Leaderboard

There are lots of reasons why teams fall short of the mark and miss out on the finals and blaming injuries for that outcome is never a popular one where offered. I'm not suggesting that injury alone was the excuse for Melbourne missing out on the finals by such a narrow margin as the 0.5% by which it fell below the Eagles in percentage but when I look at the player review series currently running on Demonland, it really puts the club's problems in focus. So far, the players with guernsey numbers 1 to 12 have been covered and it would be fair to say that many of the players in this group are among the most significant components of the entire team list. They've all either missed a large part of the season to injury or other issues or, as was the case of players injured later in the season, missed blocs of games together. I think it would also be fair to say that in almost all of those instances, the form of the players in question dropped off significantly compared to their pre injury form. I'm not an expert in player conditioning but I am suggesting that the combination of the above factors, together with the fact that the list is still relatively young, contributed to the team's sluggish end to the season where there were periods during games when it bled goals to the opposition. That happened in virtually every game in the last third of the season in various forms (Port Adelaide and St Kilda - leads of 6 to 7 goals were largely reined in; the first quarter v GWS, the last v Brisbane) leading ultimately to the lack of effort and non-existent tackling pressure in the opening quarter v Collingwood. I thought we were cooked after the GWS game and indeed, that's how it turned out. We were a slow train wreck waiting to happen. When you consider that Richmond, now playing off in a preliminary final, have had few injuries and currently have one very fringe player on the injury list, it's quite sad to consider our fate (especially since we almost certainly would have beaten the Tigers earlier in the season when we finished with virtually no bench for rotations). So here we are:- 1. Jesse Hogan - season destroyed by everything but the kitchen sink. Managed to show some form with 6 goals in Round 22 but couldn't see out the first half of the next game. 2. Nathan Jones - missed several weeks after starring in that difficult period leading up to the Bulldogs game when injured. Skipper's influence and experience missed badly. 3. Christian Salem - missed four weeks after injury in the game against West Coast (also suspended twice during the season). 4. Jack Watts - missed four weeks after doing a hammy v Bulldogs. Form dropped off badly after he returned to the point where he spent two games in the VFL. 5. Christian Petracca - there's always an exception to the rule (played all 22 games). 6. Jordan Lewis - crucial three game suspension in Round 2 and we lost all of the games he missed. 7. Jack Viney - surgery after coming off the game v Swans and apart from the first half of his return game, Hardness and leadership missed in those crucial rounds, particularly at the end. 8. Heritier Lumumba - retired due to concussion issues, didn't play and AFL rules meant he couldn't be replaced on the list. 9. Jack Trengove - played two games. The injury that afflicted him occurred a few years ago but it put paid to his realistic chances of a return to his early form. 10. Angus Brayshaw - concussions kept him out for most of the year. 11. Max Gawn - All Australian, missed half a season with a hamstring injury and was understandably never able to play at his best. Virtually needed another pre season but there was no time. 12. Dom Tyson - injured during the Swans game and missed a few games to coincide with the time when half the midfield was missing. If you look at some of the above individually, you might say that injuries are part of the game and that's true. But taken as a whole, the above scenario hurt us badly and certainly by more than 0.5%, especially given that a few depth players to be covered later on, failed to get a game at any level during the season. That's why I envy the Tigers who will be playing off on Saturday night for a grand final spot with their best possible team on the ground - something that's been a feature with them for the entire season.

