His kicking, turnovers and lack of pace are a liability... Stop trying to retain these types of players..

So obviously you disagree with trying to "develop" a player. Further consider that we have been appalling in this area for a number of years and this is the first footy department that knows anything about "improving". 13 games into the new regime - lets just flick him ?

And further consider that not a single coach but ALL coaches have this benchmark of 70 games plus before footballers start to really know their trade. Then add that big blokes take even longer.

McDonald has questionable footskills and is prone to poor decision making but there is also a lot to like about him. He finds the ball plenty and I am sure that the coaches will try to polish off his very rough edges.

I am willing to suggest that Roos and co do not share your views on his retention so standby to see a 2-3 year contract signed. If TMac does not resign I don't believe it will because the footy department dont want him.

Some of the comments in this thread are worrying.

Lack of pace? Not willing to help teammates? Am I watching the same player as these blokes? Even if they were issues, people do realise he’s key defender? On this theory we need to delist Jamar today.

His kicking and decision making could use a LOT of work but he’s been doing a reasonable defensive job each week and that’s his prime role. The other areas mentioned are bonuses and until someone can do the majority of them better than him (unlikely) he’s safe as houses.

We struggle to match up on the really tall forwards and Tommy is exposed when he has to play on a Petrie type.

He’s also 21…

Interesting to note that the Real Footy game review had Tom in the best players: Vince, McDonald, N Jones, Dawes, Watts, Dunn, Tyson.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-match-report/norths-five-goals-in-10-minutes-destroys-demons-20140622-zsi6t.html#ixzz35QyiB3U0

I don't necessarily agree he should be in there, but by the same token, I think the OP's (and a couple the other usual suspects) reaction is way over the top. Yes, he drove me crazy with his disposal by foot on the weekend, but apart from that, he played a far more serviceable game than a number of other more highly rated players (Howe, Garland, Frawley etc).

so he can kick ?

its a simple question Jaded... its a fundamental of our game

Yes he can kick. Sometimes he fluffs it, and he isn't a perfect user of the footy. But for a lock down defender, his kick is adequate.

The problem is that he's being asked to clear the ball out of defence and provide run. This should not be his role, and this comes down to us not having enough skills at half back to run the footy out.

Most FBs in the competition do not often drive the ball forward, it's simply not their role. That McDonald can take on his opponent and provide us with run because he is so fit and has such great endurance is just a bonus.

I'm sure his kicking can and will improve over time, but the thing he has that you can't teach, is a defensive nous. He is a brilliant defender!

I am glad we have progressed to the point where we can put lines through promising kids names.

Why don't you look at his age before you determine his fate?

This thread is a steaming bag of nonsense.

McDonald is a promising tall defender who needs refinement - he will be sticking around.

Im not striking Mac out

Not a line through but under with a very big ?

Im not striking Mac out

Not a line through but under with a very big ?

Negatives for Tom - can get lost in transition, can be outbodied, questionable footskills and decision making

Pluses for Tom - He can punch - he can mark. His big plus is his willingness for a key defender to get involved.

I see him as being similar to Ted Richards - the big difference is that Richards averages 12 touches a game and TMac - 16 touches.

The big ? of course is whether he can clean up his disposal and decision making - at 21 - I would definitely not put a cross through him.

Massive plus for McDonald - his engine. He is a unique athlete playing a role that athletes can play - a negating role.

For the record, Petrie kicked 1.5 and took 11 marks. The only thing that prevented a bag was his inability to kick straight.

Yes he can kick. Sometimes he fluffs it,(OFTEN HE MURDERS IT ) and he isn't a perfect user of the footy.(No argument, but it rather denies your stance he only sometimes fluffs it ) But for a lock down defender, his kick is adequate. NO. This is where I at least will take issue. So much is undone ( much good work I agree) with wayward and ineffectual kicking, many a time resulting in a turnover. That he needs to improve it only suggests that currently its inadequate

For the record, Petrie kicked 1.5 and took 11 marks. The only thing that prevented a bag was his inability to kick straight.

No - for the record it wasn't the only thing.

Yes he missed some.

But he did a few shots from on the 50 or just outside and some from the angles of 45 degree or better.

This has been addressed in other threads

Yup - some teams are missing easy shots against us but there was an article in the age last week that we are number one in the comp for not giving up goals within 25 metres.

Roos has said a few times that we are making teams take shots from difficult positions - we are rarely giving up the corridor close.

Edited June 23, 201411 yr by nutbean

Massive plus for McDonald - his engine. He is a unique athlete playing a role that athletes can play - a negating role.

This without doubt...the upside. Now to rid him of his downside and we have a very good defender, not a conflicted one.

No - for the record it wasn't the only thing.

Yes he missed some.

But he did a few shots from on the 50 or just outside and some from the angles of 45 degree or better.

