deanox

shows potential to be a good player. star? im not decided, but i am excited as he looks like being a solid 200 gamer for the club, no fuss player who does most things right. he will get 200 games on merit, not just because he is around, but i am not sure whether he will be a competition star just yet. if he is it will be as a 30 possession a game workhorse not a damaging game breaker.

i dont have the time to do it, mostly because i don't know complete stats ie height and position of everyone in H's original post however i woukld be very interested to see a break down of: talls v smalls age mids vs backs vs forwards inside vs outside mids for the list of players that may make up apparent top 6 groups (i think this top 6 argument is on the money). it would be interesting to see that list as a comparision for the top 4 sides, compared to the rest, to see if any specific combination of players seem to be more important (ie mids not forwards, forwards not backs, talls not smalls, KPP not flankers, if there is a specific age or games experience that is optimal). i realise thats a lot of work, so if anyone has a spare 20 minutes and just wants to work out positional data ie mids vs forwards vs backs, i think that would make a very intersting read.

kieranbj i think his biggest problem is he is a bit slow stepping up to afl pace in the games he got. did finish off the year strongly with over 20 disposals in each of his last 3 games (in fact his last 4 mathches 18, 22, 22, 27) were 4 of his highest 6 disposals in games out of his 52 games (also got 22 in round 22 2007 and got 18 in round 14 that year also). having now got to 52 games, and putting a string of good/consistent games together at the end of the year i am hoping that next year he manages to break out. he is only 22, and given that it has been clear no one has been really sure where to play him, his development has been a bit touch and go. i think he will be a midfielder come tagger come forward flanker, who perhaps plays the brad green role as spare parts man when green finishes up. the big thing with dunn for me is that he needs to learn to throw himself at the pill. he should be singled out over summer and told to get smashed. he should be forced to hit tackle bags, forced to back into packs, forced to take bumps and give bumps. it needs to be knocked into him (not hurt him) but he needs to be shown that going in hard doesnt get you hurt. if he can overcome this he could be a fine footballer.

well given that belly was a number 14 pick as well (which is reasonably high) and that beamer had been a few years on the geelong list before he came to the mfc im not sure how good your argument is. w/ regards to bell he was always someone i liked but who hasnt been able to take it to that next level. i agree his 2006 season was fantastic but he has struggled since the injury but he has had 3 years since then. imo his biggest problem is his knack for getting injured in the most improbable situations. its not soft tissue related its contact injuries (maybe due to his lack of awareness). but i really feel these injuries have stunted his development and his ability to learn as a footballer, as he is often spending his time just trying to confidence back in various body parts? will he make it? probably not. but he is contracted so he gets one more year to see if he can recapture the 2006 form. if he can keep injury free he may be able to do this, but i am still not sure there is a position for him in the long run as other tall-medium defenders have now over taken him (garland, frawley, warnock and martin) and im not sure he has the agility to play on the smallest forward...

if he had of been left forward he couldve been a very damaging and consistent forward over the years. but then again we already had an undersized player playing tall in the forward line (robbo) and green did play good footy in the middle/off the back flank. i would like to see him used forward more often, especially when we are really looking to win games as his kicking makes him dangerous when forward. i agree his role in the midfield will become less as younger players come though, and given that he has the versaltility to play at either end of the ground as well as in the guts indicates to me his role will be to play where we need players. if young players like grimes and strauss step up into the midfield, green will play more on either flank. if these younger players do not come through or play most of their footy in the back half then green will be utilised more in the guts. i would however like to see him swung forward when we need a change up there, or when we need a couple of quick goals, as he can provide that.

hey caseyscorp, i was wondering if you ever got that list of players who the mfc kept out of the casey side who werent injured? i am still interested to see how many and who we actually held back.

great quote. he gives his all, i like him. but he isnt taking us anywhere...

imo could finish top 5 in the bluey, perhaps one of our most important and most consistant players all season. good footy smarts, fantastic hands, good pace when he gets a chance to use it. good delivery to him will see him kick a lot more goals thanks to a thumping kick. led the club for goal assists (19), which was 16th in the afl, and kicked 27 goals. think of a player who can play what we have defined as the 'miller role' but who kicks goals, and makes quick decisions, has an ability to play closer to goal and push into the midfield. another preseason and better endurance will see him be able to run even harder. he will be a player that the others can grow around. rate him highly atm. oh and completely unselfish player in my book, will happily give it off for the good of the team.

in all honesty, i can understand why this would be an affront to anyone, no matter what the buisness, but i can also understand the clubs pov that players are payed based on other things, not financial contribution to the club.

best available with top picks at all times. if you ahve the best 5 mids in the comp, it doesnt matter if you dont have the best KPP. similarly if you have two fantastic, hardworking KPFs, a lot of damage can be done with a solid mid. that being said, you can always trade away good players for what you need later, while if you specialist pick (ie KPP, not best available) isnt as good he will not demand a higher price later. who is more important for your team, a great player or an average player who fills a position? if you have a small forward line you play short, and kick goals from the mid. no biggy.

unrelated hot spots - good news its unrelated to existing injury, bad news its a new stress injury. hopefully it is simply an issue of resuming training a bit too fast, and proper rest and physio, and a slightly more cautious exercise program should cope with that.

