Highest disposal tally for the last 6 games is 17.

Averaging 13 disposals a game since round 2.

Kicked 2 goals since round 1.

He'd be well up the Lists then!

Highest disposal tally for the last 6 games is 17.

Averaging 13 disposals a game since round 2.

Kicked 2 goals since round 1.

What you seem to not realise is that his role changed at this exact time, he started out playing inside like he was made to do, racking up 30's ect then i think he got a bit more respect from the opposition, and now he players defensive roles on strong opposition players, If he isnt following the ball then he cant get high 20's ect

What I said in the OP is being completely taken out of context. Everyone who has replied to the thread saying that his effort and attitude is outstanding well I don't disagree with you and I never did. We all know that. However no-one has been able to defend his kicking,lack of pace,lack of class and explain why he can't get his hands on the ball. I'm not excusing moloney for a second here but I just don't see upside in mags and at the moment he is liability to our side with his inability to get on the outside which is what were struggling with as a side!

One of your favourite players is Bennell yet you say Magner is a liability?

What do you base a players worth on; the number of kicks he gets or the job he does?

I really can't believe the thread. So much I haven't even bothered going to page 2 ! Thus far he has outplayed seasoned afl players. And he has played alot of negating roles because neeld knows and trusts him with a task. If you ask me this is the least of our worries on our list.

He's playing a defensive forward role. Adding strings to his bow. Neeld knows what he can do in the guts. What he's finding out is what other blokes can do. Howe was in the midfield for a stretch yesterday. Riv + Garland up forward.

Neeld's working out where his depth is going forward. The season is shot to a degree, so he's using the remaining games to work out who can do what elsewhere on the field to build for the future and teaching players new roles. The goal is to have that Collingwood-esque unit that we saw yesterday, where one bloke goes down and another can slot straight into place without a hiccup.

Magner's not a liability.

Every week I think "worst thread ever" and every week it gets topped...

Flawed argument OP. You could say "Clark doesn't win all the hitouts" or "Frawley doesn't kick goals" or even "That guy Neeld never plays, but he's always on the bench"....

Magner has been sensational for us, full stop. Only Jones, Rivers, and Clark would be leading him in the Bluey.

I know we're all looking to blame someone every time we lose, truth is it's a bigger problem, but to pick out one of our best and say he detracts from the team (which is what liability means by the way) is beyond ridiculous.

Every week I think "worst thread ever" and every week it gets topped...

Flawed argument OP. You could say "Clark doesn't win all the hitouts" or "Frawley doesn't kick goals" or even "That guy Neeld never plays, but he's always on the bench"....

Magner has been sensational for us, full stop. Only Jones, Rivers, and Clark would be leading him in the Bluey.

I know we're all looking to blame someone every time we lose, truth is it's a bigger problem, but to pick out one of our best and say he detracts from the team (which is what liability means by the way) is beyond ridiculous.

I challenge that bolded statement, Howe would be ahead of Magner in my opinion.

Magner has still been very very good this year, don't get me wrong, I think he would probly be coming 5th or sixth at the moment though.

Magner will never be the number one player at the footy club. However, he is the kind of bloke all footy clubs need. One who mightn't be the most naturally gifted player but one who is aiming to be the hardest worker at the club. If all our blokes followed his example, they wouldn't be 1-10.

I challenge that bolded statement, Howe would be ahead of Magner in my opinion.

Magner has still been very very good this year, don't get me wrong, I think he would probly be coming 5th or sixth at the moment though.

Have to disagree. Howe has taken some great marks, kicked a couple of goals, but hasn't done a lot else. Don't get me wrong, I love him, and think he's well on the way, but at this early stage of his career he drifts out of the game for massive periods. Doesn't have the consistency of Magner as yet (tho Magner himself needs a little improvement there too).

I've done my research and I've worked out that Leigh Williams is our big liability.

First he rocks up from a local comp, then he goes and gets a virus on the brain.

I doubt we would have lost a game if had got rid of Leigh Williams. Oh and our other big liability is Tom Couch, he simply isn't playing well in the VFL. It's not good enough

I've done my research and I've worked out that Leigh Williams is our big liability.

First he rocks up from a local comp, then he goes and gets a virus on the brain.

I doubt we would have lost a game if had got rid of Leigh Williams. Oh and our other big liability is Tom Couch, he simply isn't playing well in the VFL. It's not good enough

I dunno, what about that Jack Viney fella, getting paid and he's not even on the list!

Id rather have Magner in the middle than an undisciplined turnover king in McKenzie.

But I do agree with you that our midfield needs more class running through it.

If we let Moloney go I wont be as worried that we are stockpiling spuds in the middle.

I wish I had more interests in my life so I didn't have to read crap like this thread. Magner defamed - a disgrace.

