My cat's breath smells like cat food.

On 5 July 2016 at 10:20 AM, Hell Bent said:

Heard from a Swans member Tom for Tom...no idea of his source though.

 

9 hours ago, AdamPleb said:

Every day of the week.

Only if he can play FB...

33 minutes ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

You are kidding right??? Dawes uncontested 20m grubber kick and you have the audacity to suggest Tom was in any way responsible for that turnover?? that is enough to show you have no understanding of football

Blatant throw? yes, but will one arm held and no great skill he was alway going to get pinned holding the ball. Tracc had the same thing happen to him later in the game he kicked it and turned it over as well, where is his crucifiction?

As Undeeterred said this is nothing more than confirmation bias. Go back through the game and start counting the number of spoils/marks/pressure acts he made to stop an adelaide score and suddenly he will look more valuable. 

Assuming for 5 seconds that your ludicrously flawed logic is correct and he did cause 5 goals i can guarantee that you can find more times he prevented a score and given adelaide's high accuracy odds on most of them would have been goals

Im not saying you dont have the right to be frustrated by his mistakes we all are. But if you had half the understanding of football as the rest of us you would know that right now even with all his mistakes he still prevents more scores than he causes. We need more! but Tom does far more than you give him credit for.

Thinking about this further, Why not play him as a wild card free wheeling forward?? Thoughts This asuming we can get some replacements Brown ( Coll) Hurley, Hibberd et al. Would like to see what an experiment like this might bring to the table. Happy to eat humble pie if this was proven in some ways an option for his football future at MFC!?

2 minutes ago, picket fence said:

Thinking about this further, Why not play him as a wild card free wheeling forward?? Thoughts This asuming we can get some replacements Brown ( Coll) Hurley, Hibberd et al. Would like to see what an experiment like this might bring to the table. Happy to eat humble pie if this was proven in some ways an option for his football future at MFC!?

Not a horrible idea, would be a right side better than Dawes. But he is still the only KPD we have and i think we are a year off getting a big trade target so for the time being we have little choice but to persist.

4 hours ago, Undeeterred said:

I agree - he makes mistakes. I also agree that his mistakes are frustrating, because a lot of the time they are really basic errors, and so stand out more.

And I'm not comparing Jones and McDonald - you must be able to see that. My point is that all players make mistakes it's one sided to just point out their errors (frustrating though they can be).

Equally, you can't ignore all the really excellent things McDonald does when making an assessment of how important he is for us.

I have said all along TMac has some excellent attributes (marking and spoiling in particular) but what stops him being an A grade defender is his appalling disposal and decision making. IMO it outweighs everything he does. On at least 4 occasions on the weekend his direct errors either cost goals or killed our transition out of defence. It's undeniable. Jones did none of that and his 'errors' that you speak of are under the most sever of pressure.

The modern game is all about contesting and then launching attack from defence. It's why we are desperate for Salem to come good, why we recruited Melksham, why Grimes can't get a game and why Jetta is so important. TMac kills us time after time. There will come a time when we can't afford to have him there.

13 hours ago, stevethemanjordan said:

It's strange to me that you don't see Nathan Brown or Eric Mackenzie as players who would not only immediately boost our defence, but also provide relief for Tom McDonald and allow his brother Oscar to develop in the VFL like he should be right at this very moment.

Both would be immediate upgrades to Frost and Oscar in our starting 22. There is absolutely no argument there.

You talk about 'upgrades' as though we need to target an A-grader in Hurley or we  leave the defence as is.

It's an extremely short-sighted perspective and shows a complete lack of understanding of how lists are built. 

How do you think we've built up our midfield over the last few years?

I'll say it again. There are key defenders out there aside from Hurley who would help us in ways that you clearly can't see.

 

 

You are so terribly condescending in your responses, Steve.  It's unbecoming.  I merely asked a question, there is no need to be a complete [censored] about it.

Eric Mackenzie and Nathan Brown, to me, are limited players who have already reached their ceiling in terms of what they can provide going forward.  They might provide small relief, true, but do they truly improve on what we have right now?  Are they any better than Garland and Dunn, who are languishing in the VFL?  They have experience, sure, but I don't see either player improving us.  They would play the same role than Dunn and Garland would fill, and clearly the FD aren't all that keen on it.  I could concede that, in the short term, they could give a chop out to O Mac, but then so could the guys we have on our list already.  Mackenzie has been surpassed at the minute by a kid with barely any games to his name in Tom Barrass.  That speaks volumes.

I took Hurley out of the equation above, not because I can't see the big picture, but because most just focus on him.  I thought I was fairly clear in my suggestion that, if we recruit another key backman, they obviously need to be at a higher level than OMac or Frost.  If the FD believe those two are ahead of Garland and Dunn, what is there to suggest that they would believe Brown or Mackenzie would be ahead of them as well?  Not much.

