Rhino Richards

Quite correct. Those who dont understand are drawing the wrong straw.

For a guy with pretensions of being Aust Captain, he needs to change his ways. His batting at times reeks of class but not leadership. I thought he had turned the corner during the Ashes. He has lapsed since. I agree he is done. i dont think this innings will save him. He will never get it so good as this Test. ordinary attack, firm true wicket, fast outfield. He needed a ton when the wind was blowing his way. He could not get it. At his best he cant crack a ton. At his worst, he should not be selected. Phantom facts by the journalist. Its strikes me as a beautful batsmans deck with a little bit of bounce. has been like that for years now. Must have got mixed up with 20/20. Oops. I think Cam White is definitely putting himself forward as a batsman ATM. As a batsman you are probably right. As a spinner, I am not so sure. Ah ha. All lame too!

I would have thought that 3/339 reflects a fair bit of momentum. Katich shot was not good. Watson got a very good ball. What was Clarke thinking? It would be good to see Watson get his breakthrough 100. He deserves it and has play well. He would not be the first player to have taken time to crack the ton (Simpson and S Waugh come to mind) However over the series, the middle order have played some pretty cavalier lightweight hands. Hussey is playing for his future today. Its the best I have seen him bat this year. Why the media goes on about Perth being fast bowlers strip I dont know? There is a bit of bounce but it is not a quick wicket. It played beautifully for first day wicket and I reckon looks good for 5 days of batting. Windies just cant sustain the pressure consistently. Just proves that Test Cricket is not dominated by one nation like Australia did for so long. The cricket has ben very enjoyable. i read somewhere that selectors are seeing ODI as a better proxy for Test than just Shield games. I dont think they were ever going to seriously drop Hauritz to go for Smith as a spinner here. Its more a reflection that he is definitely in the selectors eyes as a future prospect but more as a batsman. Krejza has bowled fairly well but cant get the wickets this year. Still a long way back. McGain might be a very outside chance for Melbourne (odds lengthened IMO). McGain at nearly 38 yo is finished By the injuries, they may only have Swann!

A rancid apple has been sent to the compost!

Robbo had a very good career at MFC after coming off the rookie list. He improved his game particularly his kicking in the first 8 to 9 years. It is one of the myths that he should have played as a third marking option. He was in fact at various times our first and 2nd marking option (after Neitz). As you point out he regularly beat bigger and stronger opponents. He was a hard match for this size at his peak but the demands of the game changed 5 years ago and Robbo started to get found out inceasingly in some of those areas of his game that were never strong..... Even sadder for you my friend that you are caught by this bug. Robbo started to struggle in 2006 and his following years tracked a slow decline with fewer and fewer cameos to save his bacon. By his last two seasons, he was a shadow of the player he was and the demands of the game were making him looking more and more out of place. MFC have to move forward and Robbo was not part of that move. Now you are dreaming and along way from reality. 16 clubs had the chance to take him for free. They didn't....reality check. His mobility was suspect pre the ankle injury. It was not any better afterwards and his perceived weakness were real....reality check. Now lets imagine....damn it...reality keeps coming back again that he is finished. The rides over. Time to get off the dream.

His future was marked well before then. Nasher summed it up. The fact that other Clubs seeing themselves in a flag window did not pick it up. It was a great career and he should be proud of it but its over. Lets all move on. Try yelling JURRAH and Watts. Agree on the last point.

We only elevated Spencer when Jamar went down and neither Martin nor Meesen were plausible ruck options at the time. It will take more than one LT injury to a ruckman to force an elevation off the rookie list. Your post is confusing. Firstly you say elevations can only be for LT injury then suggest we could have a mid year elevation. Which is it? If the injury is a LT injury to a ruck then Jordie may not get a guernsey. I doubt Meesen will be elevated unless there are extreme circumstances (multiple LT injuries and surprisingly strong VFL form). The way I see it, Meesen is sixth in line of our ruck stocks behind Jamar, PJ, Martin, Spencer, GAWN. As we move to the 2nd half of 2010 and all big men are fit, I could easily see Meesen moving to the VFL 2nds to provide "experience" for GAWN. Jamr and Martin at AFL level, PJ and Spencer at VFL 1sts and Meesen and GAWN VFL 2nds. Brad Miller has as much chance of featuring in the ruck as Jordan McMahon has in kicking the winning goal in the 2010 GF.

With no disrespect intended to Junior Junior, the PSD is really a non event these days and PSD#1 seems hardly the trump card it used to be in negotiations. Mind you I am happy with Martin and Jurrah. But it rarely grabs a bigger fish.

I agree. They take a punt on Oakley- Nicholls or they punt on a green young player. Either way its a punt with low risk.

