Riv is struggling when one on one but there are some reasons for this as it is not his strength. His strength and at his best his ability to read the play is high class but this role is difficult when you play in a side who's defence see's far too much of the ball and quick ball too when you factor in our current ability to turn the ball over.

Smart people realise we are attempting a game style similar to Geelong, when all that comes together our defence will be in a position to play off their opponent more regularly exactly as a Mackie, Milburn & Enright do now.

Struggling one on one is a critical flaw in a defender and is not an issue with Mackie, Milburn and Enright. All these player can play one on one, they are not slow and their disposal is good. Reading the play is of little value if it does not result in your side gaining possesion of and using the ball well.

Unless MFC were prepared to let him go to the PSD for nothing (they wouldn't), they would had to offer and agree 2 years. Its hardly a vindication of his performance which has been middling at best. Its ironic that even his most ardent supporters see him as a 3rd best defender who does his best work floating off his man. Hardly critical given he is subordinate in defensive roles to Frawley and Warnock. Hannibal summed him up well.

Why are you and many others so emotive in your language ? Rivers "haters" and Rivers "bashers". Rivers is a disappointment to me and many others. He certainly never elevated his game from his RS year. We all know that there are some reasons for this, such as injury, but another is that he's slow, too small for big forwards and burnt on the lead by the quicker forwards. Another is that he's just not that good. So, it's fair to say that I'm not a Rivers fan. But by your definition, I'm a "hater". You're not that bright are you ?

Also, it's great to see some of the glee in this thread. Imagine if we're ever in the position to re-sign a bona fide 'star/s'.

How are the clouds on your high horse???? Did you give yourself a rise as you wrote "your not that bright". Hopefully you popped the pill firstly to get the pure excitement from that rise. It was a fairly simple worded comment of all the knocks that Rivers gets. Unlike others that can argue the merit of the comment you of course drag it all down to a personal level.

A thread about re-singing 3 loyal servants of the club again becomes one of your rants about perceived stars and making veiled judgments on others excitment at re-singing these players.

Go barrack for Carlton you [censored]! You obviously have no great attachment to MFC which is clear by your nominated favourite players...what a sad time you must have watching the demons as the majority you 'just don't think are any good'. (Mods - delete as you please)

Your last comment on another brilliantly put together post sums you up Hannabal.

Struggling one on one is a critical flaw in a defender and is not an issue with Mackie, Milburn and Enright. All these player can play one on one, they are not slow and their disposal is good. Reading the play is of little value if it does not result in your side gaining possesion of and using the ball well.

Unless MFC were prepared to let him go to the PSD for nothing (they wouldn't), they would had to offer and agree 2 years. Its hardly a vindication of his performance which has been middling at best. Its ironic that even his most ardent supporters see him as a 3rd best defender who does his best work floating off his man. Hardly critical given he is subordinate in defensive roles to Frawley and Warnock. Hannibal summed him up well.

So you are suggesting that Riv may not have shown loyalty if given a one year contract to prove his worth?

Mackie, Milburn & Enright are certainly no stawell gift winners - the fact that Scarlett quite often becomes the re bounder from defence is proof of this for me. In big games where Geelong are tested I have seen plenty of evidence to suggest that Mackie is not that great as a one on one defender. IMO I would stick with Milburn and Enright being superb at reading the play, not running the ball.

I disagree also that reading the play is of little value - wasn't it proven in Rivs formative years what an asset this can be?

Agreed. I don't think my local cafe is thrilled that there is a big hole in their Feral Scum where I cut out the picture!

Marketing is now missing a page from their newpaper.

That picture is sitting nicely alongside my financial calendars and fabric swatches. Fits so well!

Also, it's great to see some of the glee in this thread. Imagine if we're ever in the position to re-sign a bona fide 'star/s'.

The glee is more about the fact that young players are choosing to stick with the club rather than chase the money, which is a great indication of where we are heading.

Also, Garland could very well become a bona fide star

great photo

love that photo ricky p looks like a man on a mission can tell by the look on his face

Did you give yourself a rise as you wrote "your not that bright". It was a fairly simple worded comment of all the knocks that Rivers gets.

Firstly, I wouldn't write "your" when I mean "you're".