By the way, we've built up our midfield by recruiting players who improved on what we had.  Again, do Brown and Mackenzie represent that?  On what our FD has done this season, I'd suggest they wouldn't.

6 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

I have said all along TMac has some excellent attributes (marking and spoiling in particular) but what stops him being an A grade defender is his appalling disposal and decision making. IMO it outweighs everything he does. On at least 4 occasions on the weekend his direct errors either cost goals or killed our transition out of defence. It's undeniable. Jones did none of that and his 'errors' that you speak of are under the most sever of pressure.

The modern game is all about contesting and then launching attack from defence. It's why we are desperate for Salem to come good, why we recruited Melksham, why Grimes can't get a game and why Jetta is so important. TMac kills us time after time. There will come a time when we can't afford to have him there.

That little bit there is exactly why I cant understand the hate on Tom. Jetta spend the first half of his career being little more than a slow, small, turnover machine. Part of the reason he was rookied. Given time and development he has cleaned up his disposal and despite the occasional mistake he is now reliable coming out of defence. Why is everyone so quick to want to throw Tom away when he has more upside than Jetta ever had.

If, and only if, we can get another KPD and younger players like Frost and Omac can develop into more than what they are now, then we can start to entertain the idea of Tom being moved on. Right now we need to keep him at all costs and continue to work on him for what he is: A young defender that 17 other clubs would love to have.

As this team develops further (and, there are many, many positive signs to that effect) then our backline will get better and better....

T Mac is an important part of the future.

2 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

You are so terribly condescending in your responses, Steve.  It's unbecoming.  I merely asked a question, there is no need to be a complete [censored] about it.

Eric Mackenzie and Nathan Brown, to me, are limited players who have already reached their ceiling in terms of what they can provide going forward. They might provide small relief, true, but do they truly improve on what we have right now?  Are they any better than Garland and Dunn, who are languishing in the VFL?  They have experience, sure, but I don't see either player improving us.  They would play the same role than Dunn and Garland would fill, and clearly the FD aren't all that keen on it.  I could concede that, in the short term, they could give a chop out to O Mac, but then so could the guys we have on our list already.  Mackenzie has been surpassed at the minute by a kid with barely any games to his name in Tom Barrass.  That speaks volumes.

I took Hurley out of the equation above, not because I can't see the big picture, but because most just focus on him.  I thought I was fairly clear in my suggestion that, if we recruit another key backman, they obviously need to be at a higher level than OMac or Frost.  If the FD believe those two are ahead of Garland and Dunn, what is there to suggest that they would believe Brown or Mackenzie would be ahead of them as well?  Not much.

By the way, we've built up our midfield by recruiting players who improved on what we had.  Again, do Brown and Mackenzie represent that?  On what our FD has done this season, I'd suggest they wouldn't.

I think it's all those responses I had from you re: the Garland situation last year.. 

But you're right, on second viewing I could have changed the tone.

As for the second highlighted paragraph, I'm again baffled at your reasoning behind much of what you're saying. I question your understanding of list management and development and I'm certainly not trying to be condescending when I say that. It seems that for one, you are more one-eyed than I about individuals at our club and with that comes a bias when comparing our own players to players of opposition sides. The Garland situation is proof of that in my view. Something you just refused to see time and time again last year. And I think your second paragraph is further evidence to this 'one-eyed' view you seem to hold.

Fundamentally, we disagree on the value of both Nathan Brown and Eric Mackenzie. Why is this? How is it that you refused to point out problem players at your own club last year like Colin Garland, yet you are more than happy to state that Brown and Mackenzie are both 'limited' and have 'reached their ceiling in terms of what they can provide going forward'? It's completely emotional bias. 

Here's a picture to paint. Due to two problem players that we have at our club in Colin Garland and Lynden Dunn, we are playing a 9 game, overawed 20 year-old in Oscar McDonald and an athlete-turned footballer in Sam Frost who has 33 games to his name. It is completely circumstantial that these two are holding down key posts in our backline and if Garland and Dunn weren't problem players, both O-Mac and Frost would be developing at Casey. 

Nathan Brown and Eric Mackenzie have 122 and 132 AFL games to their names respectively. Nathan Brown is a stay at home-full back and was nearly awarded a Norm-Smith medal for his job on Nick Riewoldt in the 2010 Grand Final and since then has battled with injuries. At his best, he is defensively just as good as Tom McDonald. Eric Mackenzie was short-listed for the AA side in 2013 and 14 as well as finishing second and first in West Coast's BnF those years. He did his ACL last year and if you were aware of any of that, you'd have pointed it out as a reason as to why he hasn't regained his spot ahead of the youngster Tom Barrass just yet.

I have no idea what'll happen to Garland and Dunn at this stage but what I do know is that anyone within the AFL would have both Brown and Mackenzie over Garland Dunn. Bar some Melbourne supporters for obvious reasons.

