deanox

costs in the order of $100,000 for the mfc to have the partnership with casey, it would cost well over $1 million for a stand alone. these figures aren't exact but were suggested to me by some people involved in running a vfl club, when discussing this with them. its not just a little extra unfortunately. In the mean time I am quite happy to support Casey in the vfl. While I understand it is incorrect to call Casey the 'Melbourne Reserves' it is not incorrect to say that the 'Melbourne Reserves' play for Casey, as they do.

i like the look of jordie, seems a likely type and could play quite a few games. but anyone suggesting 250+ games, or even 200+ games is being rediculous. only 23 players have played 200 for the mfc, and only 6 have played 250. im hoping he has a good career, and as a rookie i'll be stoked if he gets 150.

I'm in, and there should be a Casey Fields Hot Dog for the winner!

I was there but was up in the room behind the coaches box geting a tour of the facility and missed it! Saw David Rhys-Jones in our coaches box though. Has anyone heard what role he is playing?

if we have footage, the afl have footage. and whoever filmed has footage (i.e tv channel). unless the afl ordered us not to show anyone else the footage straight away other people may have access to it. if it was leaked, you couldn't exactly pin point who/where could you?

i agree with that too. i would rather the afl allow the Review Panel to judge incident on precedent: i.e. this bump was deemed fair and is similar so bump x is fair. and bump y got 3 weeks and was worse than bump z, so bump z gets 2 weeks. it would be the easiest way to get consistency. Now that the AFL has declared it a legal bump however, if the footage comes out, the AFL will have to stand by that. They would have been better off saying 'its nothing to do with us, its a review panel decision; which it is. I believe the mfc have footage of the bump. It would be good if they leaked it.

i haven't seen the video, and didnt catch it while at casey so it is hard to comment exactly. But what I hope this means, is that the AFL has decided that it is possible to have a bump that goes wrong (i.e. head high) where the appropriate response should be simply a free kick, not a suspension. bumping is part of a physical game which involves an injury risk. if he didn't use his elbow, didnt jump off the ground to clean him up, didn't hit him excessively hard, and he was at least in the play somehow, then eprhaps the result should be 'fair bump that slipped high, free kick high contact'? i know sylvia broke his jar, but we cannot go around judging incidents on the injury to the player. some horrible malicious and dangerous bumps hve players jump back up, while other times (see moloney and bartel from memory) players get injured without any contact occuring and that is apparently enough to suspend them? take the injury out of the situation, if it was an accidental part of an otherwise well executed bump it should have been a free kick, nothing more.

my opinion is that the differences between 'most' afl lists is so insignificant that it can come down to little things like great runs with injuries to determine who finishes up the top. obviously we have an exception with our current list, but in general it is often those other factors that make the difference.

I'll be along, got an invite to the Casey Presidents dinner, so will see some of the Casey matches as well. I will happily note my thoughts here on Sunday for everyone, though they will be just one persons observations.

not only did they name bate in the best, they also named both fletcher and jurrah, which is odd considering they apparently played on each other. even odder is that apparently jurrah didnt have a great game and fletcher beat him... i think someone wasn't actually there!

i am happy he didnt go. i think it was an accidental high collision that was part of the game (physical contact is part of the game) which deserved, and got, a free kick for high contact. bumping or pushing or any other form of contact is legal if the wall is within 5 meters and the contact complies with the rules (ie not too high or in the back etc). if high or dangerous contact is not purposeful it should just be a free kick. my only exception is cleaning up a player, hip to the head, if the player is running to pick the ball up, that should always be weeks. but almost any side on bump where clash of heads, or slight head contact occurs should not be a report, just a free kick.

we were physically more aggressive at the ball, body and contest. not saying we were amazing, but i was very impressed with a few more of the boys willing to put the shoulder in or throw themselves on to the ball trying to win it rather than just leaving that to jones and moloney.

skip the honey moon and play cricket! next time we'll go down together with your bro. last game i played i kicked 3, it was magic. Rollo, i am still trying to confirm work committments for next sunday so will let you know when i do. what time are we anticipating this running to with all these opponents?

out of interest his brothers are listed as 186 and 80 (mitch) and 191 and 87 (jarryd). So he'll probably never tip the scales at 95kgs, regardless of how much he tries, but the 88-91 is probably around the mark. much heavier and his strengths will probably suffer - endurance and evasiveness. I think he is naturally a lot more of an attacking player than a defender which is why bailey ran him off a half back flank for much of last year - teaching him to run harder the other way as well. Rosso, do you see him as an attacking wingman/HF or as an inside midfielder or as a KPP?

