Rhino Richards

I dont see what two players who are just going not starring in the VFL and in the twilight of their careers offers MFC at a dark moment. I would have thought the Club would want to look forward not backwards. At best your ranting is p1$$ing around the edges and seek solace in the past. Given the Footy Dept selectors know more about the players and their form than average poster on this site (and it going to shock a few) does it ever cross your mind that they might actually be picking their best 22? B)

No Freak. Wrong again. As previously pointed out to you Its 16.5 points or less not 4.5 wins (18 points). You will need 4 wins or less.

If you are talking about the 2004 draft then of the fives picks, roughhead, Franklin and Lewis are players. Jury out on Murphy (#21) and Little (#26) has been cut. Still a good hit rate. The decision to trade any player is based on what is offered and what benefit it would provide to the Club above keeping the incumbent player. In a revamped and revitalised MFC, I think there may be a future for Davey. I think he is a better player in a good side as opposed to a poor side. His style of play capitalises on the opportunities created by players up the ground winning contest ball adn delivering into a good forward line. Davey does have shortcomings but any decision to trade him should be based on the expected input into future MFC sides and expectations of what he could bring to MFC in the measure of draft picks. The draft would also want to be expected to be a good one too.

Agreed Gouga. If we were talking 2005 then the comments would have some currency. But in 2008, both players have shown that the game has moved ahead of them. There performances in 2006 and 2007 have been lacklustre Given the maxims that Bailey is stating then Yze's self orientated football certainly does not measure up. And in addition after two big big wins by Sandy where it would have been easy pickings for AFL experienced players to dominate both Holland and Yze just went. If they cant show they are a cut above VFL then they will be wasted at AFL level. I thought the heading of this thread was pick the best bloody team. Neither measure up to it. Given what we know about the season thus far and where the Footy department want the side to develop I cant see the benefit or justification for playing Holland and Yze over younger players.

Freak, Incisive and compelling stuff On that factual basis lets not do it!

From 10 years experience at the one Club, TJ hates being tagged and his inability to be effective under those circumstances is one of the reasons why he was traded in the first place.

You did well up to there. No Honestly you did. Unless you are winning the contested ball and doing all those things the "tough" stuff you cherish means sweet f all. If you are just "tough" and not doing those things you end up no better than Andy Goodwin. I know you dont understand how the game has changed. The room to physically hit a player in the course of the play has narrowed significantly and such hits must happen so close to the ball and even then the level of protection to players against heroes charging or playing the man has increased. So have the penalties for repeat offences. The changes have happened over the past 15 years but the tolerance for such hits by the tribunal and the AFL is far less. You dont understand that. Many of the physical acts of the Hawks of the 1980s would be subject to the match review panel today. Clarkson has his players hard at the ball. His sides contains players who dont know (like yourself) when the line is crossed. And they have been suspended. And they wont be winning premierships with their best players suspended like Hodge etc. And they will only win a premiership if they play better contested football than other sides not by shirtfronts. My comment on Whelan was in relation to his 4 touches on the day and he is a hero in your eyes. What a [censored]! Thanks for misrepresenting my point of view but it seems to go with the territory. The lack of possessions the sort of thing that loses games. His hit on Ball was wreckless and inconsequential to the game despite you getting your rocks off. And regardless of which Club they play forward if the ball winning stars of the AFL are subject to that sort of unprotected hits then the game is lesser for it and the AFL knows it and is clamping down it. You cherish the inconsequential and miss what actually makes great sides great and its no wonder you rate Miller with Hall and think back to back premierships are a fluke.

Unless you have the skill to defeat your opponent in a contested ball situation and hurt the opposition with the use of the ball by hand or foot all the rest is secondary. You are glowing about the minor side condiments without knowing what is actually on the plate. Players like Hall have presence because of the way they win the ball and use the ball. They are hard at the contest and the ball. Sorry I find shirtfronts where you hit a player when they are not looking not tough but gutless. The AFL have recognised it and have outlawed them. Its a pity Pickett had to soil a reputation as a very good footballer, excellent in close and good tackler with some of the nastiest and gutless hits on players I have seen. Quoting Dermott Brereton on what is appropriate on a footballer is like asking Chopper Read on how to run social welfare centre. No wonder Dermie thinks its an art. He is living in the 1980s and his mindset has not moved on. No wonder Hawthorn pushed him out after advising Vandenburg & Co to draw a line in the sand some years ago. Pickett got those medals and accolades for playing the ball hard not the man. The only thing killed Pickett as footballer was Pickett. He would be happy with his MFC years. He slacked it and got $300k per year. And you are pretty chuffed with it too. And Adelaide won back to back flags in 1997 and 1998 and they were flukes. The fact that they won the flags from no better than 4th hardly makes it a fluke....Oh dear. BTW, Miller wears No 7 and rarely plays out of FF. Guy cant get a touch in the F50. Cant win a contest. Works his butt off but you are right he aint a KPP. How does he "pwotect" the little players when he is suspended? Whelan's hit on Ball was neither here nor there as it did little for the team on the day and given Whelan had only 4 touches for the game I guess you would call that "presence". It worked well and scared the [censored] out of the opposition who won 13.15 to 9.8 (and 3 of those goals were in junk time in the last quarter). In fact the hit only temporarily incapacitated Ball and took the wind out of Whelan. Bravo.

