Rhino Richards

So long as he bleeds for the Club Jack then his crap performances are just dandy!

Distance Demon's e-mail would apply to your first sentence. How dare Sylvia smile and laugh post match? Shame on him. I would not be boasting about that trade. It was stupid then as it is now. Why would NM trade a fit talented but inconsistent player in Wells for a OP crippled non performer like Sylvia? You must think other Clubs are completely daft. Beggars belief. You may as well have suggested Sylvia for Judd or Hodge! Sylvia's medical history and limited output at MFC guaranteed he had zilch trade value at any time in his career.

Robbo???

I dont know why I am put up as a Sylvia fan (I am not) and even more bizarre I am not sure why you're gloating. I have bumped thread "A sight for sore eyes" where I have stated in October 2008 that Sylvia is an average footballer, no trade value with a question about his football smarts. Try post # 15. I further note that you were glad we did not trade him as "Clubs know his value". FFS. Any chance you might still see "value". Why dont you and your cowboys do a search on Sylvia on the Forum and look horns with Y_M and BBPowell who are actually pretty chuffed with the skill and class of Sylvia. As I have lamented here often, Cooney aside, the Class of 2003 is proving to be one of the most ordinary drafts ever. Sylvia is one example of it. He was pathetic yesterday. I am not sure when his contract is up but a few non efforts like that could see him out the door quickly. Or do you still see him with "trade value"?

*BUMP* for Rusty, Minimum Bob.

I understand that the Animal Enclosure used to boo St Kilda players they did not like or thought were soft. I understand Russell Morris and Brad Gotch both spoke of being rabidly abused while playing for St Kilda! Yes an evil evil place!!!

Agree. However, I love My Friend the Chocolate Cake and through a mutual friend, I know Bridie "bleeds red and blue" (I can use that term when its not related to a player deserving a game). And I share Jacks view of the mavericks. Are we all mavericks then ????

Jack its a good idea for kudos but a number of posters were thinking of it for monetary terms. That was never on the cards. But thanks for your lack of perception.

Bully for you Mo. My you're a self proclaimed wiz. I said if the contact was between shoulder and jaw. By the same reference how do you know it was a clash of heads??? Its great that GOTO can accurately state the law without big noting himself. You fail on both counts. Then you would be the expert there Mo. No argument from me on that . Yes that and other similar incidents.

I think shirtfronts come under the rough conduct charge.

You are a pretence in dire need of substance. The contact with McGinnity was shoulder on jaw not an accidental head clash. If the contact involves shoulder on jaw there is risk that it could be deemed "rough conduct" and citable to the tribunal under the AFL laws. Refer GOTO's post. But thanks for your expertise Mo. I am sure you can channel it into that game plan we should have playing.

H is right beyond the money and the hoopla in absence of the real thing, the NAB competition is a contrived rule testing warm up to the real thing that many sides do not take seriously. I can understand why clubs that are more financially viable than us are ho hum about the whole event. The excitement for MFC's future is in its 23 and under group particularly the recruits in the past 2 to 3 years. With the older players I know what I get from them and as shown over the past couple of years its not enough and in some cases not good enough if we want to return to being a force. We need those younger players to rise to a standard well above where many of our experienced players. So I can understand H's lack of excitement in the team. So saying that, I would be happy for a win for morale for the side , to kick the season off to a good start and get the $220K of funds. I dont believe NAB success will have any material impact on getting a sponsor. However, its not the be all and end all. And if we lose the coaching department will have alot of issues that they can work on for the rest of the pre season in practice matches played under proper H&A rules.

Clear succinct summation of the events DD. Well done. This has become a blown up media storm in a teacup in a quiet pre season. Good assessment GOTO. Setanta's one week does look silly and underdone as a consequence. I think Whelan's bump was pre 2007. Correct. It is Irrelevant. Contact to the head was made. End of story.

While I agree, Beamer and Rivers have missed so much football over recent years that it is disturbing if Beamer is still getting niggles. When over his ankle injury Rivers needs to get back to playing football pronto.

