deanox

interesting point, but im not sure davey was ever a true crumber in the mold that aussie is. i originally thought that we should have kept him forward, but i dont think that is where he will play his best footy. aussie appears to be a true crumber. by all reports maric is too.

there is not much foot speed but i dont think thats a prob. we look slow when we are flat footed and not moving the ball quickly, but when we are handballing to running players we dont look slow. most of our mids are capable of running hard enoguh to put pressure on when chasing opposition ball carriers with the exception of brock, who looks very slow in these situations. the excepts are going to be when chasing the alwyn daveys of the world as we wont get near them, but few will. i think foot speed is overated, especially if you know how to use the ball and the skills are spot on. it will be interesting to see us against the doggies. we were slow last year, but beat them then.

i agree. a key forward, a back up ruckman, and some foot skills. add in a solid dose of reducing brain fades (ie man up when the opposition has a mark on the 50, zone into space, learn to kick in), and we are not too far off.

haha yes it is. but two times in a row isnt anything to brag about, spec not considering how we've been travelling recently. the sign was not very well thought out, arrogant and showed how much collingwood supporters think of them selves and their club. above the rest of the competition. and you may be right about 'sterotypes' however two things are for certain. more collingwood supporters have less teeth than melbourne supporters (and im talking percentages here), and more melbourne supporters have nice cars and houses (and im not talking percentages this time). its the way of the world. we cant help it if we're a better sort of people

i think you'll find that Paul Mac has already flagged this. his aim is to make a theme for every game ie kids on the ground, DN farewell, to try and drum up interest in every match, not just some.

dont give him/her/it too much credit... there are prob only one or two who would go the distance in that race, and thankfully we dont see them much these days...

i only read this thread because i was interested if anyone knew what gaz was doing instead of walking? but no one seems to know. he brushed over it very quickly tis all...

we seem to be willing to attack the man and try to assert ourselves on teams. we seem to have a bit of mongrel. it hasnt been showing through every week but its there. and we never, ever had that under ND. when the players commit themselves they perform well. i dont care if we lose when we commit i just hate it when players are soft and not trying. selfish play should go punished or unrewarded at all times. DB's job for the next 11 weeks is to get the team to lift every week like it has against collingwood, tasmania and for a half against freo. i dont care if we dont win, as long as they attack the footy and the man with ferocity and desire. so far im happy with DB, we have obvious holes and need a lot of development. it wasnt his fault players couldnt hit targets. i think we will come good at some point in the short term (this year or next), and i think we could be up by 2010 if we draft/trade right.

he is even slighter than you timmuns and thats saying something

he didnt say anything about a suppository...

if we can get em for 5 years on 80,000 id be happy. but they havnt been around lnog enough for me to offer big money for long terms yet. fwiw i rated garland and wanted to give him a chance to develop, i always felt he had something there. now if only we can draft a key forward...

i read today that jim intended on running with a ticket of 8, compared the the existing board of 11. that could leave room for a few directors to stay on for 12 months to help with the transition...

i understand what you are sying. i think you think that i want it to go extreme, of course i dont. i like watching footy, i just think that players caught with the ball should lose it. i dont agree with tackling a player, and continually tackling a player while he spins around looking for an open player. he should have to get rid of it straight away, even if it is to an opposition player...

i agree RE a run at sandy. 2 to 3 weeks hopefully to get some confidence back into his run. we know he can play, he just needs to get it right. but over the past few weeks the club appears to have decided that he isnt competing with CJ as a straight swap. either that or the club has decided to allow CJ to have a long solid run dominating at sandy before being promoted to the dees to allow him to transfer that form...

then you'd have to change the rules of football im sorry rogue. it clearly stats that a player with prior opportunity who is tackled and retarded has been caught holding the ball. are you suggesting the players should be allowed to hold onto the ball as long as they while beng tackled until they have a good option present itself? i suppose thats why the rule is called 'holding the ball' not held the ball in the tackle for way too long'. the ball is meant to move, if you get caught holding it you lose it.

interest stats, just wondering if they are any different this year to last season? and if they are not it might be a thought that perhaps because his main role is the now the rebounding and not the negating that he is being judged harsher. if he was still playing the negating role successfully some of his other blemishes and mistakes might not be so important, however now that his main role is the attacking, that is what he is judged on primarily. your second point is a whole new thread and discussion that i'd love to have, but given i have another exam on thurs i might have to dissapear and study for a few hours. if you start it up after thurs morning i will be happy to join in...

good question. it is hard to answer because some games it is over the top. other games they wont pay it once. in general i think the problem is that it isnt consistant, and i believe that often umps let one or two go they should have paid and then follow up quickly with a really soft free kick for something else. i think that if the rule was applied consistantly across all games, across all sections of the ground, and across all four quarters (by all umps) then it could be paid more. but they need to ensure that they pay the right thing. players just letting go of the ball as they are tackled should be pinged. players who have run 5 meters and are then dragged off their kick need to be pinged. players who dive on it then throw it out their legs should be pinged. players who have 4 guys dive on them and the ball stuck in between or have the ball held to them should not be pinged. ok overall i think its not paid enough. however i think often when it is paid, it is paid wrong.