He's playing a defensive forward role. Adding strings to his bow. Neeld knows what he can do in the guts. What he's finding out is what other blokes can do. Howe was in the midfield for a stretch yesterday. Riv + Garland up forward.

Neeld's working out where his depth is going forward. The season is shot to a degree, so he's using the remaining games to work out who can do what elsewhere on the field to build for the future and teaching players new roles. The goal is to have that Collingwood-esque unit that we saw yesterday, where one bloke goes down and another can slot straight into place without a hiccup.

Magner's not a liability.

Neeld is no fool, which is more than I can say of some posters here -- he is learning, as the players are learning.

I just cannot believe this post header -- takes the cake.

Since demonology went down i have come here more....and i can't believe some of these posts.....magnar a liability...Tapscott too aggressive....our supporters are too negative....

seriously...whats going on???

And I'd have Brock McLean over him...

Im sorry Robbo, but Brock Mclean?

The bloke is a spud.

dropped the potential to be the melbourne captain to play in cartons vfl affiliate.

no thank you

Mags plays with heart and works hard.

i think his disposal will get better with game time.

Magner is 11 games into an AFL career, Neeld keeps saying versatility, listen when he says it....

Getting Magner to learn to be a defensive forward as well as a midfielder will not only benefit him but also the Club....

He kept Maxell under control for 3 quarters, didn't get a lot of stats himself, but played his role.....

Gee we sure have some very hard markers on this board

For those wondering why it is stupid for Land to be used for news - is this thread not evidence?

Magner is a rookie listed player who would have to be in the top 6 in the Bluey, and he is a big liability? Based on what? Average possies? Superdouche points?

Moloney, Sylvia, Jamar, Green, and Davey would be on about $2m collectively this year.

Magner would have to come on to field naked, punch Jeremy Howe in the face repeatedly, and then sit cross legged on top of the interchange bench spouting obscenities for the entire game to be as big a liability.

Our biggest liability is currently ranked third in 'Land's Player of the Year.

Highest disposal tally for the last 6 games is 17.

Averaging 13 disposals a game since round 2.

Kicked 2 goals since round 1.

He is being played as a defensive forward/inside forward.

His job is to engage a damaging defender AND to be a part of the setups for stop ball situations inside 50.

Sometimes stats are not the be all and end all.

This thread may raise a few eyebrows but i am getting increasingly frustrated with James Magner. I know many have been singing his praises all year but for a mature age player with a big body he is not contributing enough and if anything just compounding our problems in the midfield. We already have Moloney,jones,trengove,Sylvia and Mckenzie to do the bullocking work in the middle. Magner doesn't do it anywhere near as well as those players and he gives us absolutely nothing on the outside in terms of run and spread. His disposal is poor,he fumbles constantly and he completely lacks class to influence a game.

I love his attitude and his effort but unfortunately I can't see any upside in magner and he's only going to keep outside runners like blease,grimes and gysberts out of the middle going forward!tough call but I'd send him to the magoos.

We have to get the contested footy working as an Instinct within our culture so the 'skilled' types will adopt the 'Mantra'.

Too early to say how Magner will go in future, after further pre seasons?

If the 'skilled types', become willing participants in head over footy, thats when they'll deserve a spot in the team.

For a first year rookie, Magner is doing bloody well.

I don't really get the point of this thread, if anything Magner hasn't been playing enough in the middle and hasn't had enough opportunity to get the disposals he is capable of. Seriously, is his disposal that bad? I haven't noticed. I think he is a good honest hard player who should be playing more in the centre instead of the wings.

Has to go to give Couch a chance, surely...

For those wondering why it is stupid for Land to be used for news - is this thread not evidence?

.

I am on your case rpfc.

The fact is I don't think this site is used for news.

You're referring to the thread about Cale Morton and The Age article today. I reckon the 'hook' for the Age article was Neeld's very obvious spray at Morton that has been played repeatedly on the box.

This site was used to flesh out the views of supporters but it was not the catalyst for the article.

That's how I read it anyhow. And you're resorting to this crap thread to try to stand up your argument elsewhere.

You're putting the cart before the horse old bean.

I am on your case rpfc.

The fact is I don't think this site is used for news.

You're referring to the thread about Cale Morton and The Age article today. I reckon the 'hook' for the Age article was Neeld's very obvious spray at Morton that has been played repeatedly on the box.

This site was used to flesh out the views of supporters but it was not the catalyst for the article.

That's how I read it anyhow. And you're resorting to this crap thread to try to stand up your argument elsewhere.

You're putting the cart before the horse old bean.

I am saying that articles shouldn't use anonymous Land users as evidence. I stand by that.

Peter Hanlon has no idea who Robbie57 is. If you don't know your source, you shouldn't print what they say.