Oliver is a freak and the idea of trading him for anything 'unknown' (as draft picks are) frightens me Fortunately it ain't happening

I understand the point you're making and I agree with it up to a point. But I think Watts also generates a fair amount of positivity around the place (like Gawn, Petracca and I reckon Jones). In those weeks when they've just had a bad loss and it seems they're up against it and the tasks ahead of them look insurmountable, Watts would be one of the main initiators of getting alongside everybody, lifting the mood, getting the team to believe in each other again. While the more intense members of the squad are in their own little bubble, smashing out the reps at the gym, working themselves into a hard ball of determination, it would be the likes of Watts & Gawn who are able to detach from it a bit and bring the squad into a better frame of mind. See, that's the upside of a supposed "lack of intensity". Because the reality is that you need a mix of both. If everyone has to be intense all the time, it can really suck the morale out of the club. We've already been through this once in recent memory and we ended up in a very bad place indeed. And you can't equate "intensity" with "commitment". I agree that Watts would be on the lower end of the list as far as "intensity" is concerned, but his "commitment" during his time at the club would be right up at the top. And in every single game, his "commitment" would also be right at the top, even if he doesn't contribute hugely to the team's "intensity". Which, by the way, is why it's ridiculous to hold him (and Salem) responsible for the team's lack of intensity in the NM2 and GWS games, because he doesn't contribute hugely to it anyway. If the team's intensity is down, it's because the usual "intensity" guys didn't bring it. Watts & Salem bring the finesse, the coolness under pressure, the delivery & execution, and if one or both of them goes, we will be sorely lacking in these areas where all the "intensity" in the world will be of no use whatsoever. And I still can't escape the feeling that Watts's lack of "intensity" is being used as a fig-leaf to cover a number of other deficiencies that showed up in the last 8 or 9 rounds or so, when our average score dropped from 102 points a game to 79 points. I don't think Watts is a "fringe" guy around the cub; I think he's a "heart and soul" guy. And if the club really is nudging Watts out the door, I think we'll be the worse for it.

Could someone please make up a rumour to get this thread back on track.

I always think it funny that for almost 1.5 centuries we could work out which team was which we even had decades of B & W Tv and still worked it out but now we cannot work out Richmond and Adelaide.

He will evolve as player in the next couple of years and we will see more of his kicking, marking and goal kicking game. He's already given us a taste of these attributes. That will take him to the elite level, quick mids or not.

Stef Martin found it hard at Melbourne. I saw him once with the guys at Fed Square, looking very ignored and detached. Look at him now. Watts seems to struggle to get into the rhythm of the job, as though on some level an outsider. My speculation about Watts centres on this. What is going wrong? Jurrah was pretty much the same, with that never-ending injury. I saw a game a few years back where Jones marked just forward of centre and looked around for options. I posted on Demonland about it at the time. Watts led to centre-half forward, clear in front of his man, and Jones ignored him. Shortly afterwards, Jones kicked it to Watts, in a huge amount of space out near the boundary except that his man was wearing him like a glove, and the ball ended up over the boundary - as it was always going to. Kick not to advantage etc. At the time I thought, Jones doesn't really like - or understand - this guy. And now he is chucking him under the bus (Nield's old bus, as I remember it - he certainly didn't like Watts). My speculation: is it the intuitive, the intelligent, the non-grunt guys that we can't incorporate into our team? Maybe we as a club think such guys can't play the game "the way it should be played"? Is our culture a monoculture that fails to get the best out of its different guys? Robbie Flower has always been the top of the pile for me. I'm not here likening Watts to Flower in anything other than being not-the-standard-model. Plenty thought someone as different as Flower was going to be useless - he was scorned by Melbourne supporters around me for his first two quarters, mostly because he didn't look like what they thought a footballer should look like. Ok he turned out to be great from his first game, but plenty of ultimate stars of the game have taken time to come on. Roos had it right - treat them all as individuals, with respect. Watts is no complainer, but how do you feel supporting a club where a loyal employee said "I just wanted to be treated as a human being"? And, this was referring to a time when one of his presumed mates was Jones? Are there things to be learned on the other side of this straining relationship too? Melbourne chucking players under buses in recent years has happened too often for a club with its back to the wall, and we know with hindsight what disastrous results some of those sackings have had. Goodness knows how morale was affected among the "survivors" each time we unwisely threw away a loyal player. If you got no talent, clearly you have to go, I accept that. But if you don't make the most of your talent, before the club says goodbye, what I want to see is the motivators showing some skill. And yet, here we have, yet again, a boot up Watts' arce (just as the bus comes into view) as our deliberately-made-public approach supposedly to motivating what is a skilled, intelligent and multi-talented, committed and apparently sensitive human being... I remain convinced that Watts has it in him to cut the big games apart, using the skill, the speed, and the imaginative flair that we saw when he took off from behind the centre once Oscar got the ball against Collingwood. Watch the vision again, and watch his thinking. and on that occasion his move was honoured by his team-mate, and (slow-motion) moments later it had reduced Collingwood players to their knees, literally. That's what he can do, at that stage of a big game - and nobody else, on either side - saw or attempted the move: Watts used brains, comprehension of the game, beyond anyone on the field. A rare talent, albeit not yet fully harnessed to the team.

