Terrible thread. Rivers among the best today. Cannot fathom where the hate for him is coming from. Took a pile of contested marks in defensive 50 and affected a heap of good spoils in contested situations as well as out on leads.

I'd agree he was among the best today. That said, one of only a few players. I thought his efforts were very good. Unlike others such as Bate and Sylvia who both needed to pull their finger out when the side needed them.

As for stranga, who said Rivers only took 2 contested marks, both he and Watts had the most out of the team (2 each) out a grand total of 10!

Others that had one each (for the record): Bennell, Sylvia, Hughes, Grimes, Jamar, Frawley.

I don't think Rivers' work ethic is in doubt after today's performance, he worked hard.....

But the criticism (which isn't even close to "hate") is legit unfortunately. Rivers was able to put himself into the contest(s) as a loose defender because that is what he is good at,

always has been. But the flip side is that one on one he gets beaten, or at least has been recently.

This is not something that a team can always hold on to. I hope they find a way, but as with Cameron Bruce, these less than stellar attributes of some of the more seasoned

players will be more fiercely exposed, and the kids as they grow up and (hopefully) be better, these players will be eventually be phased out.

This is not a slight on Rivers, far from it really, but is more a recognition of the realities these guys are going to be facing.

About two years behind...

Our defensive structure and balance going forward is an interesting issue.

If we start with Frawley and Warnock as our key defenders

Then add Garland as third tall who can play on mid size forwards or pinch hit on a tall.

Whats the balance of the remaining 3?

Need 2 running half backs one of which is Grimes

Need a quick to cover quick small forwards.

Where does Rivers fit in? Have been a fan but am unsure of his role going forward if we are playing Frawley, Warncck and Garland down back. Grimes is a monty for half back so that leaves 2 spots. Does one automatically belong to Rivers?

Terrible thread. Rivers among the best today. Cannot fathom where the hate for him is coming from. Took a pile of contested marks in defensive 50 and affected a heap of good spoils in contested situations as well as out on leads.

How many games have we won with Rivers playing this year? He is a better version of Jason Cloke and that is all.

Does one automatically belong to Rivers?

Nope, all spots must be earned, no matter by who.....

Oh and good question !!!

How many games have we won with Rivers playing this year? He is a better version of Jason Cloke and that is all.

Ok, thats just mean !!!

I'd agree he was among the best today. That said, one of only a few players. I thought his efforts were very good. Unlike others such as Bate and Sylvia who both needed to pull their finger out when the side needed them.

As for stranga, who said Rivers only took 2 contested marks, both he and Watts had the most out of the team (2 each) out a grand total of 10!

Others that had one each (for the record): Bennell, Sylvia, Hughes, Grimes, Jamar, Frawley.

Were we at the same game? Rivers was sh1thouse. He was toweled by Kennedy early so played loose inside 50m where he dropped more marks than he took. When he took the mark he took an eternity to dispose of the ball and then kicked to a contest. People need to open their eyes.

Rivers is an extra man in defense-type player. Put him one-on-one and he's no good. He will throw his body on the line, and can blast through the defense with precision and skill. MacDonald is mistake-prone; Brisbane got rid of him for a reason. Rivers is a general. I think you are all forgetting his role in the team.

Re-read and think about that after you clear your mouth.

General Custer??

Were we at the same game? Rivers was sh1thouse. He was toweled by Kennedy early so played loose inside 50m where he dropped more marks than he took. When he took the mark he took an eternity to dispose of the ball and then kicked to a contest. People need to open their eyes.

Despite his best efforts, Rivers really struggled out there.

I can smell a trade coming at seasons end with Hawthorn unfortunatly.

Rivers for Dowler.

I don't say this lightly either as Rivers is my fav player and has been since round 1 2004. I just don't see a spot for him long term. Warnock, Frawley and Garland are ahead of him and Martin needs to slot into CHB so we have a 2nd ruck option so we aren't forced to play PJ.

Also we are light on for tall marking forwards and Dowler could help with this. I have to wonder if the FD is starting to regret selecting MacDonald in the PSD instead of Mitch Thorpe who also trained with us pre-season?

