12 minutes ago, stuie said:

Yeah I get that, and my point is we hammer Watts for his lack of intensity, yet Garland continually goes under the radar for the same thing.

 

But Garland is playing as well as he can in my opinion, that is the difference

wattsy isn't yet. Hopefully with this bunch of hungry kids we have recruited in the last 2 drafts will kick him into gear. 

2 hours ago, Fifty-5 said:

7. Colin Garland - 218

You must be watching different games from the MFC football department.

Well if he was selected for his recent on field performances than yes I must be. 

If he was selected because he gets to training early to help set up the witches hats than no. He might be very active behind the scenes, if so that's great but I'm not buying he was selected by his onfield efforts.

Lets look at the senior players in the side....

Jones - Captain 

Vince - LG

Watts - No comment

Grimes - Had captaincy stripped from him after he clung on to it thinking it guaranteed him again. I'm going early, he won't be here next year.

Dawes - I like the way he goes about it but struggling with injury and at times struggled physically on the field. Didn't see why he was couldn't still be part of the group. Has a terrific attitude, hope he ends up at Casey with Crossy as an player/assistant coach.

The Prince - MIA in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Trengove - Has enough on his plate. 

Dunn - Would love to know what happened there. 

Pedo - Year by year proposition, would rather he concentrates on his game. 

Garlett - Not sure if it's his thing. 

M.Jones, Terlich, Spencer ??

The rest of the list is 23 years of age or younger. We don't have a lot to choose from, which is disappointing. Compare our senior players to those at other clubs, we're miles off some clubs. Even those that have recently departed like Howe , Frawley didn't bring much to the table. What we do have is some great young leaders coming through. 

1 hour ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

Well if he was selected for his recent on field performances than yes I must be. 

 

You're fantastic at posting quantity over quality BA.

Garland's in the LG.  The players and coaching staff hold him in high regard, as do most supporters as well.  You can post paragraph after paragraph about, but it doesn't make a lick of difference.

Here's to another good year for Col.

1 hour ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

Grimes - Had captaincy stripped from him after he clung on to it thinking it guaranteed him again.

I'm not a big Grimes fan, but this is a ludicrous comment.

Just one time try and look at things objectively and without intermixing your opinions with facts hoping people won't notice.

 

Just now, stuie said:

I'm not a big Grimes fan, but this is a ludicrous comment.

Just one time try and look at things objectively and without intermixing your opinions with facts hoping people won't notice.

 

Fat chance of that happening Stuie.  We could have a win where Grimes dominates and he'll still find fault with something like the colour of his football boots or how he was too intense in the huddle at quarter time.

Just now, Wiseblood said:

Fat chance of that happening Stuie.  We could have a win where Grimes dominates and he'll still find fault with something like the colour of his football boots or how he was too intense in the huddle at quarter time.

Or he'd just attack Watts instead...

 

Tom Mc Donald ????? 

Seriously????

Just now, picket fence said:

Tom Mc Donald ????? 

Seriously????

It would have been Toumpas if he had stayed, so McDonald is the next best thing...

39 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

You're fantastic at posting quantity over quality BA.

Garland's in the LG.  The players and coaching staff hold him in high regard, as do most supporters as well.  You can post paragraph after paragraph about, but it doesn't make a lick of difference.

Here's to another good year for Col.

Quality....coming from Captain Obvious himself. As I said earlier in the day you constantly roll out the "I'm happy to back the coaching staff" and hide behind that. Do you actually ever have you own opinion on anything or do you just go with the "company line" in a bid to rack up some cheap likes. Please don't answer, it's a rhetorical question. Some of your posts regarding Garland (there are numerous others throughout other threads) highlight the fact you have a limited and simplistic understanding of the game, then there's the arguments you get into with myself and other posters, you often back yourself into a corner or find yourself stumped when a question is asked that may require the slightest bit of technical knowledge on the game, that's when you either don't answer and move on to someone else or dance around the question asked in your feeble response. 

Garland will no doubt play, because he's playing well and currently in great form or he's all we've got at the moment until some of the younger players come through. Either way we need every player playing well this year as we don't quite have the depth yet that some believe we do. If he does play well what will that make it, 2 good seasons out of the last 5 or 6....

 

38 minutes ago, stuie said:

I'm not a big Grimes fan, but this is a ludicrous comment.

Just one time try and look at things objectively and without intermixing your opinions with facts hoping people won't notice.

 

Stu, if he played round 1 last year and wasn't dropped another 2-3 times throughout the year I might be able to agree with you, but if you look at the timeline of events it's obvious what happened. In hindsight he should of stepped down when Trenners did. 

30 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

It would have been Toumpas if he had stayed, so McDonald is the next best thing...

