deanox

jaded the problem is that we made a big deal about his first game and made the build up. i know we, as informed supporters, did not expect him to make an impact, but we used him as a marketing tool, and as a result we have to accept the attention both ways.

i think clint, our biggest problem is that our medium forwards: robbo and bate, are particularly inept at playing the defensive forward role when its their turn. miller and watts (the last two weeks) and players like newton neitz etc are large players who are usually not great with the forward pressure. most clubs then have 1-2 small forwards (which we don't have I agree) and 1-2 medium size forwards who are both able to apply pressure, crumb and keep the ball in. our medium forwards play like talls, using strength and marking, not like smalls who can roam and crumb as well. we don't have that versatility in the forward line that enables us to keep the ball in. this has been a problem imo for a few years. playing 4 talls is great if you kick it too them well, but if the midfields kicking is poor, and the ball doesn't go to advantage, the forwards (especially medium forwards who play tall, who have the advantage over most medium defenders when the ball is in the air) loose their advantage as the defenders are quick and more agile. watts has shown to be reasonably flexible. but we need to play 2 permanent crumbers to counter the top heavy medium players, or find medium forwards who can rove and crumb as well.

over the last two weeks there have been 3-4 times where he has been in good space in the forward line and ignored/not seen. i suppose an interesting question is, is this because the players don't really know him (i.e. yong recruit who is only around occassionally etc) or because he was genuinely not seen any of these times? if it is the former, an interstate trip may be a good chance to rectify some of those issues, and if they were rectified could have seen him have more shots at goal the last few weeks (they really don't kick to him unless he is on his own or on a lead). if it is the latter, perhaps the coaches need to have a serious look at some of the players vision capabilities.

I have only seen us go defensive when we get smashed, and have not yet seen us try for an all out attacking situation. Alot of our goals in these times seem to come from, getting the ball in defence (spare men or what ever), limited options going forward, means a turnover in the centre, and because we had loose men in our back line, they are all out of position (ie not attacking, nor responsible for their direct opponent) which means when the attack fails because we have no players to kick to, the opposition are unmarked and are able to run forward amidst the confusion. i think we should be trying to play more man on man footy. if the oppositon leaves players a kick behind play, we should follow them out. at most have one spare man behind the ball. and similarly i think we need to lift our workrate when we clear the ball from defence, i think at times the players mill about and don't offer options. i am not sure if there is a clear game plan for 'what to do when you win the ball in defence and we are flooding'.

its always good when someone makes big critisms and comments regarding something, then goes on to say that they are so bad that in fact i havn't bothered to watch them all year. so basically he made his assumptions p preseason, hasn't watched any games, probably read a newspaper report or two, then made his assumptions on one game, where we got smashed in one quarter, won two quarters, and had the umpires give them a free ride in the other?

he has done a few things over the past 18 months, and got up the ire of opposition clubs a couple of times. although we probably can't argue that his information has helped us much! it is pretty funny though, he just sounds like a guy who likes dressing up!

the problem with that is you may get umpires trying to get the spotlight and pay the decisions. i think the aim shold be 'put the whistle away, and only use it if you have to'. if the contact was only incidental let it go, if it doesnt affect the play, let it go. etc

probably yes. they were probably technically there. however, there were probably another 10-15 to essendon that were 'technically there, but no one would ever dream of paying them because they are soft, incidental, and don't influence the game. there were probably also 30 to melbourne (the 10-15 that were the equivalent of essendons, and the 10-15 that we weren't paid in the first place) that could have been paid. the umpires may have technically got it right for the essendon frees, then technically got it right for ones they didn't pay to melbourne (because they were soft and incidental), but it doesn't mar the fact they got more than double the frees we got, and probably got 5 goals all up from frees and 50s. we may not have played well, but we would've been level with them at quarter time if they didn't get goals from frees, and in front at half time. makes the 3rd quarter a different story if you are 3 goals in front doesn't it? the umps are inconsistent, and appear to have too much influence on the game. let it flow. let the players play, unless the infringement warrants it.

serach the forums for clash jumper stuff. i think you'll find tha most people here have expressed preference for any jumper that maintains red and blue only, no white. if we had to wear an odd clash jumper just for the essendon jumper id almost rather us in a yellow jumper for one game only, to raise money for cancer or something.

Bartram - just can't kick Bate - always nearly there Bennell - rarely seen dash Bruce - possessions lacked impact Cheney - strong over head Davey - tried to much Frawley - strong quick smart Green - courage a plenty Grimes - solid and reliable Jetta - was he playing? Johnson - improvement on form Jurrah - produced. great potential. Martin - our multi-position man McLean - best in weeks Miller - still can't kick Moloney - bleeds for club Morton - two average games Rivers - was well beaten Robertson - little to commend Sylvia - acceptable game today Watts - better near goal Whelan - how long left? sylvias game was ok. not up to the standard set the past few weeks and thats ok. but i think he let us down by missing that easy shot at goal in the last? 35 out in front. we were 10 goals down at 3/4 time had kicked the first 3 and he had a chance to make it a 5 goal game. we weren't going to win, but with half a quarter and some momentum, that goal could have seen us rush a bit. maybe i am harsh on him. but i really think he can be that player who lifts the side. or finishes it off. the type of player whos 5 touches in 5 minutes result in 2-3 goals and swing the momentum. a player who can influence. unfortunately, he has had a chance to do that a few times when he has had set shots, and he has let himself down. he has started to do it with his field play, and we know he can kick goal. needs to do it more often.

