Does anyone have a link to SEN for the interview?

There was an inteview? ;-)

Does anyone have a link to SEN for the interview?

SEN usually have all their interviews recorded on their web site.

However the interview with Clark is not there that I can find WJ

Seems like everyone else they interviewed yesterday is but not Clark.

Go figure

http://www.sen.com.au/audio

Doesn't apear to be there unless its in the KB file....

SEN usually have all their interviews recorded on their web site.

However the interview with Clark is not there that I can find WJ

Seems like everyone else they interviewed yesterday is but not Clark.

Go figure

So, was there an interview, or was diesel's "snippet on the news" not actually from a formal interview? If there was an interview, this would have to be almost the first time in my "life" on Demonland, that not one poster has been able to report on it.

He will need to build match fitness and the only way is playing but will need to come in with a good level of fitness to start with. The game these days doesn't allow anyone the luxury of playing out of the square, defenders will take advantage and run him into the ground.

Your caveat was his training to ramp up soon, if it doesn't and they are being conservative there is no way he will play to build up his fitness base.

I disagree that you cant to a minor degree luxuriate in the playing of a known power forward out of the square. That doesnt mean he just stands there. it simply recognises he wont have the legs ( sts ) to run around at CHF all day . He is very able bodied. Many of his marks were actually quite static tussles near the square. Hes a brute.

He can be fit enough to play without being in prime nick to play the half forward role. . I see no reason , really why you cant switch Dawes and Clark for an interim. it still gives coaches an almighty headache of matching up. Take Mitch off and its far easier.

You get match fit by playing. At some point you have to roll dice. If , again IF, hes fit enough to take to the field. IF his foot is ok, then why wouldnt you.

How exactly does a defender run someone into the ground if they leave them ?? Great..Let them leave him alone. Its a nonsense.

So, was there an interview, or was diesel's "snippet on the news" not actually from a formal interview? If there was an interview, this would have to be almost the first time in my "life" on Demonland, that not one poster has been able to report on it.

I heard earlier in the day there was to be an interview.

But I did not hear it.

Just a snippet on their news sections

SEN usually have all their interviews recorded on their web site.

However the interview with Clark is not there that I can find WJ

Seems like everyone else they interviewed yesterday is but not Clark.

Go figure

Everyone else but not the Melbourne player. Does this mean Denham has veto rights at SEN on whose interviews get replayed or am I just paranoid this morning?

I disagree that you cant to a minor degree luxuriate in the playing of a known power forward out of the square. That doesnt mean he just stands there. it simply recognises he wont have the legs ( sts ) to run around at CHF all day . He is very able bodied. Many of his marks were actually quite static tussles near the square. Hes a brute.

He can be fit enough to play without being in prime nick to play the half forward role. . I see no reason , really why you cant switch Dawes and Clark for an interim. it still gives coaches an almighty headache of matching up. Take Mitch off and its far easier.

You get match fit by playing. At some point you have to roll dice. If , again IF, hes fit enough to take to the field. IF his foot is ok, then why wouldnt you.

How exactly does a defender run someone into the ground if they leave them ?? Great..Let them leave him alone. Its a nonsense.

No it's not, a lot of attack now comes from deep in defence. Scarlett and Fletcher are prime examples, yes I know they haven't been taking the key forwards but they have been set up to attack from deep in defence. The game is so quick and the ball moves rapidly from end to end that you can't afford the luxury of having someone who is not able to exert the required pressure.

Do you think Clark would stand there and watch an opponent run off him?

I've said that the only way to match condition is by playing as you've also pointed out but he won't be played until he has the fitness to get through a match, apart from the above it only opens him to further injury.

So lets go back to your point of when he gets into full training, that's the critical thing now. He needs to get some run in the legs, is there enough time to get enough miles before game one. I hope so but I'm sure he won't go in under done with the hope he might pluck one or two from the square.

I must confess i have a simpler view at times.

Mitch gets ball, ball through sticks.. No attack out of defense.