Saul Eslake is spruiking his interests in making space for a team from Tassie. Mergers are dangerous paths for the AFL. The 1996 fiasco blew up badly in its face. I am not sure about the sense of merging MFC and NMFC anyway. Both clubs are cash strapped, low profitability, low attendance, low membership, poor facilities and with little vested regional or community interest. No obvious synergies beside just concentrating all these problems and more within a mish mash club that wont mean anything to anyone. I think the AFL prefers a relocation to a merger and there are not any takers ATM. Also I think the GFC (not the ones with the blue and white hoops) has also put a big handbrake on expansion plans. Its financially very tough out there.

A full bodied shiraz for me!

Shame on you HT for such good reason. Shame.

If Cox had been Davey's height the arm would have got him around the waist. <_< . Maxwell hit him partially front on and high.....that's danger. Sorry, when the attacking player runs in from an angle of greater than 90% from the direction the target is running and strikes the target front on and high then its trouble.....its not a hip and shoulder. And you may want to join the Pies at the AFL appeal to learn what a legal shepherd is. And then pray tell us all Bub. B)

No thats your argument about height and it is pointless and I only established the absurdity of it. When its contact to the head or upper part of the body where the attacking player clearly does not have his focus on the football then its in trouble. Feel to bathe in the hyperbole of it destroying the game. Another pointless gesture. And Bub it has nothing to do with technique and its an interesting "shepherd" when the player leading in the race for the ball was taken out by an opposition player who made no attack on the ball.

And you Russian??? Brilliant. So if Dean Cox swings and arm and connects with Aaron Davey's head then its OK because Cox is taller than him. Thanks for clarifying that. The height of the accused has bugger all to do with it. Its the point (s) of contact with the hit player that is relevant. The AFL have flagged a number of times that hits against players around the ball were going to be scrutinised. I am not sure what official communication has gone to the Clubs on this. By any stretch the attack was crude and would have been penalised. However last year it would have got 1 or 2 weeks not 4 weeks

So are you going to address the real issues or are you quite satisfied with your pretence of knowledge?

Nice bit of nitpicking. You are a source arent you. I note you have not addressed the focus of Maxwell's attack being the player and not the ball, and the distance of the collision from the ball. Keep swinging Mo. Too busy working on that alternative game plan champ? I trust it will be good.

Meaning the player hit did not have possession or control of the ball at the time of collision. The ball was 2 metres from the player at the time of collision. Its the bleeding obvious. I hope he get an extra two weeks for wasting people's time. It was an high attack on the player and not the ball and should be penalised accordingly

I am not sure why you keep banging on about "the list" when I have clearly established to you that our best 22 from 2006 or before was completely decimated. And that fall off had nothing to do with game style. Our record in your glory years with most of those players at their fittest would suggest that at best the game plan could get us no further than 1st week in September and that against a number of better sides we were routinely torn apart As you have been told.... After the train wreck of 2007 where it was clear many of our senior players had deteriorated dramatically fitness and form wise there was no alternative. 2008 only confirmed it. Those senior players had to be transitioned out. We had and we have a huge hole in their list. McLean Jones and Co were recruited because of their football skills not because they were pigeoned holed into a defunct game plan. And if you are telling that they cant play to a standard that every other Club can play then they are not good enough for AFL. I dont believe that for a minute as I think McLean is a key player for us and Jones and Sylvia could be useful. I am not so sure about Beamer. So what game plan would suit a number of limited one pace footballers with questionable decision making and disposal skills? If you had an iota of understanding you would have realised that these losses are a culmination of a number of issues that pre date the two years where you seemed to have blacked out on. So what was the alternative list management approach that you would have taken that would have sustained the "success" of your glory years? What was your solution Mo?

The AFL have said they would crack down on hits on players off the ball. This was consistent and strong interpretation on it. I thought one of the issues that damned Maxwell was he did not look at any time like he was playing the loose ball. His eyes were on the player and not the ball and his contact was high. That is not a bump!