Rhino Richards

Thats why they are in the VFL. Easily. Embarrassing given it was 1 v 2 on the ladder. Shameful really. Casey got monstered today. MFC and Casey players ran up the white flag after 1/2 time. Agree. I understand Maric is contracted for 2011. I would move him to the rookie list at year end. Gives nothing. With all due respect to KC from Casey (and thanks for his efforts) but PJ being our 2nd best only highlights how poor Casey was. PJ was terrible today. I cant fathom the concerted and misguided arguments to move Garland forward to bring Cheney into the side as a must have. At best, solid and capable at VFL level but does not look in the same league as the incumbents we have in. Spencer looked ordinary and Strauss did little. Bennell took a good mark then disappeared. LJ looks another 3 weeks away at best from rejoining MFC. I know he has had some injuries this year but Wonna looks sslloowww at VFL level. I am not sure whether they will offer him another contract in 2011.

No that would not work. I think the issue is part of the modern game and its not as bad as people perceive. The game is actually getting quicker not slower. How much quicker do you want it? If you seriously want to change that aspect of the game (I am not in favour) then you have to consider doing the following: 1. Limit the interchange bench use to prevent the ability of team to have players around the ball for 4 quarters 2. Penalise player tackling the ball carrier by making the interpretation so loose in favour of the ball carrier that it detracts from tackling. 3. Bring a zone off side rule where you must at all times have a minimum number of players in your forward/defensive 50 at all times. 4. Prevent the players from doing more than 4 weeks pre season training and let them enjoy unhealthy diets. They wont be running too hard after that I know I have a better idea....lets just keep it as it is.

Good riddance to the ground which was 20 years behind the times and a National Trust heirloom. The facilities and playing surface had deteriorated badly over the past 10 years. Central location (but little parking) was the only thing going for it.

Some good thoughts Biff on Flower.

"Most football followers" is a term used to justify the unprovable and implausible. He is well on the way to being highly ranked but the greatest ever..Dipping into hyperbole again Dan.. The team of the century had Bourke, Stewart, Greig, Barassi, Skilton and Williams on the bench. Greater than them. Also noting that this team does not consider champions of the past decade like Hird, Voss and Buckley who all have legitimate claims for recognition. His father over the course of his career was a freak but only got on the AFL TOTC bench. So I am not sure while you are tutting other posters comments on Flower when you have gone for a bit of licence yourself Geelong made the finals from 2004 onwards so you are really scrambling for facts if you want to claim Geelong were underachieving like Melbourne during Ablett juniors time. Flower had 14 barren years with MFC prior to 1987. There is adequate proof about Flower's performances at State of Origin (when it meant something then). He had a number of BOGs for the Big V in that company. He excelled at that high level. He was in his final year one of the prime on field catalysts as to why we made the finals for the first time in 23 years. He was peerless in the 2 finals he played. He did his collarbone early in the PF. There is sufficient evidence. OK so I now know who "Most football supporters are". B) Agree the comparison is pointless. How much of Flower's career did you actually see Dan? He is easily the best MFC player a nunmber of have seen by a long stretch. He was as good as and even better than any of his illustrious contemporaries. He maintained that standard throughout his long 15 year career. So why shouldn't he be revered on here. And yes its a matter of opinion so why knock the parochialism when all you offer is your own big statement about the future? Your pointless exercise again. Asking current players would be a waste of time because the oldest would have been at most 12 years old when Flower played his last game. Many of the younger coaches like Voss, Scott would also fall into that category as well. I dont see the purpose of it. The fact is that both Flower and Ablett junior will be and should be recognised as brilliant footballers over their careers above the pointless [censored] for tat that might go on.

Wrong wrong wrong. The game plan is the same. It did not change in Round 2. There has been enough discussion (some of it worthy and some of it crud) that clearly outlines what has happened. Do a search of the site for "Game plan" and track posters like Axis of Bob and rpfc. You may be open minded but you clearly dont have the facts.

