Rhino Richards

Is the injury list that long? I think your questioning of him is fine.

You would be quite mistaken. I am not arguing one way or other re BB. In absence of facts or evidence, I dont see how any poster can mount a credible argument either way. On that point I agree with you. The fact is I have not got a clue about whether BB is doing a good job or not. I dont know the bloke and would not recognise him in the street. From what I have read on this site, I dont think other posters are much different in this matter. However, I have read a number of criticisms and condemnations of the bloke (more than just how he is going) that have not shown a scintilla of knowledge of what actually goes on at the Club or any collaborating evidence supporting the criticism. Everytime I have asked for factual evidence of his failings by his faceless critics there's not a peep. If there is factual evidence of an MFC official failing his duties then he should go...period. Allegations of failure without proof represents a witch hunt IMO. And on your point if the injury list is a consequence of conditioning then BB should go. I think the Footy Department are in the best position to make that assessment not uninformed non de plumes on a public website.

Agreed. He could just as easily hit his teammate's opponent. Hit and miss but more miss was creeping into his game.

Clint Bizzell was already selected and barely holding down a back flank position. So he was already in. And he has shown little capacity up forward whenever thrown there while at MFC. He was hardly a replacement but I agree I did not see the sense in playing Robbo.

He will retire at the end of the year so he is irrelevant to the topic. Old's list is close. After the first six players there are a number of possible combinations. Alot will depend on how players perform and the fitness they hold throughout.

Winning

Whats "class" when it does not perform? ...Crud

No "Healy stressed the impromptu meeting was not the formulation of a group to take over the club. "

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/jud...3190796686.html Hardly surprising though. The spot was effectively vacant last year!

I am not the one making the continual claims. Your call. Cheers. We had a cavalcade of players who were best 22 who did not play much last year. Both Moloney and Yze had injuries and never returned and weren't risk. Its an extent of the injuries that mounted over the course of the year that players like Neitz, Robbo and Davey were persisted with. FWIW, I would not have persisted with Davey through the year. For the positions Robbo and Neitz played we did not have one capable player to bring in that would have done better than either of them 70% to 80% fit. By the seasons end we had barely a side to pick of capable players to pick and had no choice but to play them. Bollocks. The fact is we did not. None of the youngsters who were available were playing decent football to justify a promotion. And there werent that many fit either! The team looked crap on paper from about Round 2 onwards. We could not get our best team on the track and our depth (many of which are gone now) was ordinary.

Yeh I read that alot on this site and its rarely validated. Good luck. Is the conditioning a fault here? Yes this is a contact sport but what has caused those injuries? Most of last years injuries were in the heat of battle. We have a number of injuries that are long term (Moloney, Bartram, Whelan and Rivers). If the issue is conditioning then hold BB accountable. If its not established through an understanding of the cause of the injuries and length of period of rehab then you are undertaking a witch hunt which achieves nothing at all.

Agree with you on the approach implemented. Your last sentence does not hold. As many times last year we played our fittest rather than our best side and injuries kept coming.

I dont see how you can isolate targets and timing when you are in the game. I dont see how you can have a skill without having the ability to execute it in a game. Each to their own Richmond are an ordinary side. However they should be more [censored] off than us about the weekend. They put up a near full strength team (bar Coughlan) against St Kilda and were ordinary. I doubt whether we will have a significantly different side on the weekend in Cairns and the Tigers would be out to redeem themselves. I would not be surprised if the Tigers win comfortably on the weekend if they click. However I would not be surprised if the Tigers emulate where I think they will finish this year.....Bottom with a different coach.

How would you know what the Club is actually doing and what the situation is at the Club re injuries? I dont see the need to repeat comments that are nothing more than speculation on your behalf in absence of the facts. FWIW, last year we had a number of players who had disjointed and interrupted pre seasons. I dont recall the Club making any big comments about its preparedness last year. And my point on BB is that the state of injuries on the list may have little to do with BB's functions at the Club so I dont see the connection even if the list is dire. If there is serious issues or failings with BB or any other official then sack them. But many of our injury woes pre date BB and have occurred in the line of battle on the field not from the programs put in place by BB in conjunction with medical staff and the football department.

Execution is very much part of skills.