Brock mclean hasnt lived up to the hype. after bursting onto the scene as a young promising high draft pick we all expected him to be our star. unfortunately, star he hasnt been, although he has been a regularl contributer. the big question with brock is, do we believe him to be a good solid player who will produce the same each week or do we think he is a potential star hampered by injury? perhaps its a little of each. in his early days at the mfc, he showed a lot more RE disposal, especially long kicking and goals ie 50-60 m out. in the last 2 seasons this hasnt been evident. perhaps if he could get this aspect of his game back on track everyone would be much more willing to accept his current form (plus the goals and long kicking). hopefully an injuy free preseason can sort out brocks issues and he can take the next step and grab some games by the scruff of the neck. having some better finishes and outside players around him may allow him to excell as he might not be depended on or expected to perform outside as highly (he is clearly a better inside player). nonetheless he is an inside player who has shown he has polish and that he can finish off with good disposal in the past, so hopefully he can step back up to that level.

in the history of the mfc, only 6 players have got to 250 games, only 23 have got to 200 games. if maric gets 200 i'll be stoked. as promising as he is, he is a lnog way off yet. current players mcdonald 235 (injury free season gets him 250) green has 198 and bruce 203 (might get 250 if they plays 3 seasons more uninjured). our next most experienced players are miller (127), davey (119) and mclean (94). it is way to early to speculate on anyone else getting 250; brock would have to play 20 games a year until he is 32, davey and miller would have to play until the were 34-35. jones may be on track (70 games and is not yet 22), bate (68 and 22). morton has 40 and is 19.5, so is probably the best chance as you said nasher.

so out of three responses i got 2 for each player. it is interesting, because it wouldnt surprise me if it came down to one of these two for a spot next year. interesting because mcnamara and bartram both got a good wrap in the 'end of season report' which sounded like they would be kept around... and cheney and mcnamara's next year is discussed. newton and miller both had positive spins but nothing that suggested them as walk ups next year (although newton is contracted), bail cant go (first year) and bell is definetly looking shaky...

Robbo in a nutshell- fantastic performer who could do the incredible. successful footballer who played a lot of games, ikced a lot of goals and produced for the mfc over 10 years. what robbo isn't, is a thinker. he is a centrestage man. he is a performer not a contributer. similar to the way yze often played, he could be a quality player, but he never was the team man (although i do not doubt he lvoed the club). i hope robbo doesnt play on, because i don't think he will live up to it. but i cant see why a club like bulldogs or saints or geelong would not consider him as his talents could make the difference next year. if they are happy to have a player who will probably play for himself, not for the team, he will probably flourish in a top side where he is not the number 1 forward and has licence to do his thing.

as a young player the turnovers can be excused if we think that that aspect of his game can be improved or if he just needs time to settle. his pace is a weapon, and if other parts of his game are lifted he could be very valuable. i agree that it might come down to how many spots we need to free up. 3 gone already, i imagine they will want to turn over 5-6 spots on the list, and not sure if they are considering promoting any rookies. if it came down to valenti (solid, reproducable, workmanlike but not nessecarily a match winner) versus buckley (unproven, great pace and potential to be damaging) for one position on the list, who would you choose?

maric is a player i dont have too many doubts about. he will play 100 games at least, and hopefully will become a 200+ gamer for the club. while he hasnt set the world on fire, he is clearly adjusting to afl pace and to playing in a different team etc this year he was starting to find his feet a bit better before he got injured, and looks a likely type. hasnt got heaps of ti, but generally uses it well, and doesnt seem to be overawed. hopefully will become a very smart afl footballer.

HT, sorry i read it wrong, thought you were defending it all, rather than just the "eye gouging" part with jaded.

when reviewing that article we managed to get 4 of her top 25 rated that year, which is interesting in itself. does emma quayle have any mfc connections?

emma quayles top 25 that year. ok shes is just another journo with her own personal take on things, but genreally her stuff is worth a read. given that he was the youngest player in the draft there was speculation that he would be a high draft pick the following year. even if there wasnt that speculation, why pick a úplayer so young that he has another year of under age footy in him, only to dump him after two years? he would have to have been picked as a player who they thought would develop, and unless he has shown nothing, he would have to be worth a go. and it can hardly be argued that he has shown nothing, even if it has only been glimpses and not consistantly. http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/general/d...4767026939.html

probably, and if they are overseas or out of town thats fair enough, but you would think that there should be an official delegation from the club at the match, and given the number of playres who are in, or have been sloted in for surgery the past week or two one would think there would be a large contingent still in melbourne.

i think you have missed the point that the charge is not simply "eye gouging". it is "misconduct- eye gouging or unreasonable and unessecary contact to the head or face of an opponent." you dont need to prove he eyegouged. just mushing someones face for a few seconds could qualify for this charge and penalty. and that is in the afls own rules...

High Tower, did you read my post on page one, it pretty much sums up this case exactly. The way the afl has set up the tribunal with its activation points etc this is the only penalty that can be handed out with manipulating the description. the crime is misconduct in that the player either eye gouged or made unnessecary and unreasonable contact to the opponents face. i cannot see how anyone could argue this didnt happen. was it intentional, reckless or negligent? he admitted it, so it is intentional, not reckless or negligent. if this is downgraded it is purely to get him off, not because its true. a stray elbow may be reckless but he said he put his hand on his face to use a pressure point, this is intentionally committing the offence. <if the offence was just "eye gouging" it could be argued it was reckless eye gouging while attempting to contact the head or face, but the offence is "eye gouging or unresaonable contact to the head or face". as it was contact to the head it automatically gets the high contact level. how can the tribunal possibly, fairly, and according to the rules, give any different punishment? the crime might not fit the punishment, in a number of cases at the tribunal, but the afl decided they wuld make a standardised system to ensure "fairness and equitable sentences" but then made a stupid points szstem that makes no sense. as a result there is no leway, in fact the only leway the tribunal ever has is the intentional, reckless or negligent thing, which can make a massive difference, which is why some striking is "intentional" and some is "reckless" even though the point is always to hit the other player... fix the afl, fix the tribunal, but in this case the tribunal have simply followed the rules the afl set out for them...

beat me to it...

i would be surprised if valenti turns out to be a premiership ruckman... are you suggesting we are playing him out of position>