 Why would having either one of Brown or Mackenzie help our list?

A) Because they're both far better pure defenders with the same amount of experience but with runs on the board and aside from not possessing the many problems that Garland and Dunn possess, neither of them would be undersized full-backs.

B) Because they'd provide so much more than either one of O-Mac and Frost and would allow those two to develop where they should be developing right now. At Casey. 

and 

C) They would simplify the role that T-Mac plays at present, would allow him to play only to his strengths and would help his football and confidence enormously.

 

We will be targeting a mature key defender. It's not that I think we need the both of them at our club, but I suggested those two as the kinds of players that would without any fraction of a doubt, help our list. Injury would be the only deterrent in both of their cases and that is obviously something that the club will have to decide. 

 

 

 

4 hours ago, praha said:

My cat's breath smells like cat food.

My dog wont eat meat.

I think it would be more value if tom was able to be the 2nd tall. if we recruited someone like a hurley which would be brilliant, i wouldn't want that to be at the expense of TMAC. I think TMAC would be amazing in tandem with someone like a hurley

There are a couple of decent tall defenders in the draft - though the best, MacReadie is probably GWS bound (academy).

Not sure on Tom - I respect his right to get himself the best deal he can, but not quite sending the right message for me. Perhaps he's seeing himself as the backline general and valuing himself accordingly - but I don't know that he's a smart enough footballer for that.

Could also be interesting in terms of how this plays out with Oscar, who in the longer term could be the better of the pair.

4 hours ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

That little bit there is exactly why I cant understand the hate on Tom. Jetta spend the first half of his career being little more than a slow, small, turnover machine. Part of the reason he was rookied. Given time and development he has cleaned up his disposal and despite the occasional mistake he is now reliable coming out of defence. Why is everyone so quick to want to throw Tom away when he has more upside than Jetta ever had.

If, and only if, we can get another KPD and younger players like Frost and Omac can develop into more than what they are now, then we can start to entertain the idea of Tom being moved on. Right now we need to keep him at all costs and continue to work on him for what he is: A young defender that 17 other clubs would love to have.

We are not. You are over reaching with that statement.

It's simply an acknowledgement that he at this point is a liability and extremely frustrating despite the some of the excellent stuff he does. And frustration with the fact the he tries to do too much when he is not capable of it. FFS he kicked the ball into the man on the mark twice on the weekend. I can see that he is trying to be a leader in that backline and taking the game on and I give him credits for that but when you make the same mistakes and keep taking the wrong options you become a liability.

1 hour ago, Biffen said:

My dog wont eat meat.

Why not?

 

 

(because we don't give him any........boom tish)

14 hours ago, binman said:

There is no way id trade tmac for mitchell and unless tmac wants out there is no way the dees wouls do that deal.

Of course you  need many good mids but we have at least 5 and can target a top 10 mid in the next draft. At present we have 1 good big who can play on say a tex. Tmac. If we got hurley that's two.

If we draft a key back we wait 2-3 years and omac will take that same time to bulk up enough to take the opposition monsters.

Of course he is frustrating wirh his disposal, though on that it is clear tge direction from roos is to attack and play on. But we are simply not inna position to lose another 100 game decent kpd

Yeah, I tend to agree, unless they are confident of landing Hurley!?

1 hour ago, Hell Bent said:

Yeah, I tend to agree, unless they are confident of landing Hurley!?

My point though is we need more than 1 big kpd and unless they can't agrre on the money the dees will keep tmac. 

This topic sums up why i stopped being a regular on demonland. Everyone is soooo critical. T-Mac is our best tall defender and one of the most promising young backs in the comp, but just because he isn't yet a bonafide A grade player group think on demonland is to 'trade the spud'.

 

I just wish the football department would hurry up and sign both brothers for at least 4 years so this thread could be closed

19 hours ago, Biffen said:

My dog wont eat meat.

Hey Biff, I think its time you asked your mate Reginald for a favour, get him to call past Tom and then Jesse's place at his earliest convenience to find out once and for all their intentions.

Not often a key backman racks up 31 touches.  Credit where its due.

13 minutes ago, Petraccattack said:

Not often a key backman racks up 31 touches.  Credit where its due.

They were good ones too.

Absolutely dominated

A critical re-signing.

We can ill afford another Frawley like departure.

Bloody impressive tonight. Loving the idea of a backline including Hibberd, Hurley, T-Mac, Salem, Melksham and Hunt.

12 hours ago, SaberFang said:

Bloody impressive tonight. Loving the idea of a backline including Hibberd, Hurley, T-Mac, Salem, Melksham and Hunt.

And Oscar. Gotta be someone rotating through off the bench.

I don't care what sort of mistakes he has made so far this season, Oscar will be every bit as good as his brother.