Just thought I'd raise 3 points that interested and surprised me in this online article written by Peter Curran.

On Beamer -

"...He just adds enormous depth to our midfield..."

This surprised me. I could be interpreting it wrong, but I've never thought of Beamer as depth. Yes we have a starting 4 in the guts in Brock, McDonald, White and one of Bruce, Jones etc etc, but Beamer's at least going to be the next cab off the rank when fully fit, and for all we know could force his way back into the starting 4 on the ball. Before all you guys get on here and start spouting the obvious "Moloney's great" stuff, I'm only assuming he meant that depth means depth in the sense that we all describe it. He could easily, of course, mean that he makes our midfield appear very deep, without actually being a depth player, in the Godfrey sense of the word. Still, thought it was interestingly worded though, and worth a look.

On Neaves -

"...He is the second back-up in our ruck division..."

Once again, I read this as White being number one, Jamar number 2 and Neaves number 3, relegating PJ to fourth. It could very well be that he meant White and Jamar ARE our ruckmen, PJ is first drop and Neaves second. Would be interesting if they were in fact ready to promote Neaves ahead of PJ as a ruckman, should the need arise. It would say a lot about both Neaves' future in the squad, and the direction the footy department are going to take with PJ. Incidentally, in PJ's biog it said "His versatility will see him fulfill a number of roles..." Whatever that means.

On Miller -

"...He may also be called upon, from time to time, to help us in defence, but he'll play mainly at centre half-forward..."

It's good to hear it in words that he'll be played MOSTLY in the position he plays best. With a bit of luck they'll be telling the truth and we won't have to go through seeing him in defence for a whole 'nother season.

The link to the article, just in case.

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/Default.aspx...mp;newsId=39818

You're reading way too much into that article... especially regarding the Beamer comment.

'He adds depth' = he makes our midfield looks better than if, say Godfrey, was playing instead

Just thought I'd raise 3 points that interested and surprised me in this online article written by Peter Curran.

On Beamer -

"...He just adds enormous depth to our midfield..."

That's what depth is. Having quality midfielders past your best 1,2 or 3 players. Even if he were the best player it still adds depth. Judd back into the WCE side adds depth because it means the skill and talent goes deeper. You're thinking too much about ti all and i dont think you really understand the game.

With regards to your question about Neaves Dappa,

I take it to mean that White and Jamar are our preferred rucking duo, PJ is the '1st backup ruckman', and if two of these happen to be injured, Neaves could fill the void as the '2nd backup ruckman' (and one would have to be a 'long-term' injury for Neaves to be promoted from the rookie list). Does that make sense?

Yup.

I think Neaves is already a better ruckman than PJ

if johnson wants to retain his spot on the list, he has got to focus on his tap work only and shouldn't worry about his work around the ground. If he can't resolve his tap work, i reckon he will be delisted and we'll pick up a ruckman with our first pick. I still reckon our ruck division isn't good enough compared to the top teams.

if johnson wants to retain his spot on the list, he has got to focus on his tap work only and shouldn't worry about his work around the ground. If he can't resolve his tap work, i reckon he will be delisted and we'll pick up a ruckman with our first pick. I still reckon our ruck division isn't good enough compared to the top teams.

If White goes down we're in big trouble. You would hope then that the Russian rises to the occasion in the best of worlds. He's the next best thing but our ruck reserves are wafer thin.

Jamar is clearly a better around the ground player than PJ but that perception may be because PJ has had limited opportunities since injuring himself against the Swans. Who knows what the consequences of that injury were and the time he's been given to prove himself?

The key point here is that a strong ruck division is important to team success, especially if they can go back or forward like Jimmy Stynes, the last adaptable ruckman we had. White has it in some measure. Time to exploit our strengths. Give Miller a breather on the bench and switch White to CHF. See what happens.

Of course the rider is that Jamar assumes number one ruck for more than 8 minutes a quarter which then frees White up to play at CHF for a while rather than sitting on the pine gasping for breath and looking knackered.

Jamar is clearly a better around the ground player than PJ

That must be backwards. PJ has his faults, but is wonderfully fast, enormous and sensational below his knees. Jamar averages around 4 possessions a game, which even given his game-time is very low. Whole halves would go by last year where he'd get either one or no touches whatsoever. The one problem with PJ as a ruckman is that he doesn't ruck. He is actually a liability there. Jamar is an ever-improving tap-man who never finds the footy once the bouce-down is completed.