good points. 1. im not sure how to adjudicate that. i personally believe that if you are run down and miss the kick it should be the same as if you are tackled and miss the hand ball. i'll think you'll find the rule is 'incorrect disposal', where if a player fails to either correctly kick or handball a ball it is a free kick. thus the holding the ball decision and the throw decision can be technically different interpretations of the same rule 2. i was generally happy with the umpires. prob the best ive seen this year a an mfc game. i still dont agree with the 'you can use a forearm but not a hand' in the back rule, a push is a push, and you should be able to hold yourself in position but not push at all, but that isnt the umpires fault. i also thought the 50m to burns was soft, plenty of other times they could have called it also. bouncing was average, and i dont like that they can swap between bouncing and ball up depending on how fast they want to move the play on. otherwise i was happy because i generally didnt notice them. 3. i dont want to play keepings off but if you want to see good tackling watch rugby union. the ball is constantly alive at all times. the rules of afl state that if a player is correctly tackled its a free, good tackling is as important and fundamental a skill as kicking and handballing. and yes it is good to see players take tackles on. thats why the rule says they have to be retarded not just tackled. unless you can stop a players run the tackle doesnt make it holding the ball. spinning them in a full circle should be considered retarded. so should taking them to ground.

out of interest, if the afl instructed the umpires to adjudicate holding the ball correctly, we would probably see players start to knock the ball out of packs, which would result in more players hanging off packs (ie wings and flankers) and less congestion around the actual ball up, which would mean the game would be more open again.

but the rule says if a player with the ball is tackled and retarded it is a free kick. so if you are tackled and spun in a circle it is a free kick. the exceptions are: if the player hasnt had prior opportunity, the player must dispose of it immediately. if he doesnt it is a free kick. so you dont need prior opportunity, but you need to legally dispose of it. putting the ball on the ground and knocking it back between your legs isnt legal disposl. having a team mate rip the ball out of your hands isnt legal disposal. letting go of it when you are tackled from behind, isnt legal disposal. all those examples should result in a free kick. if the ball is bumped out in the tackle. not dropped. knocked out by the force of the tackle. and if the ball is knocked out when the player hits the ground, id consider that the player had been successfully tackled first. if the ball is pinned to the tackler. which means if i hold the ball to you, or the ball is stuck between the play and the ground. the last case is the only case where there should be a ball up. if the player with the ball has his arm pinned and cant get rid of the ball then it is holding the ball. prior opportunity or not, provided that if he hasnt had a chance he is given reasonable time to try and get his arm free or kick the ball.

it is interesting, because it demonstrates the the difference between 1st and 16th in this comp isnt nessecarily the skill of the teams (although there are obvious differences) it is which team stands up and believe in themselves, and who will back themselves to win. in other words did you come to play? often the rest will take care of itself

the difference is that we went for our own ball in the middle. last week we were trying to stop st kilda instead of win it ourselves. im not sure why...

a good strong effort and hand ball deep in the forward line...not too much else. didnt seem to waste it, didnt have a massive day. (IMO). oh and a good mark 40 out which he passed off closer to goal. cant remember if they scored or not. but he knew his limitations it was smart football. DB really should be telling him, if you could kick 55 you would be a star, go and learn. because if he could mark on 50 and then kick the goal... could do more. would have liked to see him drift closer to goals occassionally. him or bate...

if a player has the ball and is tackled and they drop it, it should be rewarded with a free kick. thems the rules carnthedees. the game isn't 'let it run until it gets locked in or someone takes a mark'. it is essentially a game of keepings off. if you have the ball and are caught the opposition are entitled to the ball. tackling should e rewarded. it isnt because it means players will have to rush disposal out rather than spin 720 looking for a team maet so that play can continue nicely. and the afl likes it to all look nice.

over the top and you havnt thought that out. which of those players would play the same role as bell? bode? too small. frawley? too tall. buckley? not a backman. not strong enough. CJ? at the moment, perhaps. the only reason is that his role has changed. last year CJ couldnt have filled bellys role (even the way CJ is playing now), which is similar to wheatlys role. i think this is one of the main problems with bells game this year. he is out of sorts, out of form and struggling. but he is not allowed to play the role he excelled at last year, which was the mid sized defender. last year he got didak. who did he get this year? he is now being asked to provide run and be an attacking player, whereas last year he was a mid sized defender spoiling the the strong marking of players like williams and didak, who are too quick for the talls. he plays his best when he can use his speed and height to spoil the ball, and restrict these types of players in the D50. playing this role he can also provide some run and rebound. but atm he is being asked to be the main instigator of that run and rebound, especially with green playing up forward a lot this week. his kicking is ok. his handballing is subpar. the biggest problem is that he doesnt clear the area with handballs he just knocks it out, normally to an opposition. getting run down from behind often indicates teammates arent talking to him. but seriously, he has cost goals by getting caught, but who have his direct opponents been and how many goals have they been kicking. i think he is getting lost.