Wow. 10 goals not good enough for Miller to get in.

Pretty big news in the context...

The comments in the article are those of one of our writers JVM and not mine but I like his outcome.

BTW, the Hawks must be in a state of disarrray. According to their website they have 5 ins and 6 outs at the moment:-

Round 20 team

In: Brown, Hooper, Peterson, Skipper, Whitecross

Out: Ladson, (omit), Moss (omit), Morton (omit), Suckling (omit), Taylor (omit), Young (soreness)

In: Brown, Hooper, Peterson, Skipper, Whitecross

Out: Ladson, (omit), Moss (omit), Morton (omit), Suckling (omit), Taylor (omit), Young (soreness)

Skipper as backup ruck?

They're scared of PJ. :D

THE MONKEY by JVM

Melbourne by 54 points.

Whoa, big call there I sure hope its pans out like you predict. Although I think our form line has dropped off a little too since the second half of the Brissuy for for much of the Richmond game os I think we'll need to ramp it up a bit to pull off the win

A ten goal win and a North loss would put Melbourne in the eight at the end of the round...

lol think you were after rocket science there mate.

It's a joke - a deliberately mixed metaphor. Used around my workplace all the time actually.

Whoa, big call there I sure hope its pans out like you predict. Although I think our form line has dropped off a little too since the second half of the Brissuy for for much of the Richmond game os I think we'll need to ramp it up a bit to pull off the win

I know there was a few fumbles Ascobar, but I wouldn't be underestimating the formline through the Melb v Rich game.

I know there was a few fumbles Ascobar, but I wouldn't be underestimating the formline through the Melb v Rich game.

Yeah fair call. I guess I was just trying the say the boys will need to be a bit sharper (i.e. less fumbles) if they are to overcome the hawks and get their fast flowing game going for longer.

Edited August 14, 201014 yr by Ascobar

It's a joke - a deliberately mixed metaphor. Used around my workplace all the time actually.

I'm surprised when people get confused by this.

I'm not one to accidentally mince metaphors.

Rivers played the first game of the season, missed four matches with a rib injury, then came back to play all 14 games since.

How does that equate to "fallen out of favour at times" Mr Rocket Surgeon?

I'm not going to spell it out to you Sherlock.

He was, he spent time in the VFL and had to fight to get back in the side.

Simply, you're ignoring the main point, which was that he does not have the skillset to play the role of "loose man in defense".

Rivers is very good at reading the play and being a help defender, but he is not especially damaging on the rebound.

In fact, I even heard Josh Mahoney, upon Rivers' return, say that he is our best one-on-one defender.

Obviously now he has been superceded by Frawley, but it is an indication of how they rate him nonetheless.

He was, he spent time in the VFL and had to fight to get back in the side.

So "at times" was really just "once".

We face the Hawks without 5 to 6 players from our 'best 22' at the start of the year (Moloney, Grimes, Petterd, Bate, Morton and Warnock). We also have another 5 kids who were picks 11 to 21 in the draft who must be pushing for selection in the senior team next year.

The problem for all these guys is the rise to fame of our 'no name' brands - McKenzie, Dunn, Bail and Bartram.

I discount Jamar because he was everyone's pick as our No 1 ruckman, but where did these other guys come from?

I also feel sorry for Cheney who is showing good form at Casey (great win yesterday too - their best for the year).

I really hope we do the dorks today, but regardless of the result, we could see up to 10 diferent players in our side when we next play the hawks.

We now have a lot of depth to see us thru the next two years. Very handy bercause we wont get many new draft picks.