deanox

i cant believe our luck though. injuries at training are one thing...but seriously. last sunday alone we now have green, wheatly, wheelan, chunky, bell and brown all off injured. thats 6 injuries in 1 match, 5 of them bad enough to cause them not to play the next week. how can anyone say its not bad luck?

gday mate welcome to the forums. are you hedging your bets in case the north kangaroos really become the north kangaroos? i ope they dont but we'll happily have you on board if they do...

have a read of the forum before you post a new thread. honestly this is the 4th topic on the same point within 3 weeks. don't you read anything?

could definetly use him. it is interesting because aaron was a risk that came off...his brother was also a risk. do you reckon that his brother was good precedent that he would come ogod, or is it more likely that we got lucky with aaron and wouldnt pull it off again. time will tell whether garland and petterd and frawley will be better but he looks the goods at the moment.

good point about the lights though, has anyone heard what they are doing? i was told that the paul gardiner graciously offered to host sydney at the mcg if they wanted...

was a good bloke. we had to delist him, given the state of our list, and it was good we were able to find a home for him in trade week...

can we make the finals from 0-5? i think we showed last year we were good enough to mix it with the best at full strength. maybe 0-5 and we have the team back on track, we'd need to win 12 from 17...possible with a rich vein of form. probably not with the number of interstate games we have to play. regarding neitz, i dont think we play him til he's right. i dont think we should be playing any injured players atm. we're not gonna finish high on the ladder, and we have so many players out that playing a payer or two who are carrying injuries isnt going to get us just over the line but could result in longer term injuries. get games into the kids. we're not gonna win anyway so who cares?

one comment in particular angered me. the comment about it being more their home ground than ours? how stupid can you be. not only are we the melbourne football club who has played there since the beginning, but we have our social clubs based their and have ties with the mcc. collingwood are but a tennent. a wealthy tennent perhaps, but just a tennent. their home is that slum, victoria park. the other point was the ignorance in them saying they have just as many injuries as us. they obviously havnt had a good look at the injury lists have they? you could actually feel the ignorance as you read their posts couldnt you?

im not so sure...i think if he wants to come here we'll get him. i dont think we'll finish last but we'll most likely finish in the bottom half of the ladder giving us a reasonable bargaining chip. similar to aker last year if he says i want to go home, you have two choices trade me to melb or i go in the psd they will trade him. and if they have a choice of nothing or a 1st rounder and a player they would take it. he is a gun there is no doubt but we can work around that.

jamar is terrible around the ground we all know that. but he has a good pair of hands when going forward. can we afford to have a tap ruckman who takes the centre bounce then runs forward and waits...occasionally drifts back when it suits? or o we lose too much around the ground... i think we will struggle around the ground but just wondering peoples thoughts...

can a team trade an uncontracted player if he'd prefer to go in the draft? if not, just offer him the money and ignore west coast, he can then just nominate for the draft. i think he mgiht try and get something for WC though, id be happy to trade a 1st and 2nd rounder for him...

i was interested in the so i watched it again. he shouldve gone the ball no worries, but i dont think he shirked the contest. he tried to take mcmanus out, i think he thought he;d lost the ball and he'd take mcmanus out as well but mcmanus changed directions at the last moment. if he had of connected i reckon we would have gotten that ball out of there... i spose thats the risk of paying the man not the ball and it is something he will learn from...

the biggest positve for me? maybe im hopeless but last week id given up at half time. this week with 10 minutes left in the last quarter and 6 goals down i thought we were an outside chance if we could just snare a couple of quick ones. we tried all day/ luck didnt go our way. we missed easy shots early that wouldve had us in the contest. when we fought hard for a goal freo would get the quick one. when we needed the umpires help from a push in the back it was ignored. we didnt deserve to win. but we played with endeavour and kept battling to the last. better than the last few weeks.

are you sure he said that? i thought he said something about sylvia being a little bit slow in disposing of the footy. that he always takes 1 step too many which in return puts him under pressure with his disposal.

terrible post imo. miller worked hard all day. a lot of the delivery to him was a hospital kick over his head or a half volley at his feet. if he had the delivery that pavlich had it would be a different story. he ran hard and presented all day, and when he was close to goal in the last, he kicked a few. another good game from miller, thats 2 in a row now...he will improve slowly, he's not going to wake up tomorrow and be wayne carey. i thought nathan carrol worked admirably today also. pavlich lead well into space and had good delivery making it very hard to defend. there is only so much a full back can do, and nathan carroll made his fair share of spoils...

