mo64

Agree that it was an excellent article. The player analysis was spot on. If Goody and the match committee were aware of the cracks, they did little to address them by way of team changes. Article clearly showed ANB's decline in form. It also debunks the notion by many on here that Spargo is elite when it comes to inside 50 connections. His numbers and percentage are less than Sparrow, who gets canned for his disposal.

Congrats to @Demonstone on solving it and picking up the silver medal.

And we have a winner. Gold medal goes to a previous winner in @tilly18.

Your initials are MR. Is that you Mark Robinson?

And I think that Kenny Roberts should have been a lock for this team.

For all the mental torture that the likes of Demonstone have inflicted upon me, I've compiled a quiz. In the scale of hardness, I'd rate it a 'talc', but that's because I know the answers. What do these players have in common: Backline Brad Sholl Noah Balta Paul Hamilton Half Back Daniel Cross Scott Lucas Garry Foulds Centreline Peter Filandia Jude Bolton David Calthorpe Half Forwards Mitch Wallis Joe Daniher Jake Riccardi Forward Line Justin Madden Matthew Lloyd Ricky McLean Followers Simon Madden Dane Swan Tom Liberatore Bench Steve O'Dwyer Leigh Tudor Ben Ronke Xavier O'Halloran Emergencies Lachlan Sholl Steve Morris Rohan Welsh James Cook

If that's the case then Kozzie must have thoughts of leaving, and there is an element of truth in what Cornes is saying. And no offence KDF, but the old "he loves it at Melbourne" was said countless times in respect of Jackson. The players aren't likely to say that player X is likely to leave.

I think you'll find that Bont and Macrae will play more inside midfield time in Dunkley's absence. Bont was forced to play forward at times, and Macrae was played as an outside mid. These 2 alongside Libba and Trelaor, and I think that they can cover for Dunkley.

I don't take any comfort from this. Why would Pickett or his manager express a consideration to leaving? What's to be gained? And the only contrary position is that a timeframe for contract negotiations are already in place. I didn't get that impression from Richo's interview.

If that's the case then Cale Morton, Jack Watts and Jimmy Toumpas would still be at the Dees.

Seems like Jack Viney is underrated by a majority. He is a big loss, so hopefully it's not long term. Gus spent a majority of the match sim off half back, so he could now spend most of his time in the middle. And it could also lock in Judd McVee for round 1, and maybe Rivers gets some midfield time.

That game was against Geelong at GMHBA in the wet. He looked a class above. Unfortunately he went totally missing in the Grand Final. I'd love to see him shine at Casey, and push the likes of Spargo, ANB and Harmes for a position in the side, because I think he's a natural goal kicker, which the others aren't.

The TV networks probably claimed the same thing about cigarette advertising back in the day. I've worked in the betting industry and I'm a keen punter, but I find the betting advertising over the top. The ads aren't directed at long time punters like myself and my mates, they're directed at new punters who are primarily kids. And I've seen the pitfalls 1st hand of underage gambling.

Pretty sure the Bombers were prepared to offer the former Dee Kyle Dunkley a rookie spot, as a carrot to poach his brother Josh a couple of years ago.

For Grundy to get back to AA level at Melbourne, it would mean at the expense of Max. Grundy was an AA playing 90% game time as the ruckman, and was rarely rested up forward. When you consider that Max is a vastly superior ruckman than Grundy, your argument that Grundy augments the value of other players is redundant. And how do you explain that the Pies have beaten us that 3 times without Grundy? It's not difficult for coaches to plan when they have a losing ruckman. Darcy Cameron and Mason Cox have hurt as forwards, something that Grundy has never managed in his career.

I'll go against the trend and agree with Buckley. McStay is a far better fit for the Pies than Grundy. With Mihocek as their only key forward last year, they needed another KPF. And I must have watched a different game. Grundy dropped 2 absolute sitters up forward. He's never been a good overhead mark. He won plenty of tapouts, but they are meaningless unless you win the clearance. Grundy's only value will be if can be an additional midfielder. A forward set-up of BBB, T Mac and either Grundy/Gawn will be a failure. And even more so if Kozzy is on-ball, and we don't have a genuine forward crumber.

Point 4. The board intends to utilise the Future Fund to subsidise the costs of the 3 month election campaigns that Deemocracy are proposing for every board vacancy.

A picture of the catering staff (I'm being kind) was posted on the MFC Instagram page. Are you amongst them WCW?

Your 2nd question to Kozzie should have been "On which club's letterhead will you be signing on?".

Without Fritsch, and Kozzie playing further up the ground, I don't think our forward line is imposing. Our midfield dominance masks some of our deficiencies. The addition of Hunter will create even more opportunities, but I don't think our current forward structure or personnel take full advantage. Our high half forwards in Harmes, Sparrow, ANB and Spargo aren't goal kickers. Kozzie is our only legitimate crumbing forward, although Fritsch has the smarts to get crumbing goals. Chandler seems to have the smarts to get on the end of passes and kick goals, which is why he should be a round 1 lock, in place of 1 of the half forwards. I don't like our ruckmen resting forward, and competing against our key forwards, when we lack crumbing forwards. And none of them are good contested marks. We'll have no problem scoring when the ball is in open play, but when the opposition hold us up, bombing long deep into the pockets will be a problem like last year.

I'll be honest, I thought that McVee would be the least likely of the 2nd year players to debut this year. But based on that game, he'll be pushing for round 1. He was excellent 1 on 1, read the play well, and his disposal was neat and effective. Others to impress were Hunter, Rivers, Bowey and Chandler. If Kozzie is playing further up field, then Chandler should be a lock for round 1. Rivers should be challenging Harmes for a spot in the side. The Grundy/Gawn combo went as how I thought it would. Gawn is vastly superior around the ground, and despite kicking 3 between them, neither were effective as marking forwards. Grundy's ruckwork was largely ineffectual, and was cumbersome at ground level.

WH gave out a clue, which by the lack of reaction, seems to have gone through to the keeper.

Sorry WCW, there is no clue in my comment.

I was stung into action after WCW worked out Demonstone's last quiz, and I couldn't. 😁

I don't think that Chandler plays the role of Pickett, ANB or Spargo. But the match committee need to decide whether they go again with an underperforming forward line, or they change things up. Pickett is our only true crumbing forward. Moving him out of the forward line for long periods of the game would be disastrous. When he's in form, ANB's role is important, but you can't carry out of form players. Chandler's skillset as a forward potentially offers more than what Spargo does in his role.