For the changes for Freo with Josh Carr out and their midfield not able to maintain the run for 4 quarters they might be ripe for a beating. While I am no fan of Jamar I just cant believe any one would play just one ruckman against Sandilands. Amazing. BTW, I think PJ will need a match at Sandy to get fitness back and Meesen is along way off IMO. Given the lack of performance of MFC listed players I cant see big changes In: Bate (if fit) Whelan Out: Warnock, Moloney B: James Frawley, Nathan Carroll, Daniel Bell HB: Paul Wheatley, Jared Rivers, Cameron Bruce C: Brad Green, Brock McLean, Clint Bartram HF: Cale Morton, Russell Robertson, Colin Sylvia F: Aaron Davey, Brad Miller, Austin Wonaeamirri Foll: Jeff White, James McDonald, Nathan Jones I/C: Lyden Dunn, Matthew Bate, Mark Jamar, Matthew Whelan EMG: Matthew Warnock, Colin Garland, Simon Buckley

Agree on Yze and Robbo. However it is interesting that the leadership group concept is actively applied at other Clubs. Its a good move by MFC and will be more effective as players realise what it takes to be a leader and elects players that reflect those qualities. FWIW, I heard on Sunday, Green had terse words with Robbo for not centering the ball. Should be more of that. Its also indicative of the lax boiled egg outcomes we would have got off TJ if he stayed.

Your understanding of what wins flags is also off beam. Teams win flags because they have the best players who can perform in finals pressure and win contested ball in tough accountable football. Tough football is at the ball and the contest. Thats how you intimidate. Not at the man. Very few enforcers have won flags. By the way premierships are never won by flukes let alone back to back flukes. I would not go on about Hall. You have shown yourself up already there enough. If Miller is a dud then he aint going to feature in a premiership side. Miller has not performed consistently since 2003 and we did not challenge then. He is no value when he gets reported and suspended. He has not got the brains or ability to play "tough". Pickett was picked up to win the hard contested ball. He is hard at the contest ....when he gets there but clearly boofheads treasure the cheap and gutless shirtfronts. At his best Pickett won games from his line breaking run and great ball skills....not because he was a thug. He was recruited by various clubs for his football skill not his thuggery which dertracted from his contribution to the team.

As usual, Freak...check you facts! As a consequence, several changes were made to the rules in 2006: The Priority Round was shifted, so that it was held between the First and Second rounds of the draft. Teams would receive a Priority Selection only if they finished the season with fewer than 16.5 premiership points. If a team finished with fewer than 16.5 premiership points in two consecutive seasons, then their Priority Selection is taken before the First Round.

8 weeks out apparently or *cough* retired.

No they did not Gouga. Its a misnomer. In 2001, the Hawks took the following midfielders Hodge, Ladson,Brown and Mitchell to compliment Crawford, Bateman and VandenBurg. Thats a good midfield in the making. They picked up Brennan and Miller in the following year who have been discarded. They also had Croad in defence. In 2004, they took who they best available in the draft, Roughhead. And then went the next best in Franklin. They could have gone Griffen and Tambling but they already had the midfield in place. They did take Jordan Lewis with pick they got for Nathan Thompson. For MFC, Rivers is our CHB. We do need a power forward and I would take one with our no 3 pick in the Top 20 and leave our lower picks for the best available.

Despite what ever breaks Hawthorn had, they were still in financial difficulties. Ian Dicker put alot of his own personal money in at the Hawks to soften the situation. BTW, we dont have a choice but to make us more competitive on the field.