Rivers was far from our worst today, in fact I gave him votes in our top half dozen but I do see where everyones concern is coming from as far as our structure goes. Unless injury befals Warnock, Frawley or Garland he may find himself in the same boat as MacDonald and struggle to get back into the team assuming he gets dropped which I feel he might assuming Martin is fit?

I don't buy that anymore.

In days gone by when our defense consisted of Carroll and a witches hat, he was the general.

Today, when we have Chip, Warnock, Garland and Grimes defending and attacking with precision and guys like Cheney, McNamara, Bail, Strauss and so forth all able to fill Rivers' role as a loose man in defense, your statement just no longer holds true.

5 years ago loose man in defense were all the rage and Rivers was one of the best. Today, you can't afford to carry someone who defensively is going to be shown up for pace and offensively is not very creative.

Rivers' biggest strength has always been his smarts in reading the play. There are few players who can read the ball as well as he can, and he can certainly take a mark. This makes me wonder whether it is worth giving him a go as a forward.

You make your point very well Jaded.

About two years behind...

Two years ago we had no backline and Rivers was struggling to walk.

You couldn't confidently make those calls, as clearly demonstrated by the fact that the club has kept him on our list.

Just because you suspected it two years ago, doesn't mean it was viable to start making decisions about his future when Carroll was playing FB

With so many kids waiting in the wings, a down game is no longer something that can just be brushed off.

We do not have a best 22, it is a work in progress. If you do not play well, your spot comes up for question.

Rivers has a spot at this club no doubt. Seems a handy player, and will work well on some match ups. He is no longer the 'General', but he is still one of the seasoned troops who are needed against hardened sides. His courage never comes under question- and he has a tonne of it.

As for next week? Pending fitness tests of Morton and Co, he may very well miss a week or two just to help him build up some confidence. He was in my bottom 5 against West Coast. To be fair to Rivo, half the side had a shocker of a performance. There will be others on the chopping board before Jared, but moves will be made!!

Rivers is 50/50 to play next week. That said, whoever replaces him will be under the same scrutiny, and someone will make way for him again in 2010 and beyond. If he is dropped, we will see him again in 2010!

I can smell a trade coming at seasons end with Hawthorn unfortunatly.

Rivers for Dowler.

I don't say this lightly either as Rivers is my fav player and has been since round 1 2004. I just don't see a spot for him long term. Warnock, Frawley and Garland are ahead of him and Martin needs to slot into CHB so we have a 2nd ruck option so we aren't forced to play PJ.

Also we are light on for tall marking forwards and Dowler could help with this. I have to wonder if the FD is starting to regret selecting MacDonald in the PSD instead of Mitch Thorpe who also trained with us pre-season?

Ummm, why do we want a kid who can't get a game for a team going worse than us??

And yeah, I'll bet the FD is really kicking themselves for passing on Mitch Thorp who is dominating for ...... ummmm ..... oh ......

I'd agree he was among the best today. That said, one of only a few players. I thought his efforts were very good. Unlike others such as Bate and Sylvia who both needed to pull their finger out when the side needed them.

Don't compare Bate to Sylvia today, Bate was on one leg and did far more than Sylvia despite his handicap. Bate has also been a better contributor than Sylvia who has had one good game and a few stinkers.

Ummm, why do we want a kid who can't get a game for a team going worse than us??

And yeah, I'll bet the FD is really kicking themselves for passing on Mitch Thorp who is dominating for ...... ummmm ..... oh ......

As opposed to holding onto a guy who probably wont be able to get a game in our back line next year at least we'd have a forward who can't get a game for a team with Franklin and Roughead already in their forward line, he might relish the chance at a new club. Kicked 7 goals in the last 2 rounds last year and the VFL match I saw him play this year he looked alright.

As for Thorpe from all reports I've heard he's doing pretty well at CHF with Weribee in the VFL, while MacDonald finds himself battling with Frawley, Warnock, Rivers, Garland, Martin and McNamara for 3 or at best 4 tall defender spots. The most obvious deficency we have is tall marking forwards, not tall rebounding defenders.

