Tom McDonald (and Oscar) SIGNS.

[jumbo returns 6,741]

11 hours ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Why is it taking so long for key blokes like McDonald, Watts, Jetta and Kent to re-sign with the club. Or why is it taking so long for us to re-sign them if they want to stay??

The club's future has never been so exciting with some of the amazing talent under the age of 21 we have.

Its not like 2014 anymore when we were a 4 win side and blokes like Frawley couldn't wait to get out of the joint.

I'm probably being impatient but it's annoying watching up and coming teams like the Dogs and Saints re-signing absolutely all of their talent.

Because their TOP priority is the signature of #1.

[Demon Disciple 12,315]

29 minutes ago, KrazyJay said:

Why even risk it on a day like today? Up the line all day long in the p155ing down rain

Neither his decision-making or disposal has improved in his entire time at the club.

There is only so much a coaching group can help improve/develop, but if you are lacking at these natural fundamentals so badly, you are never going to become even a good footy player.

Edited June 19, 2016 by Demon Disciple

[jnrmac 20,207]

2 hours ago, loges said:

Why, it went straight to him and he dropped it

Apalling decision from a senior player. OMac was under a lot of pressure. Wouldn't have thought it needed explaining.

[beelzebub 23,388]

4 hours ago, ProDee said:

No mate.  He is never an "outstanding" kick.  He doesn't have the technique to ever be outstanding. 

But yes, he can hit targets on occasions when given time to execute. 

Reality is players seldom get 'that' much time. 

Often his decisions are "odd" and resultant kick ineffective.

Needs someone more capable and experienced overseeing him out there. 

If he tools within ability he can be an ok #2 in defense. Currently a less than joyful #1.

His paypacket should reflect what he CAN do not what he thinks he can.

The brain fades haven't dissipated overly noticeably.

Even after all this time. 

[loges 6,767]

1 hour ago, jnrmac said:

Apalling decision from a senior player. OMac was under a lot of pressure. Wouldn't have thought it needed explaining.

You need to watch it again, unless he was under pressure from the rain

[dazzledavey36 55,473]

9 minutes ago, loges said:

You need to watch it again, unless he was under pressure from the rain

He had an opponent 10m away from him. Not Omac fault at all. Comes back to dumb senior leaders like Tom who continue to make basic simple errors.

Wet and rainy day you forget about switching and playing fancy. Make the simple decision and kick long down the line.

That is obviously too hard for Tom to understand. That error was the turning point of the game. Felt we were edging close until old simpleton cost us a goal.

And people had the nerve to berate me when i said during the pre season that until Tom keeps it simple he will cost us crucial goals and during games.

Edited June 19, 2016 by dazzledavey36

[picket fence 17,752]

Because, He hasn't got it and never will have!

[BAMF 4,414]

17 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

He had an opponent 10m away from him. Not Omac fault at all. Comes back to dumb senior leaders like Tom who continue to make basic simple errors.

Wet and rainy day you forget about switching and playing fancy. Make the simple decision and kick long down the line.

That is obviously too hard for Tom to understand. That error was the turning point of the game. Felt we were edging close until old simpleton cost us a goal.

And people had the nerve to berate me when i said during the pre season that until Tom keeps it simple he will cost us crucial goals and during games.

I dont think I was watching the same incident.

Here it is at 3:15 mark. http://www.afl.com.au/video/2016-06-19/highlights-sydney-swans-v-melbourne

Rohan was about 15 - 17meters away and Omac dropped a complete sitter. Wet or not. That was Omacs fault. 

[KysaiahMessiah 725]

I still think its McDonalds fault....

[dazzledavey36 55,473]

14 minutes ago, Night Crawler said:

I dont think I was watching the same incident.

Here it is at 3:15 mark. http://www.afl.com.au/video/2016-06-19/highlights-sydney-swans-v-melbourne

Rohan was about 15 - 17meters away and Omac dropped a complete sitter. Wet or not. That was Omacs fault. 

No it was a poor decision by Tom. Why on earth would you switch in horrific conditions like that is mind boggling. Play to the percentage and kick it down the line long.

 

[BAMF 4,414]

7 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

No it was a poor decision by Tom. Why on earth would you switch in horrific conditions like that is mind boggling. Play to the percentage and kick it down the line long.

 

Totally disagree.

It was a clean switch.

It was the right option. His brother dropped a basic chest mark.

[deelighted3 39]

Was at the game, happened right in front of where all us dees fans were. Shocking decision. That's what it comes down too. There was no one further afield out that side anyway. He's so overrated it's not funny. Whatever slight momentum we were building was blown by this bloke getting ambition mixed with ability. Keeps costing us, and will continue to, week after week. 

[dazzledavey36 55,473]

1 hour ago, Night Crawler said:

Totally disagree.

It was a clean switch.

It was the right option. His brother dropped a basic chest mark.

There is no such thing as 'clean Switch' in wet weather footy. 

Again it what was a poor option by Tom because there was no one up field for Oscar even if he did take the mark. Explain where would the next option for Oscar be?

Seriously unbelievable how people think that a switch across goal in horrific conditions is deemed a right option when there was no one even on that side for Oscar.

Fmd..

[BAMF 4,414]

Tom looks up the field thinks about it and executes the switch. His pass is good except the player he passes it to drops a complete sitter. If he had marked it, he would have had Jetta as a spare man running past.