Agree Golly. I dont know how much it was. But it should not have been significant given he was a fringe player at the time

He was to be re-rookied at his old salary. How much do you think he was contracted for in 2008 as a fringe player in the side?

Given your explanation of MFC's shortfalls up forward at the end of 2008, how wrong (bsdies hindsight) could the offer of 2 yr contract at low fee rates to a fringe player who offered a speculative chance of being a capable forward have been? As you rightly pointed out the overall cost has been a sixth pick in the rookie draft. Before the rule change it possible would have cost us the resigning if we couldnt rookie somehow Cheney, TMac or Bartram. There has been some misplaced gnashing of teeth over the resigning of Newton as a monumental error. Its wasnt anywhere near that and based on the situation of the Club's forwards at the time hardly an earth shattering blunder. As for the attributes, I think Newton is as speculative as any rookie pick. However, the difference is that MFC have determined Newton is unlikely to push for AFL selection in 2010 and beyond. Most other rookies are selected on the basis that they offer the prospect of sometime in the future being an AFL player. i dont thnk that is the case with our boy Newts.

I think Meesen is going to finish up his contract at Casey barring injuries. If anything I cant see him getting any preferential opportunities ahead of Jamar, PJ, GAWN and Fitz. I suspect there is more future in game time to Spencer if injuries arise.

Fair enough. Aside from rumour what are doubts logically based on? As for "murky circumstances" all there is are rumour and speculation about his departure and its get repeated ad nauseam on this site from time to time that it gathers a false head of truth. I have read alot of unsubstanted criticism of BB yet to read one informed critique of Bohdan's role. I note his title/role has changed during his time at MFC but most of his detractors would not know what role he does actually fulfill. As I have said before, if BB is failing his role then he should be held accountable. However this accountability should be based on the facts not on Footy Forum innuendo and scuttlebutt.

Your contribution to this thread Iva is???

Its called the right of reply Iva. Just like you have done and thanks for your interjection or was it opinion. I merely pointed out to the poster that his philosophy that he champions does not measure well with his conduct. Happy for you to have the last say Iva. Onto more useful topics.... Complaints about Casey should be considered against the terrible conditions the players endured when they had to train at Trinity then drive to the run down third rate weights room at Junction Oval. If a player is struggling with a half hour drive to Casey, then its going to be a short AFL career

A common element of forums is the ability for opinions to be given but also challenged in discussion by other posters. As far as I have seen you have been active in interjecting, challenging other posters when they post a view that does not agree with yours (even to the point of accusing a poster of blatant lying seme weeks ago!!!). Posters are welcome to give opinions but should be prepared to have that opinion agreed with, challenged and disagreed with. If you cant accept your opinion being challenged in any way then you may want consider why you use forums such as these.

I am not the one speculating and being generous with the facts. Your call to action should be the sort of thing done by any Club in the AFL as a matter of course. Its not rocket scienc

Dont you think the Club does that as a matter of course? Hmmm.

No issue there WYL. I noted your admission. A typical scenario in a Shield match is a fourth day run chase isnt it? And as SA prove it was a good track to start with and it got better. The drop in wickets at the MCG are producing flat lifeless wickets that bat well to the finish of a match. When White declared well short of the SA target it was going to be a case of SA setting up a run chase to push for full points. It was a fair ask at the start of the day and the powerful Victorian batting line up were equal to the task. I think these days WYL, the traditionalist would take that view, but the realists know that the preferred form of cricket around the world varies.

Its going to depend on the conditions. While on most occassions you will bat first, it is not golden rule. So the word "always" is simply wrong and history proves it. And using one game to back your argument is wooden thinking at best.

Pretty ignorant shot and in poor taste and I am glad you condone it. Its got nothing to do with the Nathan Jones. Stone Age logic at best. Absolutely. On the news it was said he struck from behind. Other than that we dont know what happened. Regardless of what did happen, its criminal assault and the perpetrator should be subject to the law. I hope the player recovers soon.

Nothing like making conclusions without the facts.

Dont you think that MFC undertake a full review of all aspects of the Club each year? Particularly given the past few years of injuries. And as WJ said well, injuries occur for a variety of reasons. You are taking Riley's comments in a context that clearly weren't meant. You are splitting hairs between the use of the words "inquiry" and "review"

You could see it coming. 45hg16 had them summed up. Another instance of foot in mouth. Agree about the Test prospects. Spot on. Its not a miracle but a contrived result to push for a win. Check the scorecard. Both Captains played for the win. Wrong. Your earlier email was a flagship to some of the ignorance about calling the toss when you win. Its already been proven that while in most situations you bat first it will depend on the conditions. And it isn't "gutless" to send a team its actually brave call particular when know nothings spout such rubbish that "you always bat first". I would not be pushing any thing "meaningful" with that earlier opinion. Proof that some people never learn.