Colin Garland

[dee-luded 2,959]

Have you looked at our record over the past 8 years? Identifying flaws in players is part and parcel of supporting a poorly performed team, and questions need to be asked of the players that have been there during that period.

Gawn is a poor example, because he showed something before constantly battling injuries.

Would you prefer that we sit on our hands list wise, and hope that all the average performers improve?

I think more-so the culture the players try to grow into, & the coaching staff was the issue... hopefully past tense. but we need to get to point of trust in the club, that it can develop players into hard headed warriors who will battle & win.

[dee-luded 2,959]

I originally voted that I wanted Garland to stay. Great clubman and a good player but personally I think he is mentally exhausted and needs a fresh start.

I agree d jack, he appears stale, & tired.. needs a fresh environment to reignite his passions at a club on the winning side of development.

[dpositive 1,838]

Looking at yesterdays game. on top of the seasons results but more importantly the standard of other teams in the competition we are obviously lacking.

I would say we have been lacking for many years.

Melbourne players lack intensity.

I have asked wether we are training at a greater intensity for the last couple of years and keep getting no replies.

There are some of the newer players who now seem to understand that intensity and display it.

How our players as a group can be being paid the same as any other group is what amazes me most.

We do not seem to have many players who would be worth anything on the open market so lets test it.

In saying that Watts is still a class act and would be valuable in any team but he does play without intensity

I would be paying players on performance and expecting some big improvements to justify the payments.

Hogan, Brayshaw, Jones, Watts are probably the only players of real value in the side.

Garlett good but inconsistent but shouldnt be expected to win every game every week worthy

Gawn, Viney, Stretch, McDonald, Salem, Pedersen are in the next category of emerging towards the top.

Cross, is excellent value as alluded to

Frost Petracca Harmes could be

Dawes and Howe the biggest disappointments.

Garland, disappointing

Jamar, past it perhaps

Toump still well short but could still develop

Will have to go get a list coz frankly many are so disappointing I cant recall where I would place them but hope we arent paying them the same as the worst paid in any other club

I would like to know the real salaries of players coz I reckon many Melbourne players are taking their salary under false pretenses.

When players are able to take their wages and dont or cant chase, dont or cant shepherd when they give off a handpass, dont play with intensity every second they are on the ground, they are fooling themselves.

This team can do better.

The coaches must understand the intensity that is required and should be demanding it at practice and certainly for every second of game time

[rpfc 29,030]

What Roos and co. do with Garland is of little interest to me; if he stays on a short contract or leaves for a bit of security - I just can't really build up the desire for much emotion.

I want to get a couple of midfielders and I want Jones and Vince to get back to playing good footy. When Gawn re-signed, that was the last contract we HAD to keep. The rest are up to the whims of the Footy Dept and what they see in the ND, or in Trade Week, or in DFA, or in NEAFL et al.

I have got my 'thanks for the effort in tough times' post all ready to go - doesn't bother me when I copy and paste that bad boy.

[poita 3,945]

There is a big gap between Garland's best and worst, probably too big for someone of his experience. He was utterly woeful defensively and offensively on the weekend, but has been far better than that for most of the year. Others have already disagreed, but I think he will finish in or or around top 10 in the B&F this year.

At his best Garland can play on any forward from Franklin to Rioli, and has done so successfully in the past. That type of player in good form is virtually irreplaceable. Talk of Frost or Lumumba being that player is frankly laughable. One is completely unproven at AFL level, and the other is on the fast track to football oblivion.

Garland is not a leader, so you wouldn't break the bank to keep him, but I would be bitterly disappointed if he left and we got little or nothing in return.

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

What Roos and co. do with Garland is of little interest to me; if he stays on a short contract or leaves for a bit of security - I just can't really build up the desire for much emotion.

I want to get a couple of midfielders and I want Jones and Vince to get back to playing good footy. When Gawn re-signed, that was the last contract we HAD to keep. The rest are up to the whims of the Footy Dept and what they see in the ND, or in Trade Week, or in DFA, or in NEAFL et al.

I have got my 'thanks for the effort in tough times' post all ready to go - doesn't bother me when I copy and paste that bad boy.

Does that mean performances like the weekend's are of little interest to you also?

Do you not see any correlation between consistently under-performing senior players (ie Garland), and our inability as a team to perform for an entire match?

I think it's fairly obvious that a significant part of why we still to this day are having these howlers of games is because of this problematic and virus-like group of players.

Frankly, I can't understand why you're so indifferent.

It's a major concern for me.

[Coq au vin 755]

I agree d jack, he appears stale, & tired.. needs a fresh environment to reignite his passions at a club on the winning side of development.

He's looked sad and tired for the past 3 years at least. I don't think he's enjoying his footy just like several other MFC players. At least I think Garland cares. Which is more than can be said for many others.

