Rhino Richards

They are no different to other supporters. However they are no bigger frontrunners than many of the players that posters seem to think that despite evidence to the contrary that if they play in a certain position where they constantly failed that everything will be alright. Injuries aside and regardless of the scoreboard, the performance of many senior players has been insipid and as another poster pointed out the absence of any player fitting into the A category of footballer. We have many senior players who have alot to play for but seem only to be heading towards the twlight of their career at a rapid rate. We many many young players that are not AF standard but might (not necessarily will) be in a few years. I am sure Bailey is fully aware of the gig he took on. He will certainly know just where its all at now. Supporters are entitled to feel disappointed by the poor performance of their team regardless of who they support. I think Demon 3 has a very valid point. Nathan Jones might not buck from his admirable work ethic but other young player watch and observe in the heat of battle so called "leaders" not chasing not manning up and not accountable then it does have a cancerous rub off.

Thanks Maurie for injection some form of interest and information in this thread. Its a symbol of the ignorance of the typical supporter when they have to adopt thelove child to justify selections of players. By the way, Schtaker, the Swans offered a fourth round pick for Miller not pick 8! There is no way Miller is worth more than a 4th round at best and there is further no way MFC would have knocked back a first round pick for an at best fringe player. Given your low regard for Miller would not the myth of the Swans offering such a high pick have seemed questionable?

Some good but sad recollections of a disappointing day. We did not lose it with Stynes running over the mark or three players missing goals they should have got. We lost it after half time when MFC went into the mind set of trying to protect the lead rather than continue the way we were playing. Jim Stynes said as much in his book about his football career. Peter Schwab and Russell Morris have confirmed the same thing. The Hawks were energised and kept at it because they believed we has gone into protection mode and you could see the potential loss unfolding at the start of the last quarter. It was a hard tough bruising game which had we won, we would not have done any better than the Hawks the next week. Both sides played their GF that day at Waverley and were easy meat for a primed Carlton side on a hot September afternoon.

For the past two seasons he has been travelling around the S bend at a fair rate. Haydo sums it up on this one.

MFC need an effective 2nd ruck. PJ isn't there yet. The door is wide open for Meesen and Jamar to take the role....if they are good enough. Holland...a maybe. Warnock...no thanks.

Unless you can dig up someone from the grave who can cover those areas you're right. But hell, there is no harm with a person just expressing an opinion. He is not necessarily right or wrong. As another poster aptly put it..."A subjective piece that's not worth worying about." Take a tablet and lie down.

Opinions are based on peoples observations and experiences. The same basis as you seem to value your opinion. Did you see Ron Todd play? How do you evaluate the opposition? He was in good in the VFA but does that have credence against the cream of the AFL? You keep up your reading now!

Dont be so precious and petty. Its covers Australian football. Cable was arguably a better footballer over his career than either of Flower and Dempsey. At his peak Cable was peerless as a rover particularly his footskills. And they would be in by the truckload. My opinion. And I guess Mike Sheahan has watched a similar if not more football. Big deal. I'll huff and I'll puff.......

FCS. Its only one person's opinion. No doubt there will be gripes about why isnt MFC footballer ----- ----- there? FWIW, while I note Flower was not there, I also note Keith Greig was excluded as well. Grieg was in the AFL Team of the Century ahead of Flower. Greig was good but also in a magnificent side yet Flower was better for a longer period in a crap side. I rate Schimma better than Greig. So did Mike Also Sheahan had Jack Mueller at 50. From my reading and talking to old long time MFC supporters, Mueller was freakish and outstanding with his skills. It was a pity the WWII happened during Mueller's peak. Its an interesting read and I think Sheahan has done a reasonable job. Its a difficult selection when you look at the next 100 that missed out. Its telling though that MFC could not muster a Top 50 player since Barassi.

I would have thought it was just common sense for an AFL footballer to adopt that without having to make a public policy. Then again common sense has been in short supply with some of the players. To me all the policies in the world are useless unless they translate into professionalism and performance on the field. I'd prefer the Club said nothing in this area, players avoid public minor misdemeanours and focus on playing top quality football when the season starts.

I'll wait to see what Brock delivers on the ground this year. Thats the true barometer of where he is at. The annoying thing about this is some of the sanctimonious grandstanding in this thread. However, his biggest crime is attending a Lionel Ritchie concert! Yyyyuuukkk!

Welcome and thanks for your efforts and observations ding. They were really appreciated by many posters.

There is a thread that discusses this issue: http://demonland.ugbox.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=8930 Despite the rumours, I have not heard nor read anything firm on McNamee's actual interest in the role. If the CEO recruitment process is run as comptetently as the Coach recruitment process, I dont think the press will know either way until the appointment is made.

Caroline Wilson is spot on in her article. http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/afl-...4402366407.html I cannot see why the AFL are so intent are on taking the Swans to task for an alleged issue in a meaningless competition when it did nothing when Carlton clearly tanked last year and were rewarded to get access to the best young player in Australia. Betting markets are framed not only on the relative strength of the selected teams but also the belief and the confidence that both teams go out to try and win. There is no difference between tanking and throwing a game in the balance as the outcome is the same. Both acts undermine the integrity of the contest for all stakeholders. More so than last minute changes to a side.

