While I'm happy for Fitzy to have played a good game, and I'm one of those who has not been a fan in the past, this is the quintessential Demonland thread. A player plays ONE good game and we need a thread showering him with praise as if he's the second coming of Gary Hardeman.

Let's wait and see him do it on a consistent basis before we all walk around with erections for the day.

You have more than one problem

Yes.

These threads are intriguing.

He's been in the system for seven years now and played on a second year key forward in Tom Boyd who got zero supply and was ineffective in the ruck and he also played on Cordy or Roughead, neither of whom are much chop.

Defensively, he did a good job. It was a solid game. But shouldn't we as supporters expect this from a bloke who's been on the list for 7 years? All he needed to do was compete hard and beat his man.

I'd like to see 15 more games like that before I get too excited. We've seen plenty of players over the years play a solid game here and there and plenty of terrible ones.

Fitzy is a limited player. He doesn't have great kicking skills nor decision making skills but he's tall, fast and agile.

I don't think it's worth getting excited about anything at this point. I'm just happy he was one of many who contributed positively to the side. We need a lot more of that a lot more of the time.

I guess you're going to wait for our 12th win before singing the song

Didn't know there was a graceful variety ...

that was the point

You have more than one problem

I have no idea what you mean by that.

c'mom wiseblood, you are like a woman who protesteth too much

i don't think posters are claiming he will be a second coming etc

we all know it was one game and he needs to kick on from here

just because you are having a bad hair day is no reason to attack your fellow posters

Haven't attacked anyone dc.

It's just the way this forum goes. A player who is nominally canned by most plays a good game means he gets a complimentary thread. Watts plays a bad game then he gets his own thread. We get rolled by the Hawks one week and people want Roos sacked, we win the next week and we're praising Jason Taylor and Roos is the messiah again.

I know we've been starved of success but there is no need to begin new threads based on one good game. Stick it in the discussion thread. Yes, I'm being pedantic, but we are either too carried away or too critical. Not enough posters actually stick in the middle these days.

Haven't attacked anyone dc.

It's just the way this forum goes. A player who is nominally canned by most plays a good game means he gets a complimentary thread. Watts plays a bad game then he gets his own thread. We get rolled by the Hawks one week and people want Roos sacked, we win the next week and we're praising Jason Taylor and Roos is the messiah again.

I know we've been starved of success but there is no need to begin new threads based on one good game. Stick it in the discussion thread. Yes, I'm being pedantic, but we are either too carried away or too critical. Not enough posters actually stick in the middle these days.

i thought in this case it was a good reason to start a thread

fitzy's game was unlike any he had played before and was worthy of special praise

whether it turns out to be his breakout game, time will tell of course

if you want to grouch there are better targets at the moment than fitzy

Edited May 27, 201510 yr by daisycutter

I guess you're going to wait for our 12th win before singing the song

Yes.

That's exactly what I'm saying.

i thought in this case it was a good reason to start a thread

fitzy's game was unlike any he had played before and was worthy of special praise

whether it turns out to be his breakout game, time will tell of course

if you want to grouch there are better targets at the moment than fitzy

Well put, DC! Nice to know at least one person on here got it.

Seems like some people have nothing better to do than tear down what little positivity we have!

Bump.

First solid AFL gam over a five year period last week. Gets his own 'appreciation thread'.

The next week has under 5 touches with a gimme goal in the square when the game was out of reach. Didn't contribute.

Not the only one of course.

How are we expected to improve as a side when so many are in the same boat.

And why on earth do players like this get an appreciation thread for one solid game of AFL football when they're a five + year player?

Because it's Melbourne we are talking about.

Deadwood still needs to go.

Edited May 30, 201510 yr by stevethemanjordan

Yep, Fitzy was totally shown up today. Out next week I reckon ..... and could be curtains for him.

Bump.

First solid AFL gam over a five year period last week. Gets his own 'appreciation thread'.

The next week has under 5 touches with a gimme goal in the square when the game was out of reach. Didn't contribute.

Not the only one of course.

How are we expected to improve as a side when so many are in the same boat.

And why on earth do players like this get an appreciation thread for one solid game of AFL football when they're a five + year player?

Because it's Melbourne we are talking about.

Deadwood still needs to go.

As you said, he wasn't our worst today (unfortunately).

How about a certain player who was apparently worth pick 7 last year?

Bump.

First solid AFL gam over a five year period last week. Gets his own 'appreciation thread'.

The next week has under 5 touches with a gimme goal in the square when the game was out of reach. Didn't contribute.

Not the only one of course.

How are we expected to improve as a side when so many are in the same boat.

And why on earth do players like this get an appreciation thread for one solid game of AFL football when they're a five + year player?

Because it's Melbourne we are talking about.

Deadwood still needs to go.

true, but last week he played well as a backman

so why switch him to the other end?

true, but last week he played well as a backman

so why switch him to the other end?

Because there was no match up..

Should have brought in Riley or Newton before the game.

Bad coaching once again some here said it all week and they still went the same way We lose games at selection there is a problem!

Edited May 30, 201510 yr by jackaub

Because there was no match up..

Should have brought in Riley or Newton before the game.

disagree with no match up. they had a distinct height advantage in the forward line

but i suppose where do you play jetta then? maybe they should have played him forward instead?

yes, i'd have had riley and newton before bail and m. jones

disagree with no match up. they had a distinct height advantage in the forward line

but i suppose where do you play jetta then? maybe they should have played him forward instead?

yes, i'd have had riley and newton before bail and m. jones

Dont play Jetta was an option

Because there was no match up..

Should have brought in Riley or Newton before the game.

Very true. On the one hand it's desirable to give fringe players about 6-8 games in a row to find out where they are at. On the other, when the match ups are wrong these guys are the first to be questioned. Add the fact that we have shallow depth and are desperate for wins, well......

I like Fitzy and think he has more upside to see. But at 200+cm and with a very particular skill set, it has to be about team balence against each opposition.

"From ugly duckling to a graceful swan"

and back again!