MikeyJ

My assessment of Stef Martin has been made by watching him over his entire career at Melbourne - not just one week at Casey. I'm not a fan of players who have chronic kicking issues playing as key forwards. I'm also thoroughly aware that he's been injured this year. That has nothing to do with my assessment of his ability and what he can offer the team. As for his ruck attributes, read the nuance in my post. Stef might be ~200cm but I said he PLAYS short, in the same way that David Neitz played tall despite only being 191cm. Mark Jamar is the same height but I'd argue Jamar plays much taller than Stef. I agree he was vastly improved in 2011 but the role we're looking at having him play this year (a replacement for Clark) is slightly different to the role he was playing last year, in that there is more of an emphasis on his ability to play forward. I understand that you are a fan of Martin's. You should also be able to understand that I am not, for the reasons I've clearly outlined above. Twice.

A very valid point and the only reason that Martin might get a gig. In terms of structure, Martin fills the role better than Cook and in all likelihood will play against the Lions. Forward entries can be directed to Garland/Rivers instead of Martin, of course, although neither is Clark. And we all know the importance Neeld gives to structure in his teams. However, I don't see a long-term future for Stef Martin at the MFC. He is too limited by foot to play key forward, plays slightly too short to be a genuine ruck and we have a surfeit of key defenders who make better decisions. The sub rule has removed the need for a second ruck on the bench, which is a real pity for him. Clark's arrival has removed the need for a 'Leigh Brown type', which would have been perfect in the long term. Clark's absence will probably be why Martin plays a good chunk of the rest of 2012. But in the long run, I'd prefer to see us fielding either genuine long-term prospects or proven players of quality, rather than NQR types who are still battling to learn the game after five years in the system.

Most posters seem to be overlooking the fact that Stef Martin can't hit the side of a barn door with his kicking for goal. It's all well and good being a big body but if you can't convert in the forward line, you shouldn't be there. Green back in as a medium marking forward for mine.

Actually, I just read the OP's email in full. What a revolting effort. You should be ashamed.

I trust you won't be celebrating any success that might emerge from Neeld's methods, then. We won't be thinking of you when the Jacks finally raise the cup.

One last thought - have the critics considered that what we saw was a brief moment in two hours of watching the game? We didn't see all the times that Watts, Martin and co. sat there stony-faced like the rest of us as the Hawks piled on goal after goal. And if the TV networks had shown footage of Watts, Martin and co. dirtying up at their on-field teammates from the stands, the critics would no doubt say that was another indictment on the players - there are fractures in the playing group, yada yada yada. What some of you expect from our players is completely unrealistic.

The difference between you and I is that I recognise that the players' behaviour in the stands - which, let's be clear, was completely reasonable for young men watching their mates play football - has no impact on how they play on any given day. Anyone who thinks otherwise is just looking for another excuse to sink the boots into the club at a time when on-field results have been completely unacceptable.

What Nasher said. Get some perspective.

I hope none of you who think this is an issue shared a joke with any of your mates at the footy on Friday night. And if you did, you should give up your membership because you're just not passionate enough, apparently.

Neeld said on SEN this morning that Liam Jurrah would not be playing against Hawthorn this weekend, but he would be in the team as soon as possible. The above looks a likely plan, provided nothing goes awry against Box Hill this weekend.

Exhibit A.

I had the displeasure of having one such supporter behind me in the MCC for the first quarter on Saturday night. After 25 minutes of constant derision and abuse - mostly directed at Watts, despite him often having no responsibility for the passage of play - I turned around and asked the bloke if he was for real. Bluster and bravado from the portly old bloke followed, I ignored it and he largely shut up shop for the rest of the quarter. Even better, his mates left him sitting in the rain as it began to tumble down. I am happily among the first to give it to our players when they deserve it but constant carping and biased abuse does nothing for the cause, let alone the experience of other supporters sitting in earshot. And those who hide behind the 'honesty' excuse when they're doing nothing but tearing players down need to take a good hard look at themselves.

I mostly agree with your first post, but for this statement. Thompson's 2004 was very good as part of a reasonably competitive midfield before he walked to Adelaide. He showed every sign of being a future A-grader and I have no doubt we did all we could to retain him. Jolly is a tough one. Should we have played him more at White's expense? In hindsight, probably, but who was to know the AFL Commission was going to hobble the 2004 AA ruckman with its centre circle rule? We tried playing both Jolly and White up forward but it didn't work in either case. White was one of the league's most dominant rucks when we let Jolly go and I think it was the right decision at the time, even though it may not have been correct in the long run.

To the OP: If you're going to lift stuff directly from a story on another website, it's usually the done thing to add a link to the original story, at the very least.

Moloney's 2011 was a vast improvement on what I thought he was capable of at the start of the season. He's still not an A-grade midfielder; rather, he is a B-grader capable of A-grade performances when the circumstances are in his favour. As other have noted already, his output was drastically lower against the very best teams. The round 1 draw against Sydney was his only good game against decent opposition and he was positively ineffectual against most of the best sides. Jones was a different kettle of fish. His effort could not be faulted, even if his execution was lacking at times. Moloney might have won the B&F and polled the most Brownlow votes but I rated Jones' year superior in most facets.

To be fair to Ralph, he isn't suggesting that Blease is currently a list clogger; rather, he is one of the "middle-tier players who could end up as 200-gamers or list-cloggers". Let's hope it's the former.

Nothing random about it. With all the talk on this forum and elsewhere, how could you not have realised some or all of the following: Jack Viney is living in Melbourne, with his family, attending Carey Grammar, zoned to the Oakleigh Chargers and playing for Vic Metro in the U18 titles?

I give him points for the constant and wilful confusion of "caption" with "captain". Tremendous stuff.

Funnily enough, he's scheduled to do a presser this morning. Wonder if the club will have a hasty change of heart on this morning's spokesman?

Said poster is here and putting their hand up! I've already happily conceded elsewhere in the original thread that Beamer was excellent yesterday. Hope to see more of it.

:) Very happy to concede that Moloney was everything I thought he wasn't going to be yesterday. Aside from a couple of early brain fades to give away free kicks, he was fantastic. Let's hope he keeps it up and convinces me of the error of my ways

I appreciate that the stats tell a different story with regard to Moloney's ability at the clearances. It doesn't change the fact that I don't rate him as a first-dibs midfielder. But I fear we're losing the forest for the trees in this instance. Whether or not you rate Moloney as a clearance player, we look to be dreadfully undermanned at the stoppages against a team that is renowned for its ability to win in that area. That was my original point - hopefully I'm proven wrong!

And regarding the Moloney debate: clearly I have a difference of opinion with others here But I suspect the Swans are going to show us up for a lack of grunt around the stoppages today. And I also suspect Brent Moloney is going to prove less than effective. We'll see what happens - I'd be delighted if Beamer sprang a surprise.

Kieren Jack is well past the point where he is going to tag other players - unless they're Chris Judd. He was the best midfielder in the competition for the last month of 2010, and is a far cry from the run-with player we've become accustomed to for most of his career.

I don't consider Moloney a genuine clearance midfielder. Nor is Sylvia. Thus, my point still stands.