That's my point. Unless you are in the Football department or have close access to the operations of it you would not know. And as you have clearly demonstrate the average supporter who only goes to Victorian based H & A games does not. So I dont know why you carry on with the pretentious claim of Ratten being some "independent variable". You clearly would not know Any assessment of Ratten in reference to other appointed midfield coaches is not only uninformed but clouded by the issue of cattle each Coach had at their disposal. Ratten had two crackers of players available which that other coaches did not that made his job easier and the rest of the midfield better. White was AA and Thompson was the inside midfield star we have been crying out for. Its impossible to put a valid assessment of the part Ratten played in that. However it is illuminating that when Thompson went injured at the end of 2004 H & A and White tired and his performance drop away, MFC returned to its disappointing old ways and we were flogged in the midfield. No Ratten magic there. Very well put your Highness! Much food for thought for those posters who think they can judge assistant coaches performance from the grandstand.

In other words you really havent got a clue as a mere spectator from row T seat 52. Your reliance of vaguely recalled fluffy media articles only reinforces the situation. Thanks for the validation.

Hence my point about the impact of White and Thompson.

Thanks Diablo for your efforts and observations. Graz, I thought the same thing about the push in the back rule. Its going to be dynamite if backman are inept or crude when 2nd in line for a contest.

Whether Williams get another year or not is determined by the people who should be in the best position to assess him. If the Foorty dept thought he was a dud then they should have dispensed with his services. Nasher is right though. How would you know any better as supporter what Williams is like after another year? Cohesiveness on the park should begin to occur with a return to form and fitness of players like McLean and co. If not valid questions should be asked about the Footy department and the players on our list.

How would you know and how can the average supporter make an informed assessment about the assistant coaches without being privy to the inside information within the MFC Footy Dept? Neither Ratten's predecessor nor Rock or Williams have had the luxury of a performing AA ruckman and a fit and firing class player like Thompson. Neither Rock nor Williams have had the cattle that Ratten had at his disposal. Unless you were at training how would you know there was an immediate improvement. Most of the midfield at MFC at that time were outside midfielders who relished first use of the ball provided by a first dibs inside midfielder like Thompson and a dominant ruck in White. The impact of those two players was substantial on the whole midfield. However when Thompson was injured late in 2004 and White tired toward the end of the year, we went to water in the midfield. And I have heard similar support for Williams and Rock from the players. I would not put too much credence in media events that are generally trained cliche roll outs.

You and Ding are champs for doing this work. I hope MFC reward your efforts with a good exhibition. Thanks

In Ratten's only year at MFC, he had a fit Scott Thompson as our No 1 midfielder and Jeff White as an AA ruck slaying the opposition. Its easy then the midfield coach looks good but in reality how would you know. Thompson went injured, White tired in R18 and MFC were crap. he had an armchair run in the midfield relative to what recent midfield coaches like Rock have had. Ratten has had such vision at CFC he is 0 and 10. Our midfield was the worst in the comp because aside from Junior and Jones our best midfield was not on the field.

That's my argument. There only one great ruckman around...thats Cox. One of the great lies is that ruckwork focusses on the centre circle. The rule changes have prevented a ruckman getting considerable advantage on the palm out. Ruckwork these days is also about mobility and ball skills. Very few ruckman have that. In the past very few ruckman had that. These days it is demanded and many bigger players like Jolly, Sandilands get found out when the ball is the open. That what makes Cox such a damaging proposition. Even more so with a damaging midfield. Last year, when WCE had Kerr, Judd and Cousins out Cox rattled up huge possesssions. It did not stop WCE getting pumped. Sydney won one and nearly another flag with ordinary rucks. Geelong belted the opposition in 2007 and they had Ottens. No not at all. He had a good year last year. Did nothing in the GF last year. He is borderline. That's one dominating ruckman and one who is better than average. Not much out of 16 teams with approx. 3 ruckman each. Dead Easy. Cut the supply in the midfield. He is not quick and would not be flash on the lead. And double team him in a contested situation. He is rather immobile and poorly balanced.

Yep. Our resident geek Fan can do this without any trouble!

There were a number of games both involving MFC and not, where despite the ruckman dominating, the midfield got crunched. In two games last year against Carlton and Richmond, White dominated the ruck but we lost nearly every clearance and contest. When he played Sandilands got his had on the ball first every time but Freo's midfield were putty last year. I dont think a midfield's performance is necessary tied to the rucks. In fact the importance of a dominating ruckman is overstated in the modern game. the future ruckman is another midfielder tall (198cm +), mobile, good ball skills and a capable reader of the play. At the moment there is only one premier ruckman in the competition....Cox. Sandilands is overrated. He is tall, lacks mobility, phyisical strength and balance and football smarts.