I can't see what is up the field as I wasn't there but he would have been at CHB with the ball in hand. It's hardly a bad spot to be in.

You can disagree with me. I'm not going to change my mind unless we get another angle of vision. It was a terrible effort  by Omac.

Do you have to be such a jerk about someone disagreeing with you? We both clearly love the club. We are discussing a minor detail with a difference of opinion. Yet you attack the poster.

This isn't the main board on bigfooty. 

[Watts the matter 1,235]

2 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

There is no such thing as 'clean Switch' in wet weather footy. 

Again it what was a poor option by Tom because there was no one up field for Oscar even if he did take the mark. Explain where would the next option for Oscar be?

Seriously unbelievable how people think that a switch across goal in horrific conditions is deemed a right option when there was no one even on that side for Oscar.

Fmd..

Considering everytime we kicked it up the line they had an extra player and it came straight back, I would say the decision is fine. The execution was also fine. His brother dropping a sitter was the issue. 

[loges 6,767]

11 hours ago, Night Crawler said:

I dont think I was watching the same incident.

Here it is at 3:15 mark. http://www.afl.com.au/video/2016-06-19/highlights-sydney-swans-v-melbourne

Rohan was about 15 - 17meters away and Omac dropped a complete sitter. Wet or not. That was Omacs fault. 

Thank You

[Wiseblood 24,637]

Just now, dazzledavey36 said:

There is no such thing as 'clean Switch' in wet weather footy. 

Again it what was a poor option by Tom because there was no one up field for Oscar even if he did take the mark. Explain where would the next option for Oscar be?

Seriously unbelievable how people think that a switch across goal in horrific conditions is deemed a right option when there was no one even on that side for Oscar.

Fmd..

The switch wasn't exactly a great option, I'll give you that, but OMac made a meal of the chest mark though.  Both McDonald boys can take the blame on that one.

[Demons11 7,061]

16 hours ago, Optimus D said:

Why would any opposition club pay  tmac big dollars when he can consistently give them 2+ goals in turnovers each week. The quintessential 19th player.

Because he stops 6 goals a week 

[jnrmac 20,207]

12 hours ago, loges said:

You need to watch it again, unless he was under pressure from the rain

A wet day in front of goals? Yeah that's pressure of itself let alone someone that doesn't have a huge amount of confidence.

[stuie 7,374]

50 minutes ago, Demons11 said:

Because he stops 6 goals a week 

Stops about half as many as he creates then....

 

Edited June 19, 2016 by stuie

[DistrACTION Jackson 9,635]

15 hours ago, KrazyJay said:

Why even risk it on a day like today? Up the line all day long in the p155ing down rain

100% agree. On a day like that you just have to keep sending it forward at all costs. There is absolutely zero point doing switches in the pouring rain.

[Skin Deeamond 339]

13 hours ago, loges said:

You need to watch it again, unless he was under pressure from the rain

The pressure comes from the facts that 1. the ball was kicked across the face of goal in the forward line of the opposition, 2. It was in wet, slippery conditions when it is hard to take a mark, 3. It was unexpected by O Mac because there were better options such as a long kick out of their fifty, 4. There were opposition players within a reasonably close vicinity. Kicks across the face of goal, close in to goal are highly risky in the best conditions and often result in turnovers and opposition goals. It was a pivotal moment in the game. At that stage goals had been extremely hard to come by and we were in with a chance. To give one away through dumb play was deflating to the whole team who had been trying so hard in terrible conditions.

Edited June 19, 2016 by Skin D
More

[The Reverend 1,736]

Why is it that Demonland seems to insist on having a "whipping  boy" every year? Last year it was Watts and before that we've had a succession of easy targets that give the keyboard heroes on here the opportunity to stick the boots in. Yeah, everyone's entitled to their opinion on here but sometimes it gets ridiculous. If anybody thinks TMac cost us the game yesterday they're kidding themselves. There were plenty of inept performances out there. He wasn't Robinson Crusoe!

[JV7 2,368]

11 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

There is no such thing as 'clean Switch' in wet weather footy. 

Again it what was a poor option by Tom because there was no one up field for Oscar even if he did take the mark. Explain where would the next option for Oscar be?

Seriously unbelievable how people think that a switch across goal in horrific conditions is deemed a right option when there was no one even on that side for Oscar.

Fmd..

I do not for one minute think the decision to switch by TMac was a good one but he executed the option correctly & was let down by Omac. Regardless wether TMac's decision was right or wrong, Omac dropped a simple chest mark which a professional footballer should mark rain, hail or shine & it cost us the goal. It was OMACs dropped mark which cost the goal not Tmacs decision to switch

 

[mo64 5,881]

14 minutes ago, The Reverend said:

Why is it that Demonland seems to insist on having a "whipping  boy" every year? Last year it was Watts and before that we've had a succession of easy targets that give the keyboard heroes on here the opportunity to stick the boots in. Yeah, everyone's entitled to their opinion on here but sometimes it gets ridiculous. If anybody thinks TMac cost us the game yesterday they're kidding themselves. There were plenty of inept performances out there. He wasn't Robinson Crusoe!

It's pretty simple. From the outside, it looks like he's holding out for a big payday, hence his performances come under greater scruitiny. Frawley and Howe received the same scrutiny.

If his performances in the past 12 months warranted a big contract, then everyone would shut up. Sadly they haven't.