BBP, if you look at the last three years then you are quite correct. Ignore the misguided disagreements. Our list in those times have been plagued by senior players physically breaking down and young players developing injuries that cost them a season. Typically, we have started the year with a number of players with hampered pre seasons and then pick up a clutch of B) injuries in the early rounds then would seemly accumulate with a regular hospital list of 8 to 10 players with everything from career threatening injuries to 1 week niggles. And as we move through the 2nd half of the year we would accumulate players who have "season" or "indefinite" by their names. This might have been helped by moving Meesen to the rookie list, delist Buckley and trading McLean.

Agree. The pass to Watts was also a shocker but he should learn from all these experiences.

As big as that one if your reference is to Ablett junior?

Clarkson is now in his sixth year and his list should be out of the developmental phase. MFC appointed Bailey with a view to complete recasting the train wreck of a list that was inherited. Given the talented young list, the development process is critical and MFC have already appointed Kelly O'Donnell to fill that role. And given O'Donnells role do you think his pedigree reflects he is new at the caper? . I am not sure how you can draw a judgement of self belief, self confidence and personal identity about Bailey. Do you know him? His press conferences are straight bat standard answer sessions with consistent key messages that are oft forgotten by supporters. I not sure you can glean any clear messages from that particularly when you seemed to have missed more obvious signs about the state of the Club's playing list.

I would have thought there is substantial evidence to suggest Dean has got the improvement from experienced players like Junior, Beamer and Jamar through to younger players Garland and Frawley. Ratten took over a team that was gifted Judd and had stitched up 3 first round draft picks. However the jury is still out on Ratten. MFC are two years behind Carlton in the development stakes and IMO are better positioned to improve. MFC dodged two bullets in trading McLean and not paying out big money for Warnock. This will hurt Carlton. Clarkson took over a similar crud list to Bailey but had the benefit of more generous drafting rules in good years, a couple of fortunate trades and the legacy of good access to picks in 1999 to 2001. There was a reason And Bailey reduced the side to a rabble??? MFC were already there in 2007. The backbone of side for the past 10 years, Neitz, Yze, White, Robbo, Whelan were finished and the need to rebuild our list from scratch was blatantly obvious. Bailey has done this and done it professionally. If you cant see the evidence now you wont be able to see any in the future.

Jolly has left his best football in Sydney. He has been very ordinary at Collingwood and he was beaten badly in two games singlehandedly by the player who replaced him as No 2 ruck when he left. I am glad we agree that Fraser is a disgrace. And your comments from big footy I think echo the general concerns about his ticker. Interesting to note that Fraser was No 1 ruck against PJ in the QBW last year and absolutely flogged him. Nah wont go there. Collingwood have really spent heavily on their ruck stocks over the years and ended with little. Fraser, a No 1 draft pick, Jolly (pick #14 and #46, 2009), Wood (pick #14, 2007). This is an achilles heel for them. However this should not take anything away from Jamar's heroics. One of the most improved players in the AFL. Jamar's position is important as MFC only play one ruck. This role is critical given the absence of an standout No2 that can hold a position up forward. Jamar is important as a player because of the way he performs in the centre with his tapwork and physical game. He is also dangerous around the ground taking contested marks in defence using the ball well and at times pushing forward and kicking goals. And its a very good point how much better he makes the midfield look. Beamer, Junior and co are far better players when they dont have to continually crumb the opposition ruckman which they had to do so often last year. Completely agree...Leroy Jetta I also reckon Thomas has been so so in his games against MFC. His improvement this year (not as good as Jamars) comes off a very low base for someone who was a No 2 draft pick.

