nrc73

Yep I'm a bit worried about Toumpas. Seems to be the multicultural ambassador, but every time I see, hear or notice social media communication from him, I can't help but think he's struggling significantly at an emotional level. On the surface it seems premature to trade him, but I get the feeling even now that a trade could be a win-win type situation. I know this is just an outside view, but I can't help but think he desperately needs support from family & friends, much like Dom Tyson has really benefited. Can you trade a player that's a history of injuries? We'll we did with Dom and he's played most games this year.

Really excited about Salem, he's really shown how smart he is. Far less excited about Toumpas and Tregrove. Wouldn't be sad if they were traded.

I agree. Roos didn't have too much trouble picking up good recruits last season, did he?

I agree Roos decisions with Watts and Grimes will be the most interesting. Second year of coaching so pivotal. He's had a year on the inside to see things for himself. Third year hinges on decisions made now. Hope he's prepared to make bold moves.

I'd agree with all those though would give Jamar another year based on good form this year and lack of progress from other ruck stock

There are many top round picks who are achieving more. There are many lower draft picks achieving more. He has an occasional outstanding game but is overall too error prone and agree he barely makes the team. To see your captain make that many crucial errors has to have an impact on morale. He needs to be relieved of the captaincy. N Jones has taken the extra responsibility well, added even more dimensions to his game. If N Jones started to regularly play shockers, you can bet a lot more would be said.

Pretty accurate way of putting it. In reality, the AFL, ASADA are comparatively small fry. WADA is the big hitter which didn't do itself any favours by making the mistakes it did earlier on. In this game of high stakes the smallest errors can cost you the game, whether everyone think they should or shouldn't have. Agree that the compensation sought at the end is why everyone's fighting so hard. Expect this to go on for years and ultimately deeply damage the competition. Very sad. Time to tune out.. there are better things in life.

Most sensible post on this thread in some time. AD couldn't keep his ego out of it and fed the whole media war thing Hird & co were clearly geared up for.Sucking the oxygen out of it should have been the strategy from the outset, albeit the ACC media announcement kicked things off in the wrong direction. The AFL have had a massive control of the footy media in recent times. Have to wonder if this isn't a ploy by Murdoch to wrestle that power back as a long term strategy. i.e. greater access to players, etc.

Agree, have to question the quality of the legal advice the players are getting. "We've realised the players will be affected by this decision." Really?

I can see your point of view on this and I think there's many who share this view.

I wouldn't call joining foces a crack in the dam (after all the judge recommended the players join). But it would seem that if 1 person goes down, they all go down.

Paul Little is no small fry. Toll Holdings is a massive company to be CEO of. I would wager he knows more about politics & strategy than anyone down at the AFL. Toll Annual Revenue is at least 10 times that of the AFL, and from experience I know Toll has had a very aggressive culture. That ASADA is just "kicking back, waiting for the right moment" I find hard to believe.The longer they go on the more expensive this is for everyone, including the AFL, unless of course ASADA just like to squeeze every dollar out of their clients. If ASADA came out 6 months after interviews with 'show cause' notices, I might believe they were playing the smart game, but not after 18 months along with whole "No Fault/Negligence" thing. It looked desperate. Agree with old dee. Many people being turned off AFL by this rubbish.Only thing to do is release all information & charge EFC.

Totally agree. Bring out all the evidence and charge them or it might not ever get used. So much time and opportunity wasted before it hit the courts..

I could ask the same. Did you think before posting? The Age has in the main been a voice for the AFL and curiously put out an article saying that they 'going separate ways', curiously a few days before Essendon & Co put their case before the court http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-and-asada-probes-were-separate-sports-body-claims-20140625-zslso.html That tell's me that the AFL over involved themselves, now wish to not look so involved. Lol Have a good think about about how much of the $100m will be lost as people turn away from the game, turn back to grass roots or other sports over the next 10 years. I see no reason why there's can't be an additional layer of testing & governance that's actually respected. In the end it's not really about the money is it? It's about the AFL/NRL being threatened by the government. This is the real story, not some messed up AFL team. My point was that the AFL went out of their way to pick a fight, when they should have been clearly explaining their dilemma. btw.. I don't want Hird back so you can lose the pro Essendon crap

No, that actually was the point. If the laws were inadequate, the players would have been protected.