You must have really hated these moments...

I'm genuinely concerned that I might be sick of Jake Lever before he even arrives at the MFC...

I enjoy the contributions of both posters, but it's possibly the most inane conversation I've ever read on Demonland. Please make it stop.

I have to apologise to all in this thread as I was the clever man who, jokingly, said I wouldn't give up Oliver for 9 first round picks. It's totally snowballed from there. Come home soon, Jake.

Shouldn't be blaming the Skipper or coaching staff for throwing Watts under a bus. The media do that by asking loaded questions all of the time regards Watts and Jones et al do the best they can in answering them. Options are: 1) Jack had a great year (untruth) 2) Jack a poor year (untruth) 3) The type of answer Jones gave (truth)

Yeah, I'm tending to agree after watching the vision a couple of extra times. Closer to 130m I reckon.

Okay, so let me see if I've got this straight. You recognize Clarry talent and his achievements but you'd trade him for two picks inside the top 10 and one outside it because you want a star. Therefore you think three 1st rounders have more chance of procuring a star than having Clarry. Really? You're used to MFC not developing it's talent (despite Oliver success) so you'd trade Clarry out for picks to be developed by the same people who are developing Clarry in the hope of getting someone better than Clarry. To be honest Steve I think this is a really silly proposition given how hard it is to find rare talent (which I obviously think Clarry is). Of course if you don't think Clarry is a rare talent then your position is reasonable although I think the "bird in the hand" argument is compelling even so. And you think that despite saying "And on a completely different topic" and "I loved Rivers ,, (getting Lever) would be gold for this club" I for some reason don't think Lever could similarly be a star of the comp and this makes me a "stereotypical one-eyed supporter". Obviously my comment on Lever was utterly positive and I do think Lever can be a star of the competition. But in addition to the above and not to confuse issues I would say that a midfield star of the competition is more valuable than an intercept mark player of the competition so I'd have Oliver and Petracca well ahead of Lever. To be clear that is no slight on Lever. Steve you've said elsewhere that you are involved in scouting for an AFL club. That will make you privy to information and exposed to some serious football people and I assume if you're scouting for them they value your input. That's why I'm having this discussion because I'm genuinely interested in your view.

Posted after the filth loss that we are losing AHG. They are pulling out of alll national team sponsorships and putting money into local dealerships who sponsor local teams. The club has 4 options they are working on.

He's had initial talks about a three year extension with the club. He wants to stay and we want him to stay

I'd love to have a wager with you on both. He won't be at the Dogs, and they won't get a super super deal.

Jay Clark's take on the horse trading for Leve rhttp://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/more-news/jake-lever-is-out-of-contract-so-melbourne-has-upper-hand-in-bid-to-land-adelaide-defender/news-story/77de2b236f1a797b08d5fb5016b1abee The deal sounds quite fair: "The deal will be five years at least on about $750,000 a year, instantly making him one of the top three of four paid players at Melbourne, and he’s exactly what Simon Goodwin’s men need to help jump into the top four...But they aren’t parting with two-first round choices without something else coming back and need only look back one year ago when the Crows refused to part with a pair of aces for Carlton’s Bryce Gibbs for some affirmation". He goes on to say that because Lever (unlike Gibbs) is out of contract mfc hold the upper hand and outlines some trade scenarios. On the down side he thinks it could go down to the 11th hour. I had thought both clubs would want it over and done with and move on to other deals. Adelaide have shown they can play hardball. Just hope we hold our nerve even if it does drag out.