Secondly, it wasn't a "fairly simply worded comment", it was an exceedingly simple and inaccurate comment, nonetheless, one that does you justice.

As for my love of the MFC ? I've been watching pure and unadulterated crap since the 1970's and I'm still here and at the 'G' every week. But yes, I mark harder than some. I'll lavish praise when it's deserved.

The glee is more about the fact that young players are choosing to stick with the club rather than chase the money, which is a great indication of where we are heading.

Also, Garland could very well become a bona fide star

Most players stay because of their teammates, not their respective clubs. Players usually only move for better opportunities, back home if interstate, or if it's late in their career they may chase success. Then there's Garry Ablett.

I see potentially probably only 3 bona fide stars on our list and 'Coldawg' isn't one of them.

Firstly, I wouldn't write "your" when I mean "you're".

Secondly, it wasn't a "fairly simply worded comment", it was an exceedingly simple and inaccurate comment, nonetheless, one that does you justice.

As for my love of the MFC ? I've been watching pure and unadulterated crap since the 1970's and I'm still here and at the 'G' every week. But yes, I mark harder than some. I'll lavish praise when it's deserved.

'G' when it should be 'G or are there missing characters after the G or are you quoting someone perhaps? Oh god now I am one of those prats that pick up on other posters punctuation and spelling errors. Woe is me!

Sorry Mrs Robinson.....giddy up on the high horse!

love that photo ricky p looks like a man on a mission can tell by the look on his face

it's a photo shoot, what did you expect.lol

Rising to the challenge - Jared Rivers

Not sure if anyone's posted this, but i found it a really good read.

Agreed. I don't think my local cafe is thrilled that there is a big hole in their Feral Scum where I cut out the picture!

Good idea...

So you are suggesting that Riv may not have shown loyalty if given a one year contract to prove his worth?

No.

He is out of contract this year and is 26 years old. He could easily go into the PSD and get a 2 yr contract elsewhere. Hell Chris Johnson did!! I dont think he has much trade value as I believe his skills are limited. If MFC were to offer him a 1 year contract then they should not bother offering him one at all.

Mackie, Milburn & Enright are certainly no stawell gift winners - the fact that Scarlett quite often becomes the re bounder from defence is proof of this for me. In big games where Geelong are tested I have seen plenty of evidence to suggest that Mackie is not that great as a one on one defender. IMO I would stick with Milburn and Enright being superb at reading the play, not running the ball.

I disagree also that reading the play is of little value - wasn't it proven in Rivs formative years what an asset this can be?

They dont have to be Stawell gift winners but they are fast enough over short distances to cover leading forwards and to also run and break the lines when in possession. And Enright and Mackie do alot of that. They also use the ball very well. Rivers lacks pace, does not run the lines and his disposal is ordinary. Add to that his lack of one on one capability he really is a tweener. Too small for talls and too slow for the small.

As Hannibal said, Rivers has not kicked on since his RS days. A combination of player limitations, injuries and the rapidly changing game has curtailed his importance. There was a time 3 to 4 years ago when in the absence of quality defenders, Rivers was critical to the defence. How times have changed? I think Frawley streets him in every facet an Frawley is only 21 on an upward curve. Garland is quicker reads the game well, runs the lines, plays body and body and is a better kick.

Being a 3rd defender whose strength is to flost off your man aint that hard nor is it as critical a role particular if one on one and pace is a weakness. Two years was about right. He would not be on big $$$ and I dont think his skill set is of signifciant trade value.

IMO he is a fringe player around the best 22 and not a given to be selected and each game he needs to work hard to overcome his limitations.

'G' when it should be 'G or are there missing characters after the G or are you quoting someone perhaps?

It was used as singular quotation marks, not as an apostrophe.

No.

He is out of contract this year and is 26 years old. He could easily go into the PSD and get a 2 yr contract elsewhere. Hell Chris Johnson did!! I dont think he has much trade value as I believe his skills are limited. If MFC were to offer him a 1 year contract then they should not bother offering him one at all.

They dont have to be Stawell gift winners but they are fast enough over short distances to cover leading forwards and to also run and break the lines when in possession. And Enright and Mackie do alot of that. They also use the ball very well. Rivers lacks pace, does not run the lines and his disposal is ordinary. Add to that his lack of one on one capability he really is a tweener. Too small for talls and too slow for the small.