I have more of a problem with the AFL than Essendon. Why? There will always be cheats around. It might be Essendon today, someone else tomorrow, but de-personalise it and you'll realise there will always be someone, The AFL can complain all they like about being politically forced into using WADA - there were enough people around at the time WADA was chosen to raise concerns and they were ignored. I agree the AFL should have kept out of it - you can thank the egotistical AD for not doing so. Had he not go so involved and the AFL not played the media war with Hird .. I can't help but believe the course of events would not be where they are now. By playing the dirty media game, they brought the game down, just like Hird did. AD did everything that he could not to end up in the stand in a court of law and in the end will still end up there. Even if Essendon are playing the 'legal technicality' game, it's not as bad as someone that goes out of their way to avoid the law of the land like AD has. It simply would have been far better for everyone if this had been dealt with in the courts last year and everyone could have moved on. Even if Essendon lose the first battle in court, it looks to be a chance in hell of actually coming up with enough evidence to link the chain of suppliers to convict them. I wish they could be convicted, but there have been clowns running the investigation from the beginning.

Roos aside, not a star studded lineup there. Sorry, but Jade Rawlings has never impressed me too much. He seems at least 5 years from being away from being a really good footy person with universal respect. Lots of potential and some good wins, but not the type that has other clubs knocking down the door (like a Stuart Dew).

Brett Kirk for me. Ling is a wonderful ambassador and I have I have enormous respect for him, would be a great alternate choice, but Brett Kirk's apprenticeship is further ahead. MFC not a team a talented players, just guys that need to get the most out of themselves like Kirk. Agree Lyon and Roos style is compatible. Not on board with Voss or Worstfold at this stage, but would consider Worstfold the better. Kudos to those that've pointed out Luke Beveridge - seems a decent smokey

Thanks Saty for that amazing rundown of players and where they're at. 100x better than anything you'll get on the MFC website or so called journalism on the main news papers.

Quite frankly I think we should get in contact with the Bulldogs and see if all the players can run onto the ground with pink Tutus on.

Running with someone and keeping up is one thing. Imposing yourself on the game is quite another. No one cares that Dawes gets 6 touches in a game because they know every time it comes near him he imposes himself, often beating or darn near beating the 2 opponents on him. That's all we care about. In previous seasons Nate Jones was one of the few that regularly imposed himself. Now there are a number of other guys doing it regularly and all of a sudden players like Jack Watts (and yes there are others) stick out for their lack of spirit. This is what culture change is all about. Jack does not much look like he's changing with the culture as Dunn, Pederson and others are. Watts is being left behind. I think Roos is better off playing him to his strengths to get the most currency out of trade at season's end. I do not agree with Roos that Watts is the easy scapegoat. "Trying to find a role" for a player (last several coaches have used that line for Watts) is hardly an endorsement. There is a massive cost on the morale of a team when there's a player on the ground who doesn't even look like they know what they're doing. It's clear the first & second year players are still learning where to run to etc., but at least none of those guys looked lost like Watts did!

Yes, Dawes is more speculative I agree. From the few games I've seen of him, I tend to think he could have about 70-80% of the impact that Cloke would. I could live with that but what I'm more interested in, given Dawes history of injury management, is if Melbourne have a clause in hi contract similar to Paul Chapman where a certain percentage of games per year is required. I think that ought to apply to any new highly touted player from now on if it doesn't already.

Quite possibly the most depressing thread I've seen on the Internet (in a long time anyway)....

Just can't bring myself to talk about a group of players who collectively put together very ordinary performances week after week ;P

Take on board what you're saying - there will be some who can manage it, but how many don't? Also, we should see if Scully is still playing at Dawes age. The thing is, if a player has a degenerative knee and they're having trouble staying on the park, is it going to get better? I'd call 50% games in a year a minimum. The Bombers are happy to get 15-16 games a year out of Chappy and I'd say he's pretty likely to meet that obligation and having a major benefit for the Bombers. "As many games as possible" sets no benchmark. Injury or not, if 12-16 players don't play more than say, 40% of the season, they'd have to be considered for trade or offload (unless they're 1st/2nd year). Why should Dawes / Clark be any different. especially after 2+ seasons?