deanox

well thats sort of what im asking in this thread. everyone rates them but no one gives them votes or the due acknowledgement. why not?

should start following sandy a bit closer? i think that we could see a resurgence in the vfl support if this kind of crap keeps happening at alf level..

i believe the ox's knee problem also extended to his netball playing mum and sisters. if he has kids they should wear knee braces or tape as a standard prevention from time zero. you can tape your ankles, why not tape your knees?

ok before you all jump down my throat a good backman and a tight tagger are essential players to have in modern footy. backmen, perhaps the most important on the ground. why then do these players miss out when it comes to accolades and votes etc? the credit normally goes to the high possession midfielder or the goal kicking forward. they are the two glamorous positions on the ground, the most eye catching and memorable. by this logic the tagger who stops the oppositions star from getting his usual 30 touches and restricts him to less than 10 is equally valuable to his team as the teammate who had 30 touches. and the backman whose player took 3 marks and kicked no goals could have been as valuable as the forward who kicked 6. when a team gets beaten it is easy to attribute the lack of goals to other players, the midfield winning the ball, the 3rd defender dropping across. when a team wins all over the ground, the tagger is just another player having a good day. both these players are again over shadowed. when casting votes or naming the best players, can these 'negative' roles be rated as being equally important for the win putting these players amongst the vote getters? feel free to discuss this, the big drive for this question was where did godfrey and carrol fit into the votes last week?

i didnt agree with starting miller on hall but i dont thing bruce on BJ is a bad idea. we probably have to give chopper first dig but if BJ kicks 2 quick goals the move needs to be made. we cant wait for him to kick 4 in a half before we make the move, it costs too much...

gouga have you considered bell to tag cooney. he has the height and pace to go with him, has been in great form and will make cooney accountable the other way? i suppose though, with wheelan and bartram and petterd out we really need bell to play back. but i think it would be a good match up otherwise.

if the afl was a business itd be broke and the shareholders wouldve sacked the board. thats how bad it is being run. i think i am enjoying it a bit less than i used to. there are not as many games that i watch and think wow what a game...i do still get passionate about the dees. i wonder if i'll lose interest if we win a flag??

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

another point is the stats on the website are usless. the afl have stats people doing absolutely every stat known to man. why dont we have access to these? they cant make money off them they should be made public.

i completely agree jaded. its a bit of a joke isnt it. i think that the full afl squad should be full time, and there should be a full time vfl development squad who get to act as reserve umpires etc occassionally in the afl. what do vfl umps get paid now? would it be that hard to invest 50 grand for 10 umps each in a full time development squad. maybe from a financial point of view it doesnt make sense for the afl because it is money they dont make money from...

there should be a stat about goals from point kick ins both for and against. i get the feeling that we score pretty highly direct from these but we also have quite a few scored against us. im not sure where to find these, but maybe someone can help us out.

everyone was fined (suspended). and AD said 'it doesnt matter if it is justified or not we are unashamably protecting umpires. we can't recruit them so we need to look after them at every level of the game.' or words to that effect.

as the topic says, i was just wondering why the time stamp on the posts is out by about 10 minutes? any reason? has anyone else noticed? maybe ive been spending too much time on here?

BRB i don't ignore what you have to say, in fact your opinions are one of the highlights of demonland. for the point of my argument however i was only interested in who played well at sandringham. i have the same view that wards days as an afl footballer are numbered for the very reason you mentioned. however who had a better game CJ or ward? as you said ward is the one who deserved the promotion based on performance alone. potential is an ugly word, at least we know what we'll get with ward. with regards to newton, i havnt been able to find sandy magoos teams and was wondering if newton would play down there this week?is it likely that many melbourne listed players will have a run? it seems a waste to drop pickett if he cant play for sandy, because he needs match fitness. and itd be disappointing if buckley and CJ didnt get a chance to recapture that form. however id also feel a bit for the regular 2's players who miss out because afl blokes need a run (although after last week im sure there is a couple of guys who could be dropped). the dilemmas of an alliance i spose.

it hurt mine too, but it was the only way i could make sense of everything.

is he big enough for miller though? giving away 10 kgs and a decent whack of height?