As Hannibal said, Rivers has not kicked on since his RS days. A combination of player limitations, injuries and the rapidly changing game has curtailed his importance. There was a time 3 to 4 years ago when in the absence of quality defenders, Rivers was critical to the defence. How times have changed? I think Frawley streets him in every facet an Frawley is only 21 on an upward curve. Garland is quicker reads the game well, runs the lines, plays body and body and is a better kick.

Being a 3rd defender whose strength is to flost off your man aint that hard nor is it as critical a role particular if one on one and pace is a weakness. Two years was about right. He would not be on big $$$ and I dont think his skill set is of signifciant trade value.

IMO he is a fringe player around the best 22 and not a given to be selected and each game he needs to work hard to overcome his limitations.

Agree with Chip & Col when used to compare, that's fine.

Riv is actually only 25 through the remainder of this season isn't he? He will be playing as a 26 & 27 year old through his 2 year contract. I don't think that is too much of a risk even if you believe there is no improvement in him or is a fringe player.

Hopefully being at an age when many footballers can play their best Riv will do the same.

Regardless of what you, I or anyone else may suggest it would seem the coaches hold him in decent regard, the last coach to drop him was Daniher for the Elim Final wasn't it? (Not 100% certain on that fact)

great photo

How good is it? I think he's the only player I've ever seen hold the jumper in that way.

How good is it? I think he's the only player I've ever seen hold the jumper in that way.

its great the great man himself will be on SEN 1116 at 4.05pm

Remarkable the God-like aura players seem to take on around here when they're out injured. You'd think Petterd was a Coleman Medallist in waiting.

We're seeing it with LJ too, people seem to think Matthew Knights is being kept up at night by the prospect of a 9 game player with a 2.2 goal average returning to dominate the contest.

Remarkable the God-like aura players seem to take on around here when they're out injured. You'd think Petterd was a Coleman Medallist in waiting.

We're seeing it with LJ too, people seem to think Matthew Knights is being kept up at night by the prospect of a 9 game player with a 2.2 goal average returning to dominate the contest.

If Knights isn't there are a he'll of lot of Bombers out there deputising for him right now lol Keep in mind atpresent for evry 2 he kicks he is instrumental in 3 or 4 others. I'll say right now he'll kick 3 will hand two to Watts and two to Bates and that's 7 goals that wouldn't have happened without LJ

Edited July 8, 201015 yr by belzebub59

The way I read it, Rivers is a great person to have on our list because the weaker the defence gets (if injuries or form drops hit) the more valuable his 'traditional' role of the cut-out defensive mark and excellent reader of the play becomes.

Basically, he'd be more useful and happier in a crisis!

More generally, he's got something, that kid. What we can hope for is that by the end of this contract he'll be as good as he might originally have been now, accounting for the massive lost time and disruption.

Also...

WOOOOOOO!!!

Demons want to be Demons.

Remarkable the God-like aura players seem to take on around here when they're out injured. You'd think Petterd was a Coleman Medallist in waiting.

We're seeing it with LJ too, people seem to think Matthew Knights is being kept up at night by the prospect of a 9 game player with a 2.2 goal average returning to dominate the contest.

It's also about stretching other teams defences. If you have half a dozen targets that are all capable players then sooner or later one or more of them will get a mismatch. Having a fit and firing Jurrah and Petterd in the forward line gives Green, Bate, Sylvia, Watts ect more freedom and the mids better choices of target.

It's also about stretching other teams defences. If you have half a dozen targets that are all capable players then sooner or later one or more of them will get a mismatch. Having a fit and firing Jurrah and Petterd in the forward line gives Green, Bate, Sylvia, Watts ect more freedom and the mids better choices of target.

Great point.

Either Jurrah, Watts, or Bate would struggle to be the focal point. In the same side however the combination should start to stretch defences and you would expect one or two of the three to pop up and kick a few.

It will be great when our entire forward line as a unit is considered dangerous.

Marketing is now missing a page from their newpaper.

That picture is sitting nicely alongside my financial calendars and fabric swatches. Fits so well!

My dad won't be so happy when he sees the hole in the page in the Sport section

Great news! Well done DEMONS.