mo64

He tried to make fun of Brett Heady by pulling his ears wide apart. Heady gave him a look as if to say "who the f#ck are you to be giving me sh#t." It was the sought of thing you'd expect to see in a primary school playground. Hilarious.

You're as knowledgable as Rhino. Ferguson made his name as a manager during his time at Aberdeen, in a league that's usually dominated by Rangers and Celtic.

Since you are such an expert on Man U., name all the high priced recruits that played in the 1999 Champions League win? Ferguson had achieved success as a manager well before the chequebook ruled the EPL, and built success through their youth academy and home grown players like Beckham, Scholes, Neville and Butt. As a Man City supporter since 1977, I hate Man U with a passion, but I have begrudging respect for Ferguson. And you are the moron who suggests that public tirades are terminal to a club. Whilst I think it's poor man management to publicly berate player, there is no evidence to support your argument that it's terminal to a club. As I said, if Vidmar is sacked, it's a poor reflection on the AUFC administration, and not Vidmar. And stop trying to be the intellect that you are not with gems like "You're a sad chip in need of a masochistic shoulder."

From an on-field perpective, how can it be factual when you don't know how we'll end up in 2 years time? Off-field we don't have a major sponsor.

Hindsight draft analysis when I side is playing poorly. Don't you love it. Did you express this opinion of these players in 2006? IMO, with the exception of Bell, the rest of the players are capable of being good AFL players. This is part of the group of players that you said could win the flag in 2007. Ha, ha, ha

Based on your infinite knowledge of football, how does Man U have access to billiions of dollars? And do you know the history of the club pre Ferguson? Obviously not. The point I was making about the CJ's case was in response to you nuffies who believe the it enhances the culture of the place for Bailey to belittle a player who had already left the club. Pittman was still playing, and Blight felt that he needed a rocket. 2 flags in subsequent seasons is terminal damage. So Teflon, answer my question, how were Vidmar's comments terminal to the club?

One of the longest serving and most successful coach in world sport, Alex Ferguson, is renowned for his press conference tirades. I dare anyone to say that they've been terminal to Man U. Was Blight's radical post match tirade on David Pittman terminal to Adelaide? Sometimes things need to be said in the open.

Vidmar's comments were directed at those off the field who were trying to tell him what team he should pick. Vidmar could see that it was having a destabilising effect on the players, and thought enough was enough. After playing like busted a#ses against the Victory, they turned things around against the high flying Roar. If Vidmar is not coaching AUFC next season because they lose to Victory, that's a poor reflection of the administration of AUFC, not Vidmar.

It's one thing to be positive, but this post is just plain ridiculous on so many levels. Answer these questions without cliches: By what measurements do you say that Bailey is doing a great job? I'm not a Harvey fan, but why would we be any worse if we had a coach that was shooting off his mouth? We are a basket case on and off the field, how could things be worse? What was so wrong with what Vidmar said? At least he has been able to motivate his players which is something that Bailey has yet to demonstrate. And btw, I would not be the least surprised if Adelaide knock off Victory this week.

When I was going through the list of players, I had a chuckle when I came across the name Lachlan Ross (Essendon 2 games). Here's a trivia question. What was his claim to fame during his distinguished AFL career?

So why keep him on as a rookie if he's no chance of being elevated? And in another post you bemoaned our lack of centre square clearance players. Valenti is probably our 3rd best clearance player after McLean and McDonald.

Last season we had the lowest number of long kicks and inside 50s in the comp. by a considerable margin. Why, because we didn't play with a structure that allowed for a long kick as an option. It seems ingrained into the mindset of the players that going long is a sin. We were totally uncompetitive last season playing a gamestyle that revolved around keeping possession. We were incapable of scoring and stopping the opposition from scoring. It was excruciating to watch. Maybe that's why some of us cry out to just kick the bloody thing. As for the opposition flooding our forward line, how about the coach allowing our mids to push forward occasionally to create a contest. Without looking up the stats, I doubt that any of our mids kicked more than 15 goals last season.

Well I'll quote you Malcolm Blight's commentary during a Coll v Ess game last year when both sides were stuffing around with handball and getting nowhere, much to Blight's frustration. "Just kick the thing long and tell your forwards to play in front". Essendon proceeded to do just that, and swamped the Pies. Why, because they had numbers up forward to make a contest in the air, and crumbers on the ground. But Blight is just a nuffy like the rest of us.