during preseason training i expect that players are training hard, possibly harder than they run out some matches, the whole point is to get them fitter now than they need to be to play round one, so its not a surprise that some players need to take it easy some weeks. anyone exercising regularly knows that you pick up sore muscles and niggles along the way. as a result you need to back off for a couple of weeks or even just a few days to let the body recover. we don't appear to have picked up any new soft tissue injuries so I'm not sure what you are suggesting?

i cant imagine we'd be playing at 10am though? do you know where and what time?

im keen for feb 28th though may be a shade under the weather...

they were my thoughts exactly.

i agree with you here, but we obviously have a different idea of which part of the exploits need to be the leading by example. i think its the exploits which involve putting your body on the line, the team first, doing the 1%ers and backing up your team mates that are more valuable that the skill set, however the skill set is important. but i think you are now taking away a bit from brad miller as a player. he may not be great, but he marks well and he throws the body around, where he lets himself down is his kicking for goal.

fair enough, but im not sure who of your suggestions take the CHF spot away from miller. other than watts (who is still at least a season away from it) none of the other players are CHF's, unless they play Bate in that position. I would like to see green and davey play a lot more forward, but i see green playing off the full forward line rather than the CHF line, and if he does push up the ground it will be to a flanker/midfield rotating role, not a CHF role. sylvia will play of a HFF, but will also get pushed into the guts a bit methinks, and while he is strong, he isnt tall enough to replace miller at CHF. Regardless of how tall miller plays, you cannot afford to play a short player as your CHF as they will get smashed by the CHB's when the ball is in the air.

really? i hope that the young and talented key forwards would watch how hard he runs and try and match that. yeah, i know they can out kick him, but if in every drill he is 10 meters ahead of me because i wasn't trying, i'd be embarrassed. and I definitely wouldn't want to argue I deserve a spot ahead of someone if I don't train as hard as they do, unless I was a superstar, of which none of our young kids are yet. If anything, his example could be that pure natural talent means nothing if you are not willing to put in the hard yards to get the best out of yourself.

You have summed it up perfectly. and you even managed to point out our other 'options' instead of Miller, which simply shows why Miller is our only current option, and why he gets a game. Bate another player that also has limitations even if he is a better overall player than Miller, but as you described, his limitations make him more effective playing a different role. LJ who has played 9 games in his 1 season of AFL, despite the fact that we all believe he will make it long term, has no runs on the board just yet. Watts, an 18 year old who still needs to put on another 5+ kgs before he is consider to play in a key forward position and who got monstered when he stepped onto an afl field last year. Garland, a promising young player who has played one fantastic season in the backline. and petterd, green and sylvia, who while effective small players are about as close to being CHF's as I am.

fair point, there are a couple in the mix there, although methinks johnson is safe with our lack of ruck ready to play at afl level. but it only takes an indifferent year from petterd and solid years from 2-3 of the other listed players to have petterd in the delist zone, simply because of the rate of turn over players from the previous few years.

Bate is a fantastic and underrated player who I think will have a breakout year this year (if last year wasn't his breakout year). That being said he does not play tall enough to be the focal CHF and is being currently utilised in the capacity of a tall flanker (similar to robbo was over the years). He has a fantastic motor, and very good pace off the mark meaning he pushes and rotates up the field (read: in the midfield) and drifts closer to goal as well. As a result he is currently not playing the true CHF role, but a different role. That being said, while I rate Bate, last year was his first year of good consistent footy for the whole season, he really found his straps. And you could argue that Miller struggled for games in the middle of last season. However, once he got back into the team he played some of his best footy for the year kicking 6.7 in 5 games average around 15 disposals and over 6 marks a game.

im not sure if you have much knowledge of the concept of leadership, but typically 'best player' is not part of the description. He is vocal and supportive, he trains hard and runs hard all day - which means even if he is not a world beater he is leadering by example with work ethic, which is far more important in leadership terms than doing fancy things well. he goes in hard and will throw his body around, he will fly the flag for young players. Did I mention how vocal he is on both the training track and on match days? Leadership is about getting the best out of other players, about standing up (in millers case physically) when required and about encouraging and supporting teammates. Miller might not be a lot of things, but in my opinion a leader is one of the things he is. And in a club devoid of leadership that is recognised by making him part of the leadership group.