Gator

One or two more wins for 7 or 8 in the season would be an unmitigated disaster for the club, supporters and Paul Roos' legacy. And it won't happen. We could win 4 of our next 5. Nine is the bare minimum. I think it will be between 9-11.

The only way anyone would support a Mosque is if they were utterly clueless about Islam and the Quran. Many of the highest ranking Imam's preach hatred of the West to our young easily influenced minds. I fully understand that my answer is wonderful fodder for those that want to start throwing labels around ... so be it. I'm well versed in Islam and the dangers it presents to the West. It is completely incompatible with freedom, democracy and our way of life. Islam is only interested in God's law, not our "man-made laws". They tolerate their host countries culture and laws, but it is in spite of Islamic teachings. Sweden is now the rape capital of the world due to their left-leaning policies and wonderfully welcoming open arms. They've lost their country. It will be Islamic within 30-50 years. Do some research. I appreciate that you won't understand much of what I'm saying and that the general populace is ignorant of Islam, so before going of with your rant do a bit of research ... and then rant. And then research again. And then rant. Islam is as much a political ideology with its own set of rules and politics than it is a religion. Anyway Old Man, I've given you what you want so you can yell racist and bigot from the top of your lungs. But it's misguided anger. You're simply oblivious to Islam. Islam is smart though. Much smarter than you. They thrive on the support from the Left while hating you at the same time. It's kind of admirable. Islam hates Israel and the Left hates Israel. One happy family. And in the meantime the Left won't dare say a word against Islam. Btw, before anyone asks, yes, there are westernised moderate Muslims. And there are plenty of them. But there's nothing moderate about Islam and those who are do so in spite of teachings or are simply ignorant of the Quran. And plenty of Muslims are ignorant of the Quran (thankfully). There endeth the lesson, Old man. Rant and spit away... (note to others: I answered a question, so don't blame me from veering from topic - it would have been easier not to answer)

Look, I don't crave yours or any other admiration. I post and people can choose what they like or otherwise, it matters not to me. If I was concerned I wouldn't write what I know will have the hand-wringers seething. The Left love to be our moral guidance on most social aspects, but when it comes to Islam they are completely silent. Utterly silent. And it's deafening, because they screech from the rooftops on everything else. Where are the feminists when it comes to Islam and its gay/women's rights ? Why you can't see this fascinates me. I'll put it down to left-wing sentiments. Rest assured though, I have little time for the present right in politics. They're a do nothing gutless mob only interested in their own interests.

I have to back pedal a bit here, because I hadn't heard the full version, which I now have. There was a pack mentality and there was sexism, which I originally disputed. Once the term Black Widow was used (I hadn't been aware of that) it changed the tenet for me. Up until then it wasn't gender specific and if it was a male journalist we wouldn't have heard a word. Wilson is a senior journalist first and foremost in my mind, so in a professional context her gender is irrelevant. It became relevant when particular words were used and she confirmed that she'd had similar references in the past. The commentary is still over the top for me, but each their own and sometimes you have to push hard to enact change. That said, I wish those frothing at the mouth weren't so hypocritical about what they condemn and what they overlook and it's usually self-posturing lefties. In the Middle East gays are hanged from cranes, thrown off buildings, or (if they're lucky) imprisoned for years, but you won't hear a word from the Left. Apostates and adulterers are murdered in the name of Islam, but not a word from the Left. Women are subjugated, not allowed to be educated and cloaked in medieval prison outfits, but not a word from the Left (cultural relativism, you know). Even in the West and here in Australia there are honour killings and female circumcisions, but not a word from the Left. So spare me the sanctimonious vitriol when you remain silent on so many horrendous practices in Islam (a political ideology as mush as a religion) that permeates the West and our own country. Yeah, yeah, I know it's a separate unrelated issue, but the hypocrisy of the Left knows no bounds. I'm also fully aware that many posting in this thread would condemn both. Have a great day, everyone

I wasn't aware of the "black widow spider" comment until now. Very silly and adds weight to those opinions with which I've disagreed. There is obviously layers to this. But I can't agree with the poster above who sees a spate of threatened drownings on the horizon. Talk about a drunk joining dots.