I am not interested in the scoreboard at this point of the year. I am focussed on who we get on the track and what methods Bailey uses. And from the experience we had last year, Rivers and McLean both had scratchy pre seasons and were injured early in the season and were inconsequential for the year. Rivers missed most of last year and has not trained fully pre season. He will need more than one match. Given he has had a slight knee injury, McLean has lost some conditioning. Given his history of soft tissue injuries I would have thought Mclean needs as much match conditioning as possible given the importance of the year ahead. You have also conveniently overlooked players like Moloney, Batram and Pettard who should be more important to side but cant get on the field. By your own twisted logic, we should not play any of best 22 during the 22 H&A and keep them in cotton wool for the finals for fear of injuries! You seem to have it repetitiously embedded that senior players can only get injured in practice matches rather considering they actually might get some valuable conditioning and training. And the injuries we had last year occurred in the H&A not in the practice matches. No one has said play players who are not 100% fit. The problem is the number who are apparently not fit or 100% and of those the number that are likely to be ready in match condition by round 1.

We probably dont know the real facts just where the players are at. However your worst prognosis would not be a good outcome for the start of the season. On another point, are you saying the injuries to the player are a result of the conditioning program of BB? Is that why you would sack him? Its possible but I would not thought they would do it so early in the season. I think the big issue is the fluff that appears the Hun, The Age and the website at this time of year.

A definite loss with probable loss. The whole point of pre season practice matches is practice prior to the commencement of the season in preparation for the season ahead. At present Neitz at 34 and Morton at 17 are probably the only ones being rested. Depending on injuries, Morton is unlikely to be pushed for Round 1. From the list it is likely that come Round 1, Rivers, Moloney, Bartram, Bruce, Davey Petterd, Dunn, Whelan, Wheatley, McLean either will not be ready by Rd 1 or will be severely underdone come the season start on an interrupted pre season. I am not sure having inexperienced rookies getting "smashed" is a positive. Its unfortunate given the above plus injuries to Miller, Frawley and Carroll's suspension that we had to play three rookies and pull a kid out of school to play for us. We had no other choice but to play them and the result reflected it. None of those rookies nor Maric are likely to play Round 1 or possibly during the season. The experience may well indeed be wasted because there is no certainty that many of those players will make it. As we have a new Coach and new game plan it would be important that those who are likely to be in the Top 22 are there fit and firing and actually implementing the game plan an reflecting the new tactics on the field. Bailey has a difficult hand of cards to play with ATM having so many players injured.

You can talk it up all you like but notwithstanding the players missing, today was a truly pathetic outcome with few real bright spots and the enormity of the task ahead for DB is being formed. There is much to do. Many of the senior players that did play may want to consider the future if todays performance is a guide.

Economics and the siren does not work!

Gold Coast and Sydney are bigger economic and demographic markets.

Obviously common sense and abilty to think through issues under pressure are not strong criteria in your judgement. Why footballers should not be subject to the same standards as the rest of the community is puzzling? Its a pity we did not get that man of fine judgement and social standing Michael Voss as our Coach.

Given we have turned over 25% of our list, have a new coach and presumably a new game plan our strengths and weaknesses will come forth. Many of the strengths noted are also weaknesses. We have a very young list which provides us with hope and potential, that potential may take some time to mature. Given our lack of contested possessions last year the midfield is as much an unknown as the forward line which could be good but has shown often in the past to inconsistent and the players listed are mix of twilight career players (Neitz, Yze), players whose form was ordinary in 2007 (Robbo, Davey, Yze) and the unproven (Newton and Maric). BBP, I would be careful assuming talent because of the an AFL draft selection some years ago. The draft is littered with players who were Top 10 and never made it in the game. Our ruck is reliant on an aging Jeff White with three other players who have failed to make the grade so far. I think our defense is capable with Rivers in there and the midfield is competitive. The best way to beat the Pavlichs and Brown is to cut the supply as they are difficult to beat one on one. FWIW, I think our list is better now than it was when ND took over. Back then our best talent was in our older players many of which were crippled and good for only a season or two after that (eg Lyon, Viney, Stynes, Tingay). Our recruitment in the mid 90s had been appalling. I think our recruitment in the past five years has been good but subject to injury we should see the benefits of this. Its going to be a really interesting year with the rise of some young players and potential declines of others.

Given the 10 players that are injured or being rested this issue was rather inevitable. You would think that the ruckman will all have considerable bench time. I am not too worried about the result. I am more interested in the manner in which they play.

Agree. Should their membership card be a scratchie ticket?