i have no problems with that and i think that CJ is someone worth persevering with but it seems the footy dept is damned if it does and damned if it doesnt. if they play the kids (garland) they shouldnt because they didnt deserve it. but on the other hand the season is shot so the kids should also get a run (buckley). also we should be rewarding good performances at sandy (newton) but not other good performances (ward) and we should play CJ because he has potential; even though he didnt perform at sandy. as far as i can tell that sums up the views on this topic. they are inconsistent at best and self serving at worst. people have been bagging the coaching and selection staff but if you consider what people are really asking for the coaching staff are making decisions that arent half bad. CJ is a future player at the dees, no doubt in my mind. but if he is just going at sandy because he was shitty at getting dropped he deserves another week down there. let chris smash em this week playing in the sandy magoos and see if he can back it up in the afl.

while i agree that a champ can be taken with a lateer pick, the way the science of drafting is moving now it is becoming more and more likely that the top picks are stars. this isnt to say that the later picks are duds but the chances arent as great...

dfj, when you 'felt' that had you already seen the teams? lol

1. if he drops his head and puts in a s...house effort at sandy because he was dropped from the firsts are you sure you want him around the club? yze went back got 28 touches and 6 tackles and people said he hadnt done his penance, but yze had over 200 senior games of experience on his side. CJ has a hell of a lot of potential. but potential is all he has at the moment. no runs on the board no points earnt. if he wasnt interested in playing for sandy the coaching staff are right not to select him. 2. ive got no idea about this one. it was as left field as left field gets. maybe ND pulled it out just to prove to people he can play the kids? these people are payed too much money to be making random selections so there is obviously method to his madness. but i cant explain it.

a quote from Beach Road Barry's last Sandy report ignoring the second part of the ward quote, which is BRB's view, last week at sandy CJ just went and ward was one of the best. who ever said that form at sandy should count when getting a go? maybe CJ isnt getting a go because he doesnt want it enough. if he is just going at sandy why would he ever rip it up in the afl?

actually another point. i have read posts here with people complaining the ND is reactive 'picking ward because bulldogs are a running side' but we saying that we should play to our strength. i believe we have selected towards our strengths this week with the two outs being running players and the two ins being the same. it would have been easy to drop warnock for buckly 'to match the dogs through the midfield' but i think this way we will force them to match up on us.

i don't not rate warnock. i havnt seen enough of him. he seems a good honest defender who isnt going to be your number one. not at this stage anyway. but he doesnt seem to be doing too much wrong... i think the reason we have gone tall is because of the old fashion rule. a good tall will beat a good small anyday (except in the wet). knowing our luck the afl will decide they now want the roof open and it will rain. however we are much taller than the dogs and we can use this to our advantage. have a look at the team again however. we have carrol and rivers as talls in the backline. bell is medium but he is essentially a runner. in the forward line we've named neitz and miller as talls. yes bate and bruce are tall and green plays more like a tall than a crumber the reality is bruce and green will play mostly on the ball with stints up forward. bruce might even play on johnson whereever he plays. bate, for all his height, isnt a true tall in that he runs all day chasing the ball. he will play at all of the HFF, CHF and the centre throughout the day. a couple of posters rightly pointed out that moloney won't line up in the FP. well put dunn there and moloney on the bench, we suddenly have 2 runners on the bench and a little extra height to cause the dogs problems up forward. the bulldogs height and weight (i've left some out coz we know they are smalls, but i put the height in for a couple of the mediums. B: McMahon (185,78), Harris(195, 100), Morris (190, 86) HB: Gilbee (180, 80), Wight(200, 95), Hargrave (190, 87) HF: Giansiracusa (182, 79) , Johnson (182, 85), Boyd (184, 87) F: Hahn (188, 100), Darcy (197, 99), Akermanis FOLL: Street (211, 105), Cross, Cooney I/C: Ray (187, 87), Higgins (184,85), Addison (186, 79), Harbrow (178, 71) Harris takes neitz. is wight going to be mobile enough for miller? if not he spends all day on the pine. he is listed as a 200cm 3rd tall. i havnt seen any of him to make a judgement, but it sounds like he'll get either miller (194, 96) or dunn (192, 90), making him probably not mobile enough for either. miller is probably a little too tall for either morris or hargrave, but one of them get dunn. the way i see it they have probably 6 talls to our 8. their resting ruckman is also their full forward. they will have to seriously consider throwing another tall forward at some point throughout the game. im pretty happy.

can we trade CJ and our first round pick for judd? is that a bit like selling our soul (father son) for the devil?

obviously the typical description of laconic didnt apply to TJ this time. using it would definitely be a malapropism who says i don't learn stuff on demonland lol