Tom McDonald?

[P-man 13,366]

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.

What does that have to do with how he performed on Petrie? It really was a very simple point. He didn't beat Petrie. That's it.

He's beaten some decent opponents, and yes he's promising in that respect. I've never said any different. I am just less dismissive of his lack of skills.

(Incidentally, I read very little into diplomatic comments from opposition)

[Adam The God 30,119]

The problem McDonald has is he needs to know his limitations. Too many times he tries to run around or take an opponent on too much. If its not that its trying to be too cute with his kicking.

But unfortunately we dont have the dashing half back flanker with sizzling skills to feed it off too. Haven't had one since Aaron Davey use to play there and set us up.

Spot on, DD. I yell this out to him every week. Know your limitations. Grimes and Terlich are the other two than need to realise they shouldn't try to bite off more than they can chew.

[DEE fence 5,002]

The only problem with our back six is we don't have the rebounder, like Nick or Harry, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Malceski or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritier_Lumumba, as soon as we have this type of bloke we'll be laughing. I reckon Tom is fantastic for his 1% efforts and run with ability, easily pick up a gig in any team, but we are never going to be Manchester United, where everyone has a great kick. I too get a twitch when he goes to kick, but it's his other talents that are why we should keep him. Pair him with the right rebounder and we'll have a defence as good as the Russians at Stalingrad (If Frawley stays as well).

I also think we need a Nick or Harry more than a midfielder or forward, the slow kicks coming out of our backline is what puts pressure on our midfield and forwards. I ache to see a few more flat hard passes that gives our attack time and rewards all the good work everyone is doing.

[beelzebub 23,313]

The only problem with our back six is we don't have the rebounder, like Nick or Harry, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Malceski or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritier_Lumumba, as soon as we have this type of bloke we'll be laughing. I reckon Tom is fantastic for his 1% efforts and run with ability, easily pick up a gig in any team, but we are never going to be Manchester United, where everyone has a great kick. I too get a twitch when he goes to kick, but it's his other talents that are why we should keep him. Pair him with the right rebounder and we'll have a defence as good as the Russians at Stalingrad (If Frawley stays as well).

I also think we need a Nick or Harry more than a midfielder or forward, the slow kicks coming out of our backline is what puts pressure on our midfield and forwards. I ache to see a few more flat hard passes that gives our attack time and rewards all the good work everyone is doing.

agree with much of this.

[The heart beats true 18,108]

A good side can't have 3 defenders that turn the ball over like Grimes, T Mac and Garland have the last few weeks.

T Mac is my least concern. He has size and time on his side.

Grimes is a genuine worry and Garland seems to have little intensity this year.

[monoccular 17,413]

The only problem with our back six is we don't have the rebounder, like Nick or Harry, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Malceski or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritier_Lumumba, as soon as we have this type of bloke we'll be laughing. I reckon Tom is fantastic for his 1% efforts and run with ability, easily pick up a gig in any team, but we are never going to be Manchester United, where everyone has a great kick. I too get a twitch when he goes to kick, but it's his other talents that are why we should keep him. Pair him with the right rebounder and we'll have a defence as good as the Russians at Stalingrad (If Frawley stays as well).

I also think we need a Nick or Harry more than a midfielder or forward, the slow kicks coming out of our backline is what puts pressure on our midfield and forwards. I ache to see a few more flat hard passes that gives our attack time and rewards all the good work everyone is doing.

Hopefully Jimmy T could develop to fill this rôle in time. Some have had Blease here, though he lacks something, probably related to intensity and / or concentration.

[beelzebub 23,313]

A good side can't have 3 defenders that turn the ball over like Grimes, T Mac and Garland have the last few weeks.

T Mac is my least concern. He has size and time on his side.

Grimes is a genuine worry and Garland seems to have little intensity this year.

they all concern me . Only varies by amount and what day. Garland has a bit of leeway as hes not 100% but as others rightly say how does that go to decision making as it's gone a tad backwards.

No point doing hard work only to have it constantly rammed back down your throat through turn overs.its senseless.

Edited June 25, 2014 by beelzebub

[DEE fence 5,002]

Hopefully Jimmy T could develop to fill this rôle in time. Some have had Blease here, though he lacks something, probably related to intensity and / or concentration.

Agree - in time, with the best will in the world I reckon he's 2 but realistically it's 3 years, before he is big enough and hard enough to take the hits. I haven't seen anything from Blease to suggest he could do this except for his run, and his training reports suggest he's immune to what Roos wants from him.

[nutbean 8,838]

they all concern me . Only varies by amount and what day. Garland has a bit of leeway as hes not 100% but as others rightly say how does that go to decision making as it's gone a tad backwards.

No point doing hard work only to have it constantly rammed back down your throat through turn overs.its senseless.