I can smell a trade coming at seasons end with Hawthorn unfortunatly.

Rivers for Dowler.

I don't say this lightly either as Rivers is my fav player and has been since round 1 2004. I just don't see a spot for him long term. Warnock, Frawley and Garland are ahead of him and Martin needs to slot into CHB so we have a 2nd ruck option so we aren't forced to play PJ.

Also we are light on for tall marking forwards and Dowler could help with this. I have to wonder if the FD is starting to regret selecting MacDonald in the PSD instead of Mitch Thorpe who also trained with us pre-season?

Rivers was far from our worst today, in fact I gave him votes in our top half dozen but I do see where everyones concern is coming from as far as our structure goes. Unless injury befals Warnock, Frawley or Garland he may find himself in the same boat as MacDonald and struggle to get back into the team assuming he gets dropped which I feel he might assuming Martin is fit?

Thats an interesting point re Hawthorn, and they need a Ruck as well, and a backup ruck.

Thats an interesting point re Hawthorn, and they need a Ruck as well, and a backup ruck.

Package Rivers with PJ.

They will be dribbling with that.

If we can package Meesen as well.

We must play hard on the deal.

Actually now after having watched the St. Kilda-v-Essendon match the Saints might be a club that could do with someone like Rivers, Zac Dawson really does struggle down there. Possible trade Rivers and a draft pick for Stanley or Lynch?

Rivers seems to be very slow these days.

Most likely to be traded away at the end of the season.

Rivers was in my three worst on the ground on Saturday, he was continually lead to the ball and when he did get off his man to fly for the high ball he dropped it!!! i would rather have Martin in defense then rivers, as he is very quick and did show a bit when he played there.

About two years behind...

Exactly what I thought. Even just this season we've had this debate many a time.

Rivers is an extra man in defense-type player. Put him one-on-one and he's no good. He will throw his body on the line, and can blast through the defense with precision and skill. MacDonald is mistake-prone; Brisbane got rid of him for a reason. Rivers is a general. I think you are all forgetting his role in the team.

If you can't play one-on-one and are just an 'extra man in defence' you're no good unless you give drive.

I think you're the only person I've ever seen characterise Rivers as a guy who blasts through with precision and skill (unless you're talking about the way he leaps through the air at a pack ).

Exactly what I thought. Even just this season we've had this debate many a time.

Not true, the "debate" as you so nicely put it, has been that Rivers is either completely crap and should never be seen in a Melbourne jumper again, or that he is a great player and easily part of our best 22.

I think the answer lies somewhere in between, because he is definitely not a terrible footballer and does have some unique qualities, but he is also going to struggle to be part of our backline if he doesn't change his game.

Nobody here really seemed to answer my question about his viability as a forward. He is a better kick than Miller, he can take a mark and he can read the play. Question is, can we teach him to lead to the right spots and can he instinctively make the switch into an attacking player?

IMO it would be wrong to throw him away like yesterday's garbage without trying him in a new position. Clearly our club holds him in high regard, or they wouldn't have stuck with him through years of surgeries and injuries and they wouldn't have put him in the leadership group, so he is worth something.

Don't compare Bate to Sylvia today, Bate was on one leg and did far more than Sylvia despite his handicap. Bate has also been a better contributor than Sylvia who has had one good game and a few stinkers.

There was no comparison as such Redleg. Merely pointed out the side needed them to pull their finger out. If you're going by numbers you're right. However, Bate should have had 2.1 not 0.3. Sylvia was barely seen and needed to at least impose himself. His shots at goal were woeful. (0.1)

I know it was not a good time for our forwards. But FCS, we needed someone to at least move and kick too. Too many stationary for mine. But I must say, West Coast came well prepared and came to play.

We only needed to be off 5% from previous weeks and we were gone. The writing was on the wall, 10 mins into the game.

At the end of the day, they had McKinely, the Big Q, Kennedy and Le Cras who lead well and presented. We had 'F' all. There is only so much our backline can withstand if we're turning over the ball time and again.