he needs support and he isnt getting it. it is unfortunate that over the years we have recruited a number of reasonable rucks and developed them but now that white is on the way out whats left isnt up to standard...

i think he'll go. he hasnt done enough, no worries. but my big question is, is there someone to replace him. i cant see the point in sacking him to bring in someone who hasnt done it and doesnt know what to do when they get there.

interesting comparison ash...if we were full strength and playing adelaide this week and i saw those injuries i would pick against them in a flash (exactly why i picked sydney). it just goes to show the quality of depth at adelaide compared to melbourne... personally i didnt have too many problems with the umpiring yesterday...a couple of bad decisions but when you lose by that much the umpires aren't the difference. our biggest problem was the 8 behinds we kicked in a row in the first half. if we had of nailed half of them we might have been in the lead putting pressure on freo to play to us. headland wouldve been made more accountable. players with licenses to run around would have been forced to try and defend rather than all out attack. the injuries have killed us thought. i don't mind that we lost, it was inevitable with the players who were picked, no offense meant. we just didnt have the cattle. and the injuries in game have probably cost us the most. to demon doug, if you think that all players should be able to run out a game you've had you're head in the sand for the last 5 years. players dont play full games of footy anymore, not unless they are a tall KPP or a close checking defender. the midifield and the runners are rotated endlessly to allow a quick freshen up. players are told to run them selves into the ground, knowing they dont have to pace themselves as the will be rested when they need it. with no fit men on the bench, our players had to either conserve energy to last the whole game, or run as hard as their fremantle counterparts without a break, meaning they would run over us at the end. if an afl player went back to the vfl or a lower level of footy, running out a game wouldnt be a problem, but at afl pace the players need to have their structured rest plans, its the way they are trained and conditioned as athletes...

i like tradition. and i like this rule. there are plenty of things that need fixing before this needs fixing. they cant get the hands in the back right. they cant judge when someone holds on. players who bet get fined 10,000 but players taking illegal substences get off scott free. swearing is tolerated, and if you feel that someone has said something to upset you, you can punch him once, punch him another time, then threaten him via a journalist that you are going to kill him, and get off scott free. the draw is bias. sydney get a higher salery cap. melbourne teams dont get to play on the grounds they want. training and support staff for some club far outweigh those at other clubs. get the other rules first. this one has worked fine for years. and is the only anomoly in what is otherwise a pretty fair drafting situation. if a team gets a good player through father son its luck. there are no guarentees. the other things mentioned arent luck. the favour particular teams. maybe those teams should miss out on the f/s?

this epitomises why i rarely take notice of your threads...

they have been soft this year. to some extent i dont mind. i would rather see everyone get off and just keep the game going. you dont want stars out for weeks...and you want to see body contact and big hits. who doesnt? but some times players need a slap on the wrist...

yeah good post. a very important point you make is that it has been a lack of form/skill due to injuries, not a lack of endeavour. after watching sundays game that is my belief as well. we tried much harder on sunday than we had in the previous two rounds. with so many outs we are struggling. our use of the ball has been down. is that form, luck or confidence. we are a wounded side playing well below their best. while we may well be 0-8 at some stage this season, i think we will come good. maybe too little too late and we have to try again next year...but its not a lack of trying at the moment.

they are not bound fair nough... but i think a slur on a fmaily emmber is a slur on a family member. saying something about sex with a 6 year old is no more provoking or wrong or illegal than a comment on sex with an older married person (his mum). the same offence could be taken from each comment and if you want to say that only one is good enough as a justifiable defence for violence you are making a judgment that the respect and love someone has for their child is greater than the respect and love they ahve for their parents. if you are talking about a criminal issue, if he had of said i robbed your mums house, would that be an acceptable defense because it is a criminal act? what if he said 'my uncle slept with your mum when she was 6'. would that be as insulting?

gouga i agree entirely...words are words. if a supporter on the other side of the fence had of said something and he had of hit them provocation would not be an excuse big enough to get him off. what was said did not force him to hit him, more than once. a downgraded penalty would have been acceptable but to let him off completely is a joke.

sounds bout right to me dappa dan...