If someone jokingly threatened to drown Jon Ralph it would be viewed as though they wanted to drown Jon Ralph. His sex wouldn't be considered part of the narrative. It would be obvious that they take umbrage at his professional output. If someone jokingly threatens to drown Caroline Wilson it's an offense against women. The stereotypical attitudes on here are a sight to behold. I view Wilson as a senior Melbourne journalist. It's a pity others don't.

You can't enuncuate your argument.

Killing a "journalist". Poor joke. Not a reference to domestic violence to women no matter how desperate you are to link the two.

Done to death. And no, my critiques of Jack have never been wrong. How about gay rights in Islam. Does that float your boat. I'll start. There aren't any.

I see Wilson as a senior professional. You see her as a female. The comments were not gender specific. They were about a combative journalist. A senior journalist. It's a pity you can't see Wilson as a professional first and foremost and have to resort to the type of stereotype that women in the workforce have been fighting for decades. An issue for you.

Holding a "journalist" under water. Why are you so stereotypical towards professional females in the workplace ? It was in poor taste and unnecessary, but it wasn't a comment about domestic violence against women.

I've answered that old man. They made jokes about arguably the most senor (and combative) journalist in town. Her sex wasn't the cause of the comments and should have no bearing whatsoever.

You tell me. Happy to debate loud mouth nasty lefties.

Sniping ? If you'd said that you disagree and enunciated why I wouldn't have had an issue. But all you did was make an uninvited snide response. And YOU talk of sniping. A joke you are. You and I suspect most others on this thread are probably nasty loud mouth left-wingers, who can't abide the opinions of others.

I never take notice of people that can't articulate a position, but instead resort to insults. Comments in poor taste to a senior journalist don't represent "violence to women" and nor are they representative of me because I hold a view as to their nature. I'll let you to stick to snide remarks, because you know nothing about football.

Unless you take offence to the boys' club laughs you'll be hung drawn and quartered by the professional offence takers that reside here. You really are on a hiding to nothing, which is why there's little point raising your head. Best move on to the next topic... You'll be accused of condoning or worse encouraging violence towards women, of being a relic from the 1950's, of not understanding what is acceptable in modern society, of showing your true colours, and being told by others that they hope there are no women in your life. But in reality, the criticism of what took place is overblown. Why I'm most bemused is that I don't think of Wilson first and foremost as female, I think of her as a journalist. She's a professional, who happens to be female, which is irrelevant to me in her position as head football writer at The Age. Clearly no right-minded logical thinking person's first thoughts would be that men were sitting around encouraging domestic violence. If that was your first thought you really lack common sense or are liberal with the truth. these remarks could have been said about Mark Robinson, Purple, Ralph or any other journalist. And I dare say your first thoughts wouldn't have been about domestic violence or any other kind of violence (although some might pretend otherwise). It's a discredit to Wilson and other professional females that she's being treated differently because of her gender. Those shouting the loudest are usually the first to condemn stereotypical attitudes towards women, yet this is exactly what you're doing in this instance. And the bows being drawn are over the top. It will get to the point where some won't be able to rationalise different situations without first leaping to illogical conclusions. Anyway, I'll let the snide remarks and those holier than thou continue.

I would have tried to move him on (depending on what was on offer in return) as I thought 7 years was well and truly enough time to see if he was ever going to contest in the fashion required of a top-line AFL player. I never envisaged he could improve his contested footy to the extent he has and I'm glad he's been retained. The decision to off-load him would have been wrong in hindsight. It's a pity I can't crystal ball gaze. But, as you'd be aware, I take back none of my previous criticisms.

Yes, I quoted your incorrect stats and then proceeded to note that they were incorrect. The point being that if the were correct (they weren't) it wouldn't have mattered anyway. 1.4 to 1.2 would have been a non-issue if your stats were correct. Which, of course, they weren't. You are a blight on this site, but tolerated for some mystical reason. Not be me anymore.

