Rhino Richards

Game strategies evolve and the successful get copied, modified and countered. For every successful strategy, in time a successful counter strategy will be determined to nullify, block or overcome it. Within this period of time there are constant rule changes designed to change the flow and speed of the game. Strategies will also have to be adapted and developed to cope with that. I agree that some of the strategies (eg Swans flooding and containment) were awful spectacles. The AFL is sensitive to anything they believe undermines the game as a spectacle particularly in regard TV ratings and contracts. Possession football is critical to all successful and challenging sides at the moment. Teams are more focussed on decision making under pressure and not turning over the ball. Greater emphasis is being made on the use of the ball by foot and hand and the application of greater pressure on the ball carrier when you dont have it. In 2006, I would have agree that given where MFC were contesting finals and our scarcity of defenders, Rivers was critical to our structure. Regardless of the game, Rivers has missed 2 years of football which is alot for any top sportsman. He still has to prove himself match fit going forward. However, the tempo and pace of the game has changed significantly in 2 years. Rivers reliance on judgement and instinct covered somewhat a lack of pace that he had. In addition, I dont think he is strong body on body player. At times he was exposed. Given the increased pace of the game, players lacking pace are going to more exposed. While MFC supporters revere some happy memories of Rivers zoning off, opposition teams are going to exploit his lack of pace. The latitude he enjoyed in his early years is not prevalent in today's game. Given the options we have in defence now, Rivers like any other player will have to prove himself as much as any other player. I hope he returns as a worthy contributor and ultimately a leading player at MFC. But its not a given at this point.

Many of those footballers who did play in the 2006 through age, retirement, injury or form or both could not make an on field contribution to MFC. Neitz, White, Yze, Carroll, McLean, Rivers, Robbo, TJ, Pickett, Ward........ Damn the truth!

It is pointless because you are continually exposed my myself and other posters as having much content and facts as a Museum of Creationism. Your persistence in make revisionist statements about the side reflects a damning naivety of the facts, a need to pose an argument regardless of the truth or something more puerile. I dont have to defend anyone at MFC. You have already tried in the past to erroneously paint me as an ND hater. You got found out for that as well too. The following players who were with MFC in your "glory years" have either retired, been chronically injured, been traded or their form has deteriorated to a point that they are no longer AFL standard or a combination of both during the past two years... Neitz (Captain), Yze (VC), White, McLean, Rivers, Robbo, TJ, Moloney, Whelan, Carroll, Pickett, Brown. In addition the following senior players have been released from service....Godfrey, Bizzell and Ward. There may well be others whom I cannot recall. Nevertheless, the change in the playing personnel has been massive and has left us with a core of inexperienced footballers and a number of more senior players who many on recent performances are just average footballers with questionable skills to take us further up the ladder.

The game has changed for two key reasons: Firstly, the rules have been changed by the AFL to affect the way the game is played and they which have had a dramatic effect on the way coaches strategise the play and the sort of players that will succeed going forward. Centre bounce, kicking in, holding the ball rule changes have altered the way it is played. And secondly, the strategies do reflect an evolution of thinking Coaches combatting other coaches and also trying to irk out every inch of benefit from the laws of the game. Pagans Paddock and playing long down the corridor was tempered by the advent of flooding. Flooding was broken by game plans that emphasised stretching the defending or flooding team to create open space in the F50 and so on. An evolution does not necessarily lead to an improvement in watching the game for all people. In fact in some aspects the game are worse. (eg high marking has taken a back seat) In some aspects the game is better. (generally the fitness and ball skills of the players has improved immeasurably, AFL treatment of of off the ball incidents).

You must the only one to miss that the game has changed more in the past 3 years than in the previous 10 years. Coaches, analysts and long term current players are all saying and continually commenting on it. The increased emphasis on ball possession, speed and mobility and impact running is paramount which had changed the game substantially. That's now up there with "The world is square" etc. However, I agree with about the "he bleeds red and blue" line. Whenever that is used it generally a turgid bit of waffle at best.

We had possessions that did not count. I have no problem if the first disposal was a handball. Centre ruck duels are played predominantly within a tight space. It is inevitable that many contests will not result in a clear possession of the ball (unless a side is competing against MFC's rucks!) and that the ball will very often be contested. The problem with the midfield is too often we make the wrong decision by hand or foot and/or we execute with poor skill. BTW its not advisable to handball to a stationery player period regrdless of who you are. Often such action of passing to a stationery player smacks of desperation resulting from pressure on the ball carrier, inexperience or lack of skill. A possession game of football is not the sole domain of the elite players. You are right we dont have the stars or the quality in our midfield which makes your alternate reason for our poor inside 50s a case of missing the wood for the trees. So Mo, I will ask for the 43rd time.... what game plan would suit a young inexperienced, slow, one paced midfield with poor hand and foot skills? If a MFC player cannot handball/kick a football to the requisite skill level for AFL then that player should go. And the stats from the leading sides show that most successful strategy involve an almost equal level of foot and hand disposals. We do have to improve the targets we have up forward. Miller was good but if we are lauding him as our option up forward we are going to have some tough days. Bate, Dunn, Sylvia, Morton will all need to provide options up forward. Ultimately I hope Watts will be our saviour up forward. Our poor execution is combination of decision making and skills. Too often kicks and handballs just went to no mans land. We could have had Buddy and Roughhead up forward and many of the players would still miss the targets.