Have you even read my posts in the McDonald thread, obviously not but knock yourself out....again.

2 minutes ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

Stu, if he played round 1 last year and wasn't dropped another 2-3 times throughout the year I might be able to agree with you, but if you look at the timeline of events it's obvious what happened. In hindsight he should of stepped down when Trenners did. 

I'm purely talking about you saying: "Had captaincy stripped from him after he clung on to it thinking it guaranteed him again."

That is not anywhere near anything we know about the character of Jack Grimes.

 

16 minutes ago, stuie said:

I'm purely talking about you saying: "Had captaincy stripped from him after he clung on to it thinking it guaranteed him again."

That is not anywhere near anything we know about the character of Jack Grimes.

 

We know how he plays though....Average at best...ever since that idiot gave him the 31 jumper

 

53 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

It would have been Toumpas if he had stayed, so McDonald is the next best thing...

I just spat out a mouthful of my beer, damn you!

Just now, Sir Why You Little said:

We know how he plays though....Average at best...ever since that idiot gave him the 31 jumper

 

As I said earlier, not a big Grimes fan, but you can't fault his character and to suggest he tried to desperately cling to being captain in an attempt to prolong a "failing" career is a pretty poor call I would think.

 

48 minutes ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

Quality....coming from Captain Obvious himself. As I said earlier in the day you constantly roll out the "I'm happy to back the coaching staff" and hide behind that. Do you actually ever have you own opinion on anything or do you just go with the "company line" in a bid to rack up some cheap likes. Please don't answer, it's a rhetorical question. Some of your posts regarding Garland (there are numerous others throughout other threads) highlight the fact you have a limited and simplistic understanding of the game, then there's the arguments you get into with myself and other posters, you often back yourself into a corner or find yourself stumped when a question is asked that may require the slightest bit of technical knowledge on the game, that's when you either don't answer and move on to someone else or dance around the question asked in your feeble response. 

Garland will no doubt play, because he's playing well and currently in great form or he's all we've got at the moment until some of the younger players come through. Either way we need every player playing well this year as we don't quite have the depth yet that some believe we do. If he does play well what will that make it, 2 good seasons out of the last 5 or 6....

Company line? Please. An opinion is not hiding behind a thing - Garland deserves to be part of the LG, a point I've gone over numerous times,  and the club feels the same way. I can't make that any clearer for you.

 

 

24 minutes ago, stuie said:

As I said earlier, not a big Grimes fan, but you can't fault his character and to suggest he tried to desperately cling to being captain in an attempt to prolong a "failing" career is a pretty poor call I would think.

 

I don't care what you think

If he wasn't made Captain which was one of the WORST decisions in the clubs long history of Bad Decisions Grimes would have been dropped a lot earlier

Like Trengove....Neeld (Read Schwab) made sure they were played way more than they should...

1 minute ago, Sir Why You Little said:

I don't care what you think

If he wasn't made Captain which was one of the WORST decisions in the clubs long history of Bad Decisions Grimes would have been dropped a lot earlier

Like Trengove....Neeld (Read Schwab) made sure they were played way more than they should...

Right, having Grimes as captain was one of the worst decisions in the 150+ years of the MFC... Not an overreaction at all there WYL.

 

21 minutes ago, stuie said:

Right, having Grimes as captain was one of the worst decisions in the 150+ years of the MFC... Not an overreaction at all there WYL.

 

Sure was. 

Now go away....

6 hours ago, stuie said:

Not saying one or the other about Garland, but I don't think BnF results are always the best thing to hang your hat on....

 

We have come a long way in a very short time...

2 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Now go away....

Lol righto. That's twice you've jumped in on my replies to someone else. How about YOU go away?

 

1 minute ago, stuie said:

Lol righto. That's twice you've jumped in on my replies to someone else. How about YOU go away?

 

You can't read either

amazing....!

Just now, Sir Why You Little said:

You can't read either

amazing....!

Another reply? Maybe just put me on ignore champ, better for both of us.

 

Can we not just celebrate the Leadership team for what it is and let it evolve?

Why continue to despair about history and all of the mistakes which 'in hindsight' are so clearly comprehendable?

Is Viney too young? Will the same fate befall him and with the weight of expectation of being a 'leader' he'll fail? No, because he's a fecking unit who lets his footy do the talking. Grimes is not that and probably never will be but for crying out loud, who else during that period was even capable? We didn't have what we have now so saying it was a bad decision by the CEO, FD etc at the time is completely ignoring relativity to time, place and circumstance.

1 minute ago, stuie said:

Another reply? Maybe just put me on ignore champ, better for both of us.

 

Nah then i would miss a lot of humour

can't have that...