No I didnt Stevie. Another Fail. Not a good one by your standards. A little tip if you are going to quote someone get it right. I responded to Demons 06 who said Garland into the fwd line and Frawley to take Garland's defensive role. And I have said often recently what you have quoted from 2 years ago. Why remove a strength in putting Garland forward? Here is the quote I suggested moving Rivers forward because I dont see him as a LT back solution given we have Warnock, Frawley and Garland. I think he is slow, poor disposal, not good body on body. I dont think he has a future for us up back. At the time in 2009 with our forward stocks so low there might have been an opportunity for him to carve a career up forward. Garland has been recovering from a serious injury and was out for over 12 months and is now showing the form that made him a must have in defence before he was injured. He is one of our key defenders and its the reason why MFC were soo keen to get him back in defence. In his early games he was pinch hit forwardbut showed more up back If you want to talk development why wouldn't you get Frawley (51 games), Garland (30) and Warnock (49) playing more games together in defence to learn the ropes especially as they're starting to gel well? Oh that right we need to fit a one dimensional player in there from the VFL. Ugh! Not you best effort Stevie but I know you are trying really hard. And you will get there..eventually. Keep swinging. So you'd expect Bailey to make a definitive statement on a Sunday footy show? From Mordja's comments Bailey has not ruled the thought of doing that in or out. But its got you impressed. Poor example. Bennell was moved up the ground because his defensive skills particularly body on body were poor and was not capable of playing the small defenders role. Bailey still sort to capitalise on his attacking style of play, But he needs to do more when he does not have the ball. As far as development and game is concerned he is doing very nicely in the VFL. I cant see him going back for a while.

I have said nothing of the sort about Frawley. So try again. The fact is you dont know. What we do know is that Garland is a very good player in defence. And you are wrong about the forward he takes. Garland has some significant scalps who have been prime movers. Now why cant we play Cheney forward if the MFC Footy Dept deem him not good enough to unseat the incumbents??? Hmmm. Its because he is one dimensional and as a defender unless he can show more than incumbents in the role then why should he be picked? In your case, yes.

My bad. I thought it said 5 weeks to go and not 2 weeks. Make that Round 17. I would have thought 2-3 games at Casey to get some match fitness will be required.

Given the amount of football they have missed, I doubt Blease, Tapscott, Gawn and Spencer will be playing AFL. Jurrah might be back for Round 20+. But he too has missed nearly a season of footballer. Mark them in for 2011. I would. I could not believe Junior would want that either given the team orientated selflessness which cahracterises his game.

Outstanding film clip of a truly brilliant footballer. He is the best I have seen in an MFC jumper in the past 40 years. For those who never saw him play, you missed a star and a treat. And with all due respect to some fine MFC players since we have not had another like him or as good as him. I hope the current generation of Scully, Trengove, Watts and co develop to become players of that high quality.

Why wouldnt you try those that cant get games in defence, up forward? They may possibly provide more value to MFC there to plug a short term gap up forward then wallowing in the VFL. And use also maintain your strength in defence. Who would have thunk it?

Well said Nasher. Too hard for some. The very case to move Garland forward could easily be made for Cheney if that switch is necessary. Sage wisdom there Goffy.

Firstly we have depth but we dont have the quality. If the Footy dept thought Cheney a better option up back than Garland they would have played him. Hmmm!! Of course this is all about how we get Cheney into the side at the expense of common sense! How silly of me not to realise it!! Moving Cheney forward might also be the greatest thing MFC has done. Not that you and I would ever get caught uttering hyperbole. Thank god the footy department shows a little more nous.

I did read properly but you got it wrong on all three players. Dunn mounted his greatest achievement to date. Keeping an attacking player like Shaw out of the action. And that was more valuable to the team than any cameo in the VFL. If anything our attack was better having Shaw nullified. Think about it.

Thought the same. Hang on Nasher.. Grimes was recruited as a midfielder..

Grimes, Frawley and Garland...how many do you want? FWIW, I thought Shaw was quiet for the day. If I remember correctly we had Dunn draw him from the play.

Neitz was a fwd at MFC in when the seconds were still in the AFL. We had Jako at FF and Schwartz at CHF. Neitz was player who could not break into that Fwd line consistently. He went into the backline and as a good footballer. Based on your assessment, we should have moved the Ox to CHB. Thats silly. So why would you weaken a strength? Why wouldn't you take the lesser players and see if they can offer you more in another role? Therefore you get more value add for the team. In time Strauss will become a back. If you'd seen him on Saturday you'd have seen he is progressing nicely. Macdonald is a capable back - not as good as Garland but not poor. And we don't know about Cheney and McNamara because they haven't had a go. Not at all.I have explained my position on that. I am just not narrowing to a situation which has a questionable net benefit to the side. If were strategically thinking you would realise it too.

Who from?? Whos been talking? Source?