YOUR stats are wrong. You posted that he averaged 1.4 tackles in 2015 and 1.2 in 2016. This is INCORRECT. He averages 1.4 this year and 1.25 LAST year. This point still escapes you. I also said "he's a young player with 30 odd games and is no doubt working on all aspects of his game", which you either didn't read or once again chose to ignore. By all means hold him to account, but when YOU bring up stats at least get them right. And the contested marks stat was beyond a joke. He's top 3 (equal) in the competition and was the same as last year before yesterday's game. Anyway, enough of you, Stu. You don't warrant further time from me or anybody else.

Hang on. Are you related to Bub ? YOU were the one comparing his tackles this year compared to last. YOU. And if you're going to compare one year to the next you have to use the games in the subsequent year, which in this case is 13. Last year he averaged 1.25 tackles for the WHOLE year and this year he's averaging 1.4 tackles. YOU got YOUR stats wrong whichever way you want to slice it or dice it. Change your post which gives the incorrect numbers. And let's keep going with your stats. Last year Hogan averaged 2.4 contested marks per game. This year he averaged 2.4 contested marks per game, i.e. the same, before yesterday's game. How many contested marks did you think he was going take in the pouring rain ? Talk about disingenuity. Before Sunday this stat was identical. It's incredible that you would bring up a stat that can change from one round to the next. So we've now demolished 2 of your stats. Your other stat, i.e. disposal efficiency, is arguably the most useless stat in the AFL. James Frawley came in the top 15 last year and is top 30 this year. Haha. Good stat. And in the post above you question his "work rate". His work rate is superb. The ground he covers for a key forward is superb and acknowledged by all paid to analyse the game. But let's look at some other stats. He averages more marks inside 50 this year, (3.2 > 2.6), more disposals (15.5 > 13.1), more marks in general (7.1 > 6.7), more goal assists, and more shots at goal (3.85 > 3.15). Oh and more tackles (1.4 > 1.25). Most importantly, he's a young player with 30 odd games and is no doubt working on all aspects of his game. He's rarely out-marked and the contests he makes every week are nothing short of outstanding. He's constantly providing opportunities for others and I repeat has an exceptional work rate. Rather than analysing football stick to your silly gifs.

Some are concerned his tackles are going from 1.4 to 1.2 (which is approx. 3 tackles over 13 rounds). That's the level of debate provided by some. Ever checked the numbers of nearly all the great key forwards ? But let's get the facts straight. In the first 13 games Hogan played last year he made 13 tackles. In the first 13 games this year he's made 18. So even the point that was being made is factually incorrect. He's made 5 more tackles this year from the same amount of games. Hogan is the best young talent to come the club in 40 years, but naturally enough there are those who would rather concern themselves about his perceived lack of pressure in the forward 50. Of all the things to dwell on they think a hulking 195cm forward could apply more defensive pressure. It's about 77 on the list of things you could highlight or be concerned about. Jeff Garlett being down an average of one tackle per game is of more concern, because that's a strong part of the role of a small forward.

He didn't prove you wrong. You correctly evaluated what you were seeing and his effort in contests was substandard. It led to him being shopped around and dropped twice in his 7th season. I'm not sure how any of that was proving you "wrong". With good development and coaching, a mind-shift from the player and hard work he's greatly improved the contested side of his game. I'm stoked we now have a player that can impact games and make us better. But he'll always need to make sure he's working on this aspect of his game.

A 10 goal drubbing in the wet means a few put the cue in the rack. But when one remembers we're the youngest and most inexperienced running around it gives some reason to the performance. Young teams find it hard to run out games in the wet. That's not an excuse that's fact. I liked my boy Wattsy's game again. Twice now he's been good in the wet, which is exceedingly unlike Jack. He really has improved his contested footy. I can't believe some posters potting Hogan. It's BS that he gave no second efforts. Conditions couldn't be worse for a hulking key forward like Hogan, but he finished with 17 disposals and 5 marks while competing in the air all day. Any idea how tiring is to do that in the wet ?

No mate. He is never an "outstanding" kick. He doesn't have the technique to ever be outstanding. But yes, he can hit targets on occasions when given time to execute.

How dim can you be to try to bounce the ball in the wet ? And can we have Tom McDonald kick out more just to really enforce the pain ?