What you dont understand is the fundamental difference between being at the ball and hard at the man and your ranking of who you would want beside you in a brawl is irrelevant. Carroll struts the tough physical stuff buts makes basic dumb errors with the ball and when contesting that nullify and make silly any of his tough stuff. Although you are seem impressed by it. Is Gladiators more your measure? Brock and Jones play contested football and are prepared to get in the thick of the contest (not the brawl and the fight). Rivers is probably the one of the best on our list because his judgement and defensive skills are excellent. He does not throw punches but makes his man accountable for when he goes for the ball and when he's got the ball. Whelan is hard at the contested ball but from acting tough in your definition got himself suspended for popping that peanut in Fevola. So much for your comments on Hall! As for Miller, on three occassions he has been suspended for his "AGRO" and lack of judgment to the detriment of his career and the team. Each "AGRO" moment has been spectacularly stupid in that he gets himself suspended, gets he and his teammates distracted and gives away a free or 50 metres within the MFC defensive 50. Totally stupid but your impressed! He is more inspiring in the leadership group because of his general work ethic, character and his normal attack on the contested ball. Not the physical stuff on an opposition player and getting in fights. It appeals to boofheads Nevertheless he is an ordinary footballer with limited football brain. How you could rank him next to Hall in any manner is perplexing at best?

Thanks for validating my concerns. You really dont know what tough football is. In fact your comparison with Miller and Hall establishes that gap even further. The way you are going you would probably stuff up the fair play old chap routine. Amazing.

Hall was a very good footballer with outstanding potential at St Kilda. The Swans have built a premiership side around him. Miller may have subdued him in 1 or 2 games but he is not in the same orbit. Not even close. And you clearly cant differentiate between what on field leadership is and what makes a tough footballer and what makes an undiscipline player to being a thug and a net drain and disservice to the team. FWIW and its a little clue, Hall's hit on Staker was gutless, cheap and dishonest to his team. I can only think its too many violent video games that you enjoy that makes you want to naively and mystifyingly glorify such on field indiscretions that are the domain of the brainless and for the enjoyment of the LCD in society. FWIW, the line of the sand was one of the most undisciplined and stupid on field acts you would care to see on the ground and it is no surprise the Hawks got no where doing it.

Capuano actions are banned by the AFL following the incident between the Saints and Capuano. You will need either a LT injury to a listed player or *cough* a retirement. ATM Valenti is still a rookie and not a senior player.

Just be like comparing Judd to Godfrey.

I have said in the past that Cooney has not delivered on his substantial ability thus far. This has been his best year to date. And he is only player in this draft that has the possibility of being elite. And it will take him two years to get there IMO. The relevance is that those that were critical of our choices to pick McLean and Sylvia should consider what other options were available to MFC. BTW, if you had read my post and not go for a cheap misguided point score, the assessment of Sylvia actually is based on the current situation of the player. BTW, I dont believe 2 years (50 or so games) to be a short period of time for elevation. I also believe that well talented players can move from good to elite within a 2 years time period. Ablett was also a superior player and Bartel a more than capable player. Both have taken a further step over the past two years. The assessments of McLean and Sylvia have been based on what was expectation of the players being ultimately "stars" that would have been received with picks 3 and 5. Many have seen CAC's 2003 assessments of both players and have been entranced by the potential upside. I think that has had to have been mellowed some what. Cam Bruce has achieved a hell of a lot from pick 64 in 1999 and Miller has been a serviceable player from pick 55.

He is definitely working harder in the past couple of games than he has done in the past two years. Its just foreign territory for him and I am concerned that despite his best efforts he is not good enough at it. However, he still has a penchant to go for money or bust MOTY or GOTY efforts which shows a limitation in his ability to think properly through the options at hand.

Firstly we dont know where MFC or other Clubs will finish in the draft. And secondly Naitanui and Rich may not be available to us. And finally...how many of the pundits here actually see junior football that much beyond a Youtube take or a misquote on Bigfooty in making the choices over one or the other? Both Rich and Naita seem very talented and will go early but how of them have the experts seen? And there are those that do actually do the hard yards of investigation and review but they seem to get drowned in the sea of speculation at seasons end and even pre season end (if your team is not going so well) Dreadlocks you say....

So what other choices does he have in the centre? Its not a desirable solution but I dont think DB has much choice in this. Bruce and Green do not get the No 1 tags. Also Miller gets a game because of work ethic, attitude and leadership values which are not in abundant supply at MFC and while in the longer term if we improve our list in skill, KPPs and in these above attributes he will struggle, he gets a game.

The dubious overall quality of the 2003 draft is often overlooked. In my mind the 2 best picks have been Cooney (#1) and Adcock (#32). McLean and Sylvia are not superstars. But they are unlikely to be duds either and certainly better of many of the other players who were taken in the Top 20 that year. If Sylvia can continue to build on this base he has developed this year, maintains and improves fitness and can demonmstrate off the ground he is focussed and dedicated then we may have a player to include in the rebuilding process. A God knows that process looks more significant that what may have been likely in February.