Interestingly though - we have butchered the ball and turned it over - but even though some have occurred in the backline - very few have hurt us.

Besides the Eagles game and to a lesser extent the North game I would suggest that our turnovers have stopped us winning games more than contributing to the opposition beating us if that makes sense.

Our defensive efforts have been really good in that once we lose the ball we close the play down and either force a ball up or win it back.

It was mentioned about Hawthorn by a few commentators that if they lose a clearance in the centre they dont care because they back themselves in to get it back off you through their defensive measures. This has happened a lot with our turnovers - I dont think we have necessarily turned it over much less than last year - I think we have been defensively good that we dont let it hurt us - hence the much improved "points against" part of our percentage.

In the end turnovers still mean we lose games and the fewer of them, the bigger positive impact it will have on the scoreboard.

[beelzebub 23,313]

Nut...its a fine line surely between losing games and them winning. In reality its two sides of the same coin, just depends which seats you watch from .

By coughing up the pill you lose momentum and the pressure on the opposition that such carry incurs. You just make a rod for your own back by stuffing things up. You wont win games ( agree in that sense ) if you do this continually., which by and large...is where we're at !! ne c'est pas ?

[nutbean 8,838]

Nut...its a fine line surely between losing games and them winning. In reality its two sides of the same coin, just depends which seats you watch from .

By coughing up the pill you lose momentum and the pressure on the opposition that such carry incurs. You just make a rod for your own back by stuffing things up. You wont win games ( agree in that sense ) if you do this continually., which by and large...is where we're at !! ne c'est pas ?

hence my last line - and the definite need for us not to cough the ball up.

I just found it interesting that I think we still have the problem almost as bad as last year of turning the ball over but it has been masked to an extent because we have been good at recovering from our mistakes and not getting carved up because of it.

The JKH dropped mark against Collingwood and the Bail almost flicking it back in when it was across the boundary line last week reminded me of last year where we turned it over through error and were made to pay big time.

[beelzebub 23,313]

Essentially Nut Id have to agree. It just makes me wonder. if we were able to spend less time fixing our f' ups and more time into our own fwd 50 this is when we'd start winning more and consistently.

[nutbean 8,838]

Essentially Nut Id have to agree. It just makes me wonder. if we were able to spend less time fixing our f' ups and more time into our own fwd 50 this is when we'd start winning more and consistently.

Essentially - be Hawthorn and don't turn the freakin pill over at all !!

[beelzebub 23,313]

Essentially - be Hawthorn and don't turn the freakin pill over at all !!

well....that was where id be looking to go also

[Barney Rubble 1,576]

T. McD. Didn't cost us the game against Norf.

There were about 7-8 others that didn't pull their weight that contributed to the ball coming in very quick.

1 week is a long time in footy.

Agains the bummers he alone decided to go inboard with 1 min left and gave the ball to viney then crossy to Salem.

End of story.

[TGR 1,367]

I'll buy the TMac shares.

Has a tank. Can keep the most dangerous multi-dimensional-mobile-tall quiet.

Without Frawley, with Dunn has held up a defence that has had heaps of I50s against it.

[Left Field 313]

TMac at a good club may not yet have debuted.

He is developing before our eyes rather than the VFL.

I'm with Rono. A definite buy.

[rpfc 28,249]

TMac at a good club may not yet have debuted.

He is developing before our eyes rather than the VFL.

I'm with Rono. A definite buy.

At another club that doesn't have so many I50s to deal with - he would be dominant - especially with a highly skilled HBF to handball to...

[beelzebub 23,313]

At another club that doesn't have so many I50s to deal with - he would be dominant - especially with a highly skilled HBF to handball to...

lets hope

[Slartibartfast 17,188]

I'm not over Tommy. I love him. I'm just hanging out for the contract extension.

[Jaded No More 68,862]

I'm not over Tommy. I love him. I'm just hanging out for the contract extension.

Agreed.

Was our best last night. He is great!

[What 18,810]

Hes battled brilliantly since losing the support of Chip down back after round 3

He and the rest of the back line still come under a lot of pressure as our midfield is still the worst in the league

They deserve credit for how well they stand up under the the avalanche of ball that opposition continue to send inside 50

Much like 2012 and 2013

[Bring-Back-Powell 14,758]

Given Frawley's gone, we may as well hand our licence back to the AFL if McDonald leaves the club.

[Ted Lasso 19,282]

Hyperthetically, what's Tommy Macs trade value?

if he decides he wants a trade, would a 21 year old quality key position prospect get us a first round pick?

[JackVineyForPresident 310]

Hyperthetically, what's Tommy Macs trade value?

if he decides he wants a trade, would a 21 year old quality key position prospect get us a first round pick?

To me he's not for sale.