I'm getting terribly sick of old out of touch journalists and commentators who do not understand that 'goal' is not not a verb. I mean, how many times do these people need to be told that you don't 'goal' you 'score'? That older generation just don't get it.

last night the reason out numbers were so far up the ground is because the essendon players dropped a wall a kick behind play once the ball moved into their forward half. we had an extra 3 around the ball, but they had all the players loose. to stop that, our forwards pushed up and manned up in the midfield, so they didn't have a wall. as a result, they had a spare 3 men in our forward line. wouldn't have been interesting to see what happened if our mids had of dropped back.

i don't think PJ has been doing too bad, however it has been a few monumental stuff ups that have caught everyones attention. the problem is, he is playing a sweeper role and turning the ball over. i much prefer him playing up forward where he is a lovely kick for goal (if he can mark it) but we are front heavy atm. with his pace he should play as an old fashion ruckrover and follow the play. but he needs to tuck the handball away, because he can kick 60 pretty well if he wants to. first time ever.

good article to read if anyone is interested about LJ's first foray into the melbourne... http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/magp...6857513262.html article is also written by martin flanagan, and he has reused some of his material this week. but its slightly different nonetheless.

exactly right there. biggest and most hyped debut for the mfc since jack watts. :S

PJ needs to kick and not handball. his foot skills are far superiour. bartram is not in for maric. jetta has re Out: Daniel Bell, out for Bennell Addam Maric, out for Jetta James McDonald (Knee), out for Bartram Matthew Warnock (virus), out for Martin Mark Jamar (quad), Nathan Jones (Virus), also out and miller and jurah in. We are probably slightly taller than last week, although martin may have to pinch hit in the ruck. backline is not too short, we have rivers, frawley and martin there. it will only be a problem if PJ goes down. I think it is possible that miller will be swung back, given watts and jurrah are both forwards on the bench. you could argue that jurrah is replacing maric, with jetta replacing jones in the midfield if he gets a run up there. either way it isnt a bad side. perhaps 1 forward too many, and a ruck short. but we don't have many other options atm. very tall forward line with 5 marking forwards. how do the bombers sit for height in the back line? should be good conditions inside, maybe we are going to try and exploit this? may leave us a little slow, especially if our disposal is not on song.

our two number one picks together in the afl for the first time!

wow i love how much you are getting into the bag collingwood spirit! even if you're from a long line of collingwood supporters, its clearly hard not to despise them when you go for melbourne. out of interest, did collingwood just not rate him? or did they think he was too much work (with the resettling in melbourne etc)? ah well, they had their chance.

i'm meeting at the ground at 6 and gonna get seats together then. we're panning on getting a meal between then and the game. any ideas where a good feed is near by?

when was the last time we had two young KP forwards to be excited about? but i remember how excited we were about newton. lets make sure we dont turn on these two if they dont live up to expectations. btw, does anyone think we can claim to have two number 1 draft pick forwards playing for us this week? as long as i don't specify which draft hey?

carn dees, dont get me wrong, he has my full support when he is out there, and i think he is a pretty good player, who has been forced to play out of position most of his career, and i think if playing alongside 2 talls would have kicked even more goals and been even more appreciated. i know he bleeds for the club, he is definitely a true demon, however when i saw this interview i really sat back and thought 'wait a sec, thats not right'. he should have been saying 'yeah i stuffed up last week didnt i? but i went back to casey and worked really hard, hopefully it was enough to get me a game this week. sub-par performances like that aren't tolerated.' for a senior player he said the wrong things. that being said, i cant find anything in an article, so it must have been footage i saw. and perhaps i have taken it out of context slightly, or blown it up worse than it was, but that what and how i remembered hearing it. if anyone else saw the interview and know how to get it, can they post a link please?

did he make any arrogant comments like he did before the collingwood game? i remember reading 'i was only dropped for one week because i am a required senior player' and 'it wasn't a big issue, just a couple of little things to work on, i did my week so i'll be back now no worries'. i lost a lot of respect for him when i read that...

i think you mean tomayto and tomarto...

here is the hughes link sorry: http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pc-melb...s--danny-hughes also HT you are right about cale, 30 games and he is just over 19. i didnt include him in the main list because he still has to get to 50 first! but should have listed him with frawley etc

a lot of it comes down to playing finals. brock currently has 86 and is 23. another 8 year (31) at 20 games per year gets him 250. jones has 61 games and is yet to turn 22, could notch up the 250. bartram has 52 games and is just 21, could be a candidate if he gets back into the team and stays around. green as just turned 28 and has 193. if he plays another 4 years the 250 is available. if we play finals in those four years, he could get to 280 pretty easily by the time he is 32. other than those players, not many older players have the chance to get there, rivers, davey, miller, mcdonald, robbo, wheelan will all drop short. younger players ie frawley, grimes could get there but it is way to early to tell. this will all change of course if the afl introduces a 26 game season, like they are discussing. ps while etting this info, found the danny hughes page, where they have somehow managed to link his stats in with the old danny hughes, played his first season aged 1 apparently? haha