[dee-tox 4,835]

Roos mentioned in his press conference that Garland was injured but kept playing because the sub was already activated.

[Deeoldfart 8,201]

Let him go and hope for reasonable compensation I say. A move may well rejuvenate his career and revitalize our list. Both require a huge lift in performance.

[Wiseblood 24,637]

*sigh*

I don't even know what to think anymore. I'm exhausted thinking about the off season, all the holes we need to fill and how we are going to attract anyone the club.

I still think the club will re-sign him and let Howe go but most are probably right when they say it makes little difference if he stays or goes.

[jumbo returns 6,745]

*sigh*

I don't even know what to think anymore. I'm exhausted thinking about the off season, all the holes we need to fill and how we are going to attract anyone the club.

I still think the club will re-sign him and let Howe go but most are probably right when they say it makes little difference if he stays or goes.

Basically, we're [censored].

My censored word begins with an f and finishes with a d.....no need to buy a vowel.

[Wiseblood 24,637]

Basically, we're [censored].

Pretty much.

I am totally worn out with this football club though. Couldn't even muster any sort of annoyance at the game on the weekend, just acceptance that this is the way we are. I've tried to defend the club, the players and the decisions being made but Sunday was almost it for me. Won't go, listen or watch our last two games. I don't have the energy.

The club can do what they like with Garland and the rest. Doesn't seem like it makes much difference to me. I just feel sorry for those guys.

[jumbo returns 6,745]

I went with a couple of mates (Blues' supporters) and after a few beers, we played 'who to trade, who to delist, who to keep' as you do....

Who to keep from both parties? Hogan and Cripps....but, we were all terrified of (imminent) offers from Freo for both boys.

[DeeSpencer 26,682]

3rd round picks in this draft apparently are barely worth taking. 2nd rd pick for Garland like Sylvia, sure thing. I'd do that.

So I'd sign him up for a 2 year deal on decent money (league average is 340k so at least more than that) rather than see him walk, but if we are the under bidders and he goes on 3 year big money deal that fetches us a 2nd round pick I can live with that.

I'll be annoyed if we let him go and don't get the good return.

Bit unfair on Col but the club is more important.

[titan_uranus 25,255]

Understatement of the year.

Not only have you waffled on... and on... and on about him you've gone and started a thread just so you can repeat yourself. Again.

We get it mate, you don't rate him and you've got time on your hands to write an essay to rival the Gettysburg Address to let us know.

Garland isn't the problem.

I haven't read the whole thread, but Garland is wholly part of the problem (though clearly not 'the' problem on his own).

[dazzledavey36 56,345]

3rd round picks in this draft apparently are barely worth taking. 2nd rd pick for Garland like Sylvia, sure thing. I'd do that.

So I'd sign him up for a 2 year deal on decent money (league average is 340k so at least more than that) rather than see him walk, but if we are the under bidders and he goes on 3 year big money deal that fetches us a 2nd round pick I can live with that.

I'll be annoyed if we let him go and don't get the good return.

Bit unfair on Col but the club is more important.

No offence but thank [censored] your not in charge of a list management.

[spirit of norm smith 16,679]

Poor attitude. Shellshocked. Move him on.

[Guest]

My moniker on Land is a tribute of sorts to Col Garland.
I do believe though his time is up. He is one of those blokes I have mentioned before who looks like he needs to apologize for even getting on the field and one of those poor suckers the club wheels out like naughty schoolboys to promise that 'we will never play like that again'.
As said before, a delisting of ten fringe players will be a faux clean out. We need to make call on players who are first 22 at our club but wouldn't get a sniff elsewhere (i.e. Colin Sylvia).

[whatwhat say what 23,863]

no way is yr moniker a tribute to garland.

[Guest]

no way is yr moniker a tribute to garland.

Ah, that's where you are wrong Andrew.

It's a bit of a mix up. Garland's first nickname when he came to the Dees was Humphrey (as in Humphrey B. Bear in that he didn't speak).

One of TISM's vocalists is Humphrey B. Flaubert (a tribute to Gustav Flaubert and the aforementioned children's entertainer).

[whatwhat say what 23,863]

too cryptic by far.

i miss tism.

[Guest]

too cryptic by far.

i miss tism.

There needs to be one more 'reunion' gig.

[SaberFang 7,151]

So if the Lions get pick 2 for Leuenberger, do we get band 2 compo for Garland (pick 20)?

[Demon Disciple 12,537]

So if the Lions get pick 2 for Leuenberger, do we get band 2 compo for Garland (pick 20)?

Ha, we should get pick 1 if that's the case. At least Garlo can get on the field and stay on the field for longer than 2 seconds.

[Dr. Mubutu 867]

There needs to be one more 'reunion' gig.

There have already been hundreds too many.