Bernie is very comfortably best 22! As for kick-ins, don't the detractors watch other AFL teams... all the kick-in specialists stuff up once in a while. Bernie has a few bloopers but offsets this by being a genuine hard nut who can unsettle the star performers in other teams. He probably needs to be relieved of the high-pressure defensive stuff occasionally. Bernie has a lot to offer as a forward (in small doses). Being a competitive beast, he thrives on a challenge. Haters, keep telling him he is washed-up and we'll get another decent three years out of him!

I remember my girlfriend of the time being besotted with him. I asked what he had that I didn't. She has almost finished the list. We are no longer together.

What will make him a better star is to have a couple of quick mids running past for his handballs.

We should be sponsored by the Psychiatrists Association of Australia. That can kill two birds with one stone get money in the door and treat the players so they improve between the ears on match day! Its a WIN WIN.

Good lord.

What percent of that 70% are afraid of change and scared to let go? How many are deluded that Watts can still become a star? How many are blinded by the fact he was pick 1 and still value him that highly? The noisy minority are correct in this poll.

Any mods out there care to move this to the general forum? This [censored] is the reason I don't wade into that cesspool anymore.

This is an absolute Joke there is no Clash. Hopefully it becomes a huge issue and rabid Tiger supporters set fire ? to AFL House I want this sorted. I would hate to see the Demons walk out on GF Day in a white Jumper sort it out

It is ok 64 you are allowed to insult white anglo saxon types just ask the PC police.

Of all the likely trades, Kent worries me the least. Disappointment factor-zero.

Talking to a couple of Dees fans and the thought is that Kent is not a fan of the Coach. The reverse might also be the case. If we want Balic an opportunity opens up.

Short term decision that I was comfortable with at the time and still am. Ditto the Tyson trade. Phase a) of Era Roos/Goodwin was to restore the club to competitiveness ASAP. I wouldn't support a trade like this for a 30ish year old now, but circumstances were different then.

From the outside, how can you effectively assess the value of an assistant/line coach?? The senior coach is judged on overall results. Development coaches are rated on how well the youngsters come on. Who of us, would really know how well Jade Rawlings is doing? Any time I hear the players speak about Twig at Best and Fairests, etc they all speak of him extremely highly as a mentor.

Ur best post yet redleg. Well said.

Abbott just needs to keep talking. Like Roger Corbett, he's the best advert for the "Yes" case going

A great step by the AFL to add its weight to removing the stigma and oppression of a minority group in our society. The fact that so few (any) AFL players are prepared to openly declare their homosexuality is indicative of the sad and toxic oppression they endure. Good to see Australia is growing up.

Hahaha … oh wait, you're serious? That's a completely ridiculous (and monstrously selfish) argument. Imagine for a second that the situation was completely reversed. Gay people can legally marry, and straight people can't. In that scenario, would you seriously think that your rights as a straight person weren't being impeded? Would you seriously make the case that "I have the right to marry, I'd just have to marry a man"?* Of course you wouldn't. So … have a little imaginative empathy, and put yourself in their shoes. Also, on the "nobody's rights are impeded because (gay) men can still marry women" thing ... So … somewhere between 0.01% (low end estimate) and 1.7% (high end estimate) of babies born are born either A) without genitals/gonads/hormones that aren't identifiably male or female; or B) with a combination of chromosomes other than a simple 'XX' or 'XY'. Those people are called 'Intersex', it's the 'I' in LGBTQIA, and it's a well-documented medical fact. To borrow your phrase, that IS "existing biology." Here's the wikipedia article to get you started. So those people, neither men nor women, have no right to marry anyone at all? Even if we accept the logic of 'gay people could legally get married to people they aren't attracted to', some people's rights still ARE being impeded by specifying "between a man and a woman" in the marriage act. I'm in favour of equality. To be otherwise is monstrously selfish. *I'm assuming Wrecker45 is a straight man. If I'm incorrect in that assumption, I apologise.