This has been addressed in other threads

Yup - some teams are missing easy shots against us but there was an article in the age last week that we are number one in the comp for not giving up goals within 25 metres.

Roos has said a few times that we are making teams take shots from difficult positions - we are rarely giving up the corridor close.

Granted, but it is a clear overstatement to say that T Mac "beat" Petrie. That's the point I was making.

Some posters might be comfortable in placing ALL their stock in McDonald and shout down anyone who dares questions it, like the OP has done here. At this stage I'm not comfortable. His horrible skills and decison making are not improving. They cost turnovers, momentum, and effectually, goals.

Not putting a line through him by any means because in the lockdown role he has credits in the bank. I want to see him improve the other elements in his game more than anyone. But I'd also like to see another key defender being blooded.

Granted, but it is a clear overstatement to say that T Mac "beat" Petrie. That's the point I was making.

No - Petrie clearly beat him.

I wouldnt have liked to be a defender the way the ball was coming in yesterday ( far too easily) but at the end of the day - it doesn't matter - I thought Petrie beat him.

For the record, Petrie kicked 1.5 and took 11 marks. The only thing that prevented a bag was his inability to kick straight.

So by that logic, Petrie should be sacked because he can't kick .....same as McDonald???

So by that logic, Petrie should be sacked because he can't kick .....same as McDonald???

umm Drew has over 300 goals...he had "yips sorta day" ( lucky us )

Tom likes to play inadverdant kick to kick with supporter, struggles to kick more than 20 m accurately under game pressure, is a fantastic athlete and back man otherwise

Picture......an Apple........and an Orange...actually....a Pear

Spangher is better player ATM than Tom Mac and he can't get a regular game at Hawks and probably goes when Gibson comes back.

In fairness to Tom Mac, he is surrounded by butchers down in that back line. Imagine how much better he would be if he could offload to Birchall, Burgoyne, Hodge etc rather than Grimes, Howe, McKenzie etc.

This thread is the kind of laugh out loud funny I needed after a hard day at work. I know it wasn't intended anyway but thanks nonetheless to those that contributed to this comedy.

umm Drew has over 300 goals...he had "yips sorta day" ( lucky us )

Tom likes to play inadverdant kick to kick with supporter, struggles to kick more than 20 m accurately under game pressure, is a fantastic athlete and back man otherwise

Picture......an Apple........and an Orange...actually....a Pear

I know......Was trying to be funny..........I guess it didn't work

Tom is a legitimate prospect. I am happy to put up with some poor kicks and decisions while he grows as a footballer. I think he is worth investing in.

I know......Was trying to be funny..........I guess it didn't work

went to through to the keeper....my bad ...lol

Anyone know if Tom and possibly a couple of the other shankers in the team are getting any specific coaching at training to address their obvious deficiencies.

Question - why do key position forwards and rucks get afforded plenty of time, but key position defenders don't?

Yes he can kick. Sometimes he fluffs it, and he isn't a perfect user of the footy. But for a lock down defender, his kick is adequate.

The problem is that he's being asked to clear the ball out of defence and provide run. This should not be his role, and this comes down to us not having enough skills at half back to run the footy out.

Most FBs in the competition do not often drive the ball forward, it's simply not their role. That McDonald can take on his opponent and provide us with run because he is so fit and has such great endurance is just a bonus.

I'm sure his kicking can and will improve over time, but the thing he has that you can't teach, is a defensive nous. He is a brilliant defender!

No, his kicking even for a lockdown defender isn't good enough.

You don't need to try to argue he can kick to win this argument though. If we had proper rebounding half-flankers we wouldn't be relying on McDonald to rebound so much. If we didn't concede so many inside 50s, he wouldn't be being asked to dispose of the ball so much.

His first job is to stop forwards, which he does, and does well. His second job is to provide drive out of defence, which he does, and does really well for a full-back in every way except for his disposal, which is horrendous.

Kicking aside though, he's doing everything you could ask of a 21-year old, 50-game key defender.

For the record, Petrie kicked 1.5 and took 11 marks. The only thing that prevented a bag was his inability to kick straight.

Ease up. No one would have stopped Petrie yesterday if he'd kicked straight. The ball was given to him on a string.

Ease up. No one would have stopped Petrie yesterday if he'd kicked straight. The ball was given to him on a string.

Once again, it was a simple counter point to the comments pointing to Petrie's one goal as evidence that T Mac beat him.

Once again, it was a simple counter point to the comments pointing to Petrie's one goal as evidence that T Mac beat him.

Petrie actually acknowledged Tom on Grandstand as a really promising up and coming young defender.

Maybe a forward who's been in the game for over ten years is qualified to make such statements compared to the rest of us guru's.

Like t Mac - we need some quality ball users down back to support him...

I'd lock t Mac for 3-5 yrs