Yes, We'll wait

Everyone else but not the Melbourne player. Does this mean Denham has veto rights at SEN on whose interviews get replayed or am I just paranoid this morning?

Perhaps there was no interview beyond a comment from him on when he may return!

Your paranoia is understandable

OPTIMISM... POSITIVITY... FAITH... FINALS....DREAMING

Go DEES!

You've edited my quote Roost!

What's wrong with dreaming anyway? Sometimes dreams come true. In fact, someone once described dreams as memories of events that haven't happened yet. I'm happy to dream.

Get on board the optimism bus.

Go DEES!

I heard the interview and, as with most, you missed nothing if you didn't. The boys are fitter, which means they should be able to compete better and he looks forward to not being the sole marking target up forward, as Dawes and Pedersen will share the marking/goal kicking load. And he expects to play early in the season as his rehab has progressed according to plan with swimming and bike sessions. Should start running again very soon.

That's it.

Often with the short, relatively content-light* interviews, they don't bother putting up a podcast.

I heard it, and this was one of them.

*all SEN interviews are light on for content, but in relative terms, this was more so.

Often with the short, relatively content-light* interviews, they don't bother putting up a podcast.

I heard it, and this was one of them.

*all SEN interviews are light on for content, but in relative terms, this was more so.

some are not even "on", they are just "off" (especially venom)

Agree that would be nice to see, but I suppose that with our current surplus of defenders, there is also the possibility that Garland might be moved forward as a stopgap measure? I would be happy either way.

Personally i would rather see Fitzy than Garland standing in for Clark as he can also help out in the ruck (at 200cm). I don't like the idea of players who have been training with the backline group moved forward to cover for Clark (as we did with Garland and Rivers last year). We have much more depth at both ends this year and (touch wood) less injuries. If anybody is to move, I would rather see a considered long-term strategy as we did (successfully) last year in moving Watts from the forward structure to the backline.

Like McDonald to the backline after traing as a fwd?

Yeah, that was a fail...

From what I recall, Garland was recruited as a forward and Neeld was prompted to move him forward upon learning of that; so it's not really a part of the ground that is completely foreign to him.

This line about Neeld 'discovering' Garland was a forward i hear all the time. Neeld would have known that right from the start. I'll concede that he may not have known fellow Tasmanian Ray Biffen had also been a forward.

This line about Neeld 'discovering' Garland was a forward i hear all the time. Neeld would have known that right from the start. I'll concede that he may not have known fellow Tasmanian Ray Biffen had also been a forward.

Hadn't realised that I said he "discovered" Garland was a forward. Regardless of when Neeld was made aware of that fact, the thrust of my post remains he same.

Personally i would rather see Fitzy than Garland standing in for Clark as he can also help out in the ruck (at 200cm). I don't like the idea of players who have been training with the backline group moved forward to cover for Clark (as we did with Garland and Rivers last year). We have much more depth at both ends this year and (touch wood) less injuries. If anybody is to move, I would rather see a considered long-term strategy as we did (successfully) last year in moving Watts from the forward structure to the backline.

Agree. I have a feeling Fitzy will blossom this year. The penny dropped mid last year.

Fitzy has a lot of upside to him. He will demand a tall back men to man him up but Fitz is very quick for his size. If he can be fit he could be a mobile lead up target and take a small amount of ruck duties. I expect Fitz to play in the first half of the year.

This line about Neeld 'discovering' Garland was a forward i hear all the time. Neeld would have known that right from the start. I'll concede that he may not have known fellow Tasmanian Ray Biffen had also been a forward.

There was an article published on the MFC website last year that Neeld discovered it after poring through all the players' draft notes quite late in the piece, indicating that it was indeed a discovery.

There was an article published on the MFC website last year that Neeld discovered it after poring through all the players' draft notes quite late in the piece, indicating that it was indeed a discovery.

Agreed Nasher. Heard him discuss it in an interview as well.