOESNT take much responsibility down there...surely ?

in all fairness he hardly does that now.. i will grant that the StKilda game got a bit weird in the second half...and thats 'weird' even by our season 09 standards, but that aside his , and I raise this again, possibly confidence( read realted to fitness ) plays a big role. He seldom now takes a contested mark.. probably wiesly opting for the knuckles. This becomes often too limiting in the effect of play. Those that will now interject with...well would you prefer an opposition mark ? No.!! and point taken.

with frawley , warnock and garland he DOESNT take much responsibility down there...surely ?

Frawley had a breakout year and Warnock improved out of sight, Garland was out for the majority of the year and may or may not return. Riv is a much required player and whilst our backline is not too bad, without Garland and Rivers we are a bit short.

It was only a short while ago that posters were calling for Garland's head. Oh! and Warnock was perceived to be not much better.

One thing I never expected to read on this website when I joined was that people are down on Rivers. I just can't believe it.

He's a young bloke who has had a couple of seasons ruined by injury, and then came back last year and played well. He'll keep getting better too. It's a bit rich to make grandiose statements about his ability when you're looking at his form over this year, and over a season two years ago (especially at his age).

If we drafted a player at pick 11 in the ND this year who backed into packs and put his considerably good sized body on the line like Rivers does consistently, we'd all be applauding out loud.

Some people here need to be careful they don't throw the baby out with the bath water. Rivers is a very good player for us.

I would prefer MacDonald play with Junior and Bruce in the backline and push Grimes into the midfield.

I'm not sure who would move out of the 22 though.

Availability is the great unknown and, as always, will play a role.

He may also free up Aaron Davey from spending 1/2 the game in the defensive 50.

I've heard various reports about McDonald's kicking. Is he good enough to take the kick-outs? That would be one less job for Aaron.

Frawley had a breakout year and Warnock improved out of sight, Garland was out for the majority of the year and may or may not return. Riv is a much required player and whilst our backline is not too bad, without Garland and Rivers we are a bit short.

It was only a short while ago that posters were calling for Garland's head. Oh! and Warnock was perceived to be not much better.

we have seen thse guys , Frawley Warnock and Garland come on. We canexpect they will continue along this path for some.

Down on Rivers ? maybe an unfawning unblinkered perusal of his form.. ? The problem with any fan site is its not popular..indeed almost sacrosanct to go against the flow. hes adequate at present..not brilliant.. not even outstanding.. Hes a third up that just about does his job. Gee thats a lot to get excited and carried away with. ( NOT!! ) At teh dreaded 192 he plays a good 187. He ought to be cpable of more...but reality shows otherwise.

Dont make excuses for his injuries..if thats what theyare..thats what theyare.. If this impedes his effectiveness then surely just see it as it is..dont harp on about what was..or might be.

I can remeber anarticle manyyears ago heralding Miller and Rivers as our brilliant bookends.. one CHF the other CHB...ironically both are as good as each other..still.. Boith handy without being stellar. Apparently being somehwere between medicocre and adequate is sufficient for some. Well Im here to tell you it wont be for the MFC slection committee. For a number of years due to injury and design it wasnt that hard to get a gig at the mighty Dees...thats all about to change.

I oftentake note of what other teams followers say...well they arent all drongos and no one has got very excited about jared for many a season..including the last.

Be blinkered.be content... be easily sated.

premierships arent won with that. Hell if jared turns it up and puts inblinders..I'll be amongst the first to congratulate him..Id did with Frosty..then he went al blacmange on us again.

Many here thought Jared outght to be traded ..I did. Hes here, all well and good. I would like results.. not feely feely goodness that amounts to yet another season of dissapointment.

Happy to be made to eat crow.. bring on 010..lets see

we have seen thse guys , Frawley Warnock and Garland come on. We canexpect they will continue along this path for some.

Down on Rivers ? maybe an unfawning unblinkered perusal of his form.. ? The problem with any fan site is its not popular..indeed almost sacrosanct to go against the flow. hes adequate at present..not brilliant.. not even outstanding.. Hes a third up that just about does his job. Gee thats a lot to get excited and carried away with. ( NOT!! ) At teh dreaded 192 he plays a good 187. He ought to be cpable of more...but reality shows otherwise.

Dont make excuses for his injuries..if thats what theyare..thats what theyare.. If this impedes his effectiveness then surely just see it as it is..dont harp on about what was..or might be.

I can remeber anarticle manyyears ago heralding Miller and Rivers as our brilliant bookends.. one CHF the other CHB...ironically both are as good as each other..still.. Boith handy without being stellar. Apparently being somehwere between medicocre and adequate is sufficient for some. Well Im here to tell you it wont be for the MFC slection committee. For a number of years due to injury and design it wasnt that hard to get a gig at the mighty Dees...thats all about to change.

I oftentake note of what other teams followers say...well they arent all drongos and no one has got very excited about jared for many a season..including the last.

Be blinkered.be content... be easily sated.

premierships arent won with that. Hell if jared turns it up and puts inblinders..I'll be amongst the first to congratulate him..Id did with Frosty..then he went al blacmange on us again.