You cant choose. Youre stuck forever. Suck it up.

Start a new thread... The safe schools program has zero to do with SSM. In case you have missed it, we don't have SSM in this country and yet the safe schools program is being debated in parliament as to what should and shouldn't be acceptably taught in our schools and has been debated in different circles since its inception. And the nonsensical nature of continually throwing these red herrings into the debate is that it doesn't follow the just because SSM law is passed that it necessarily impacts the safe school program. (Look up Simon Birmingham's response)

Oh i remember that night very well. It was our GF I knew Essendrug would smash us. So i celebrated hard after the Prelim was at The Ox's Pub for a while.. then it gets blurry

I think the AFL does have a reasonable mandate to take some social actions. The case as I see it is - 1. Everyone should feel welcome and safe attending or playing football. 2. Some people can reasonably believe they are not welcome and safe attending or playing football. 3. The AFL should take reasonable steps to overcome the gap. As for endorsing the Yes campaign. Well... hard to imagine someone feeling especially welcome at an AFL game if the sport is boldly declaring 'maybe' when asked the question "Is this person's relationship so soiled and awful as to be afforded lesser civil rights than murderers, drug traffickers, terrorists and rapists?". Yeah, 'maybe' doesn't cut it, does it? People can have their religious beliefs, and even have their belief that their religious belief should be imposed on the whole of society, but for a secular 'whole of society' organisation, it is important to show that basic level of respect for equal rights.

Gotta love the new fb mob. Lol! More "Number One" than Lever or just about any other half decent player? Nah. Really, this has more alarm bells that a Chubb Security showroom. Pass.

The day we trade Tracc and/or Oliver in the next 7 years is the day I follow St Kilda or WB. No effing way!!!

We are not trading trac or oliver and anyone who thinks its a good idea are peanuts, lever might became the best defender ever, however oliver is no track be as good as Joel selwood, and trac is tracking better then Dangerfield at the same age, its never a good idea to rob Peter to pay Paul.

Trade him! We can't drown him! He's a witch! He cost us the year by missing 2 goals! It's Jack's fault the club is so impotent F M D

Yes we need commitment but we also need talent. Players who are 6'5" are quick, have endurance and elite disposal don't come along too often. I don't see we would get a suitable trade to match what we would lose.

Jones and Goodwin are critical of Jacks preparation off field because it's inadequate and it sets a poor example to other younger players. For example, would we want Petracca, a similar high talent player, modelling his approach to his AFL career on Jack Watts? I'm for sending him North for the best deal we can get. 9 years is too long.

Just wish the afl would stick to bloody footy.

Isn't it great to watch a game of football: 1. that isn't a rolling scrum? 2. Where the umpires don't prance around 3. Where there are players to kick to up the field 4. Where marks are taken, and leads made 5. Where individual players can kick 7 or 8 goals in a game ...How good was Schwartz?

Maybe just maybe Jack Watts has been ruined by this club with its poor standards and constant changes and now that we are getting it together he just needs to refocus. One thing we know for sure and that is that he has better skills than most of his team mates and is the best set shot for goal on our list. He also has the ability to set up play and deliver the ball accurately to team mates. Perhaps instead of throwing him out with the rubbish, we try and get him to fit into our plans and get the best out of him. This is the same bloke who was composed enough to kick the winning goal on the run against the Pies, on QB and then run down the other end, to grab a mark and save the game. He is also the same bloke who was thrown into the ruck and ran himself into the ground for us earlier this year. He has talent, lets try and get it used for our benefit.

I can't believe you listen to that station, Ethan. I used to like you. You're dead to me now.