True Jarka, and an errant handball is even worse than an errant long kick because the ball is 50 metres closer to your opponents goal.

I must admit, I was livid last night. But in the cold light of day, I've tried to work out whether the promise showed by individual performances yesterday, and even last season, will ever translate into consistent team performances. Let's not kid ourselves. Hawthorn were playing at half rat power for 3 quarters, but when they decided to pull the finger out, we went back to being an uncompetitive rabble. The level of intensity displayed by the Hawks in the last quarter is probably 60% of what we should expect from our opposition during the season proper. Individual Performances - Positives Spencer, Grimes, Cheney, Martin, and Frawley all showed promising signs. When you add Garland, Jones, Maric, Morton, Wona, Watts, Strauss, Blease and Jetta, we have a core group of players that could potentially become very good AFL players. But if we rewind 3 seasons, we were saying the same thing about McLean, Sylvia, Rivers, Davey in addition to our larger group of established senior players. Whether this potential amounts to onfield success, is questionable. Individual Performances - Negatives Miller, Bell and Warnock all fall into the try-hard, coach's pet category, but continue to make the same mistakes. It frustrates the hell out of me to watch them play. Newton and Sylvia - Even more frustrating than the try-hard group. Newton is a lost cause, and Sylvia has about 10 weeks to show whether he's worthy of being on our list. Team Performance Very little to get excited about. Despite having a dominant ruckman, we couldn't win the centre clearances when it mattered. Symptomatic of last year, and the responsibility lies with the coach. Overuse of the ball through handball. Players under little pressure handballing to a stagnant target is senseless. Again, symptomatic of last season. If it isn't a coach's directive, then he isn't getting his message through to the offending players. Either way, the responsibility lies with the coach. Usually at this time of the season I'm more interested in the promise shown by the kids. This season I'm more concerned about the team performance.

Agree JL. How the hell could anyone put Miller in the votes is beyond me. He tries hard, big effin deal. Why do people excuse a missed shot for goal, yet castigate a player who turns the ball over?

Got it in one Mick. I was still nervous at 3/4 time, and was tempted to take the $10 on offer for the Hawks.

That's me. I was the genius who told my Hawthorn supporting boss to back the Hawks when they were paying $10, with 3 min 50 secs to go, and Melbourne 15 points in front. I knew that we were incapable of winding downing the clock through short passing. We had to be proactive, and try to score. And btw, you forgot to mention example 3: In the final minute, Hawthorn bombing the ball to Roughhead, who was playing from behind. See, it can work. The only upside of the result was that my boss gave me a sling of his winnings.

This is coming from the bloke who doesn't know the difference between a tackle and a shepherd/bump, or what "off the ball" means. And Teflon, from the footage, how could you determine that it was shoulder on jaw? GOTO correctly states what the law is, and also makes the following observations: "If he had not broken his opponents jaw, it is unlikely he would have been charged ( no evidence of contact )" "This is a case of the law being an ass. " Nice try Teflon, but wrong again.

Not surprised. By the letter of the law, he had 2 other options, laying a tackle or picking up the ball. The appeals tribunal obviously felt that neither of these options were reasonable. If he tackled McGinnity, it would have been holding the man, and if he picked up the ball, he would have either ran out of bounds or got tackled by McGinnity. In the spirit of the game, his option to clear a path for his teammate by laying a bump, was the correct one. So Rhino, appealing the verdict was a waste of time, was it?

So obviously the theory that players get picked on form has gone out the window. If we are serious about winning this game, Valenti has to play. And with Robbo's long term injury and Newton showing nothing, it would have been nice to see Zomer in action.

Like your friend Rhino, you don't understand the game. If Maxwell had laid a TACKLE and there was an accidental head clash, it is not a reportable offence. But because he laid a shepherd/bump, regardless of whether the contact to the head was accidental or not, it is deemed reckless. So in the eyes of the law, there is a huge difference between a tackle and a shepherd/bump.

Maxwell was not trying to lay a tackle, because McGinnity didn't have possession of the ball. Maxwell was simply trying to bump McGinnity out of the contest to clear a path for his teammate. So you clearly haven't seen the incident.

Outstanding hoopla. Definite candidate for post of the year. And for those who scoffed at the idea (yes you Rhino), it just goes to show how out of touch some people are with the common man.