One of Davey's tricks was his closing speed from behind when the defenders were trying to clear the ball. But Davey seems unable to lay effective head on tackles and as you have noted his one on one skills will be tested. Opposition coaches will be seeking to isolate Davey deep in defence, well up the ground and make him accountable to prevent his offensive play. Rather Bell I would play Pettard down back. Preferably I would like Davey up forward as I dont think he wins enough ball or has the tank to do more than an odd cameo in the midfield. Playing Davey out of the BP will not make a third world midfield any better nor will it in itself lead to more inside 50s. Better use of the ball by each player will. PLayers were able to rack up the statistics but the decision making and execution lead to countless turnovers. I would be interested to hear your views on how we address the midfield issue as I am not sure we have any trump cards there at the moment.

Go to the Ticketek website for details

Morton selected himself for much of last season and his selection was not due to the absence of players like McLean. His selection in the midfield only highlights the paucity of talent and skill we have there. Given we have a 3rd world midfield, he is definitely best 22 and subject to fitness and form will be selected. I doubt whether we have a full squad or not has anything to do with it. Morton will only get better and other NQR players at MFC will fall by the wayside. In a nutshell Phoenix... Lack of defensive skills and physical pressure will limit his role down back. He certainly knows how to get the ball but his disposal is questionable at times. He is a definite best 22 candidate though.

Thanks for proving my point. His first four years were injury riddled and ordinary. Last year he was solid in some pretty ordinary sides. He will never be the star we had hoped. We will get more out of him on the paddock than we would have at the trade table. I love the term "trade bait" for a player. Given that the trade table is basically dead why would Carlton and Freo go for a player who has been injury stricken and inconsistent. BTW, he's nothing like TJ.

Monty you have a bad case of the hoopla. I trust the ground broke into rapturious applause every time he dashed out with a coach's message You made the earlier comment..... I have no doubt about his marketability in time but aside from the over excited few, most people need to realise his opportunities this year will be managed and his impact will be limited. Wona could be something special. Davey might be popular with the kids but he getting a bit long in the tooth re on ground impact.

Whoa horsey. Jack Watts could be that iconic player in 3 years time and if he is the "star" will be a crowd and member magnet. But FCS, there is alot of water (think Ingham!) to flow under the bridge before he is at that stage. There is no surity that he will indeed be considered for selection at such an early stage.

Good post. Too many posters judging Sylvia on the player posters dreamt he could be rather than the player he actually is.

Our midfield still remains a question mark. There were some positive take aways from the game. We may have some players of the future to challenge the existing midfield components but its a long term WIP.

Its a harsh and silly allegation of cheating at the Hawks in absence of the facts. Jonathan Hay's issues did not come to the surface until he blew up a number of times at North. At Hawthorn, he was a talented but inconsistent performer who wasn't rated as the smartest player at the Club. If and I do so if Hawthorn know anything about Hay's predicament then I would have thought the release of such information would have been a massive breach of the Privacy Act North have had every opportunity to assess Hay from his playing history. They had every opportunity to do any other assessments on him in the off season prior to recruitment. They didn't. They made a bad deal regardless of Hay's state of mind. His last season or two at the Hawks had been erratic and inconsistent and the Roos paid over the odds. More fool them. You have had a go at Hawthorn for "cheating" but would be happy if MFC did it. Well done.

Agree with that.

While it is good for MFC to explore these avenues, people should remember that the Melb City Council is financially straightened following John So's populist mismanagement. In regard to the State Government, I would think resources would be meagre with the GFC and the substantial bush fire recovery effort (This will take years of capital spending). In regard to semi government institutions, beyond State Treasury, TAC, Workcover and VFMC are the entities which control the vast majority of stored Government capital. My inside information from the TAC experience is they will not be sponsoring an individual football club again and realise the potential folly for themselves in getting embroiled associated with a Club whose players are found guilty of civil and possibly criminal driving offences. And TAC does not represent Melbourne. Its HO is in Geelong.

Sorry. Agree on all three points. While after a dismal 2007, 2008 was going to be hard. I dont think people realised the disadvantage we started with last year with crap training facilities and only 17 fit players to do pre season. You could have almost predicted the start of the season was going to be a problem playing the heavyweights of the competition when we were underdone inexperienced lightweights.

Very clever. I feel an affinity with the Owls GBP 28 million in debt??? That will take a fair can rattle!!!

I didn't validate it..more fool you for pandering to a cliched perception. I aware that the finance people at the AFL are low key and do get behind the scenes at the Clubs. You still haven't addressed whether the AFL has found anything untoward in the deal that would require investigation statement or comment. Rather you have trolled out your own biases. Well done.

Agreed. Five huge plusses for this year in.... 1. Number of players able to participate in a full pre season. 2. Additional Footy department resources to develop players. 3. Access to a complete and professional training venue like Casey. 4. Our youth are another year more experienced. 5. Our recruits this year starting with Jack Watts. Bring it on!

On one hand you are saying that footballers are entitled to third party business and unless there are issues of a non commercial nature they should be settled through the Courts and not involve the AFL. I suggested that the AFL would be involved regardless whether there is a suspicion of the financial gain through the nexus of employment or bringing the game into disrepute. Then you suggest that the AFL will do nothing by its nature. How do you that the AFL has not investigated this matter behind closed doors and found nothing untoward re salary cap but would definitely be interested in the public/media fallout if there is a messy protracted commercial legal battle between two parties involved with the one Club? Always like a valid point when actually made Bub.

Nice back flip....that's the reality!

Large business like Bunnings are owned by large publicly listed companies like Wesfarmers which are likely to be financially involved in every precinct in Australia.

If those activities that bring an AFL Club into "disrepute" - then its in the AFL's interest and they may investigate further. I dont recall Ben Cousins actually breaking any drug laws. However his behaviour and other individual's behaviour at the Club resulted in suspensions, inquisitions and sackings. Damn reality!