Many here thought Jared outght to be traded ..I did. Hes here, all well and good. I would like results.. not feely feely goodness that amounts to yet another season of dissapointment.

Happy to be made to eat crow.. bring on 010..lets see

I'm not prepared to argue with you on this, as they say no one ever changed their mind because they lost an argument. Suffice to say I would love to know where you stood on both Garland and Warnock prior to their improvement in form and were you calling for their blood back then?

Let's see what happens I'm looking forward to Rivers making you eat those words.

we have seen thse guys , Frawley Warnock and Garland come on. We canexpect they will continue along this path for some.

Down on Rivers ? maybe an unfawning unblinkered perusal of his form.. ? The problem with any fan site is its not popular..indeed almost sacrosanct to go against the flow. hes adequate at present..not brilliant.. not even outstanding.. Hes a third up that just about does his job. Gee thats a lot to get excited and carried away with. ( NOT!! ) At teh dreaded 192 he plays a good 187. He ought to be cpable of more...but reality shows otherwise.

Dont make excuses for his injuries..if thats what theyare..thats what theyare.. If this impedes his effectiveness then surely just see it as it is..dont harp on about what was..or might be.

I can remeber anarticle manyyears ago heralding Miller and Rivers as our brilliant bookends.. one CHF the other CHB...ironically both are as good as each other..still.. Boith handy without being stellar. Apparently being somehwere between medicocre and adequate is sufficient for some. Well Im here to tell you it wont be for the MFC slection committee. For a number of years due to injury and design it wasnt that hard to get a gig at the mighty Dees...thats all about to change.

I oftentake note of what other teams followers say...well they arent all drongos and no one has got very excited about jared for many a season..including the last.

Be blinkered.be content... be easily sated.

premierships arent won with that. Hell if jared turns it up and puts inblinders..I'll be amongst the first to congratulate him..Id did with Frosty..then he went al blacmange on us again.

Many here thought Jared outght to be traded ..I did. Hes here, all well and good. I would like results.. not feely feely goodness that amounts to yet another season of dissapointment.

Happy to be made to eat crow.. bring on 010..lets see

A lot of Jared's form the last few years has had to do with his injuries. How quickly people forget... This time last year he was still the guy who couldn't get through a game, let alone a season.

If he gets a full pre-season under his belt this summer and Warnock, Garland and co are fit and firing, allowing him to play on (or off, as the case will often be) the third tall, he is likely to be a dominant force.

Time will tell.

I'm not prepared to argue with you on this, as they say no one ever changed their mind because they lost an argument. Suffice to say I would love to know where you stood on both Garland and Warnock prior to their improvement in form and were you calling for their blood back then?

Let's see what happens I'm looking forward to Rivers making you eat those words.

As it happens i wasnt convinced at all about garland.. he was all over the place and couldnt nail a game to save his life. But he did "get it" and until cruelled was showing much promise. warnock I thought always had the makings...just a typical slow developer of a key player.. Frawley was another similar to garland. None of this is relevent to Rivers as he went through all of this ..played wel..very well..plateaud..got inured... hasnt got back to his beter form yet. If inded he will. Called for neithers blood but wondered , as did many , when theywould evolve. Frawley probably the greatest of step ups.. Good for Chip

look Im happy ..tickled pink if he (Rivers ) did ( return to bestform ). Couldnt care less for myself but the club would benefit a great deal from an 'on song' Rivers. More power to it.Eating words whilst unpalatable is hardly worth worrying over.

I havent not acknowledged his injuries etc.. The reality is they have had a major impact.

6 years in the system for a couple of good ones..sorry..is that good ?

Meanwhile back to Joel ..

I find it interesting that the club ( as we a re given to understand ) is to use its PSD pick on a back. werent we pretty sound in this dept ?? I do agree that all things can always be better. But do we read into thsi that the FD concedes there are problems with fitness/form etc of the existing defenders. Possibly Macdonald represents not only added 'oomph' but badlyneeded insurance. We saw how we faltered when Garland took crook.

Curious again were looking ( assuming ) at a back and not a forward as a definite pick up

Meanwhile back to Joel ..

I find it interesting that the club ( as we a re given to understand ) is to use its PSD pick on a back. werent we pretty sound in this dept ?? I do agree that all things can always be better. But do we read into thsi that the FD concedes there are problems with fitness/form etc of the existing defenders. Possibly Macdonald represents not only added 'oomph' but badlyneeded insurance. We saw how we faltered when Garland took crook.

Curious again were looking ( assuming ) at a back and not a forward as a definite pick up

I see getting Macdonald in the PSD as a free shot at getting a player who is almost certainly going to be better than whatever pick 70-something has to offer. I don't think the fact that he is a back has much to do with it at all really. He's just the best we're going to get with that pick.

I think our backline is sound anyway, and I don't share your view that we faltered when Garland fell. I'd actually say it's the one and only area of the ground where we consistently looked solid all year. Macdonald can release someone like Grimes in to a midfield role - break even for the backline, net gain for the midfield.