Gator

How about we not try to manufacture scenarios and just play the bloke if he's ready and makes us better ?

This poster (Diamond) has been online and not once clarified their post after repeated requests to do so. Mr Grapeviney will make redundant.

You'd keep Neal-Bullen ? I thought he was terrible and just looks completely off the pace of AFL footy. He's a fumbler and makes ordinary decisions and disposal under pressure. He's the opposite to Oliver in traffic. He was good against Geelong last year, because he was played as a forward and was OK with time and space. And he was OK running onto the footy near goals. But he's not ready as a pure mid at AFL level - yet. He may, or may not be in time.

Just a silly comment. He ran 2.97 seconds for 20 metres, which is considered good pace. His bio's said he had good pace. And if he was "too slow" recruiters wouldn't have drafted him at pick 2 and he wouldn't have been labelled in SA as the best junior since Buckley. That said, Sam Mitchell is slow. Luke Hodge is slow. Scott Pendlebury is slow. Patrick Cripps was considered by some to be slow (although he's OK in my eyes). Jimmy Bartel is slow. If you're good enough you're quick enough. That said, I repeat, Trengove wasn't slow at 18.

In no universe was Frawley in Hogan's league. Even when he made AA he wasn't a patch on Hogan, who is chronically undervalued for some reason. A victim of his own standards. Josh Kennedy is the reigning Coleman Medalist and best traditional key forward in the comp (there's never been anyone like Buddy) and check out Hogan's stats in comparison. Average Disposals: Kennedy 15.7 (157); Hogan 15.6 (156) Marks: Kennedy 7.6 (76); Hogan 7.6 (76) Contested Marks: Kennedy 2.3 (23); Hogan 2.6 (26) Marks inside 50: Kennedy 4 (40); Hogan 3.6 (36) Inside 50's Kennedy 2.6 (26); Hogan 2.8 (28) Goal assists: Kennedy 1.1 (11); Hogan .7 (7) Goals: Kennedy 3.7 (37); Hogan 2.6 (26) Hogan is already a gun and some Melbourne supporters don't even realise it. Tom Lynch (Gold Coast) is recognised as a gun key forward and in AA form. He's also in his 6th season. Let's compare he and Hogan. Average Disposals: Lynch 14 (140); Hogan 15.6 (156) Marks: Lynch 6 (60); Hogan 7.6 (76) Contested Marks: Lynch 2.6 (26); Hogan 2.6 (26) Marks inside 50: Lynch 2.8 (28); Hogan 3.6 (36) Inside 50's Lynch 2.4 (24); Hogan 2.8 (28) Goal assists: Lynch 1.1 (11); Hogan .7 (7) Goals: Lynch 3.4 (34); Hogan 2.6 (26) Hogan has Lynch covered in just about every stat except goals kicked and the only reason for that is goal kicking accuracy. Hogan has had one more shot at goal (45 to 44). I accept that Scully and Trengove were rated as highly as Oliver and Brayshaw, however, the latter two will become big bodied mids, who are the most likely to succeed. And already Oliver is as clean in close as any Melbourne player I've ever seen. I'm not sure what you're missing to think the jury is still out on him. Happy to leave it there and agree on our differences.

Really ? Hogan, Oliver, Brayshaw and Salem could be "boom or bust" ? You should learn to back your eyes a bit more. And even on limited viewing Stretch, Harmes and Hunt have shown a greater propensity to contest and tackle than Blease, Strauss, Maric and co. Stretch averages double their disposals for starters and even though he's outside he cracks in far more. Anyway, I'm happy to relax knowing the list we're building and you can just hope we're getting things right.

You can't tell the difference between Viney, Oliver, Hogan, Salem, Tyson, Brayshaw, Gawn (young for a ruckman), vandenBerg, Stretch, Harmes, Hunt and a few others ? You think they could be the equivalent of Morton, Grimes, Strauss, Blease, Maric, Watts, Gysberts, Scully, Trengove (cruelled), etc. ? The latter are skinny and outside, whereas the former (in the main) have shown quality inside grunt and skill. I think if you gave it a bit of thought you'd note the differences.

And it doesn't take too hard of an edge or skill to tackle. Going into this game, which had a lot on the end of it, we were averaging 69.6 tackles per game. We had 46 against Port. There wasn't the stomach for a battle. The collective will was lacking. You're right when you insinuate that our leaders don't lead and it's the kids coming through that we're relying on. Poor old bloody Viney. It appears if he's down we're shot ducks.

Supporters get sick of excuses, but there are valid reasons. We're regularly putting out the youngest and least experienced team in the AFL. Naturally, inconsistency follows. Have a look at the age and games experience of most premiership teams. Add the fact that we're missing experienced older bodies in Dawes/Pedersen, Trengove, Lumumba, vandenBerg, and top notch young talent in Oliver and Brayshaw and we're not at our best. With Viney, Vince and Tyson not contributing it was a minor miracle we were within 17 points at 3/4 time.

Thanks. It's quite a good article.

As good as they are first and second year players won't provide a "hard edge". But the sooner Oliver, Brayshaw, Trengove, vandenBerg and Salem are back the better.

Nah mate, I remember it happening. Viney was already walking off. It was byplay between two friends. There was no "helping" about it.

I watch lots of games of football and I had Sam for a while in my Dream team a rookie option while he was still at GWS. I watch my Dream team players closely and while no star and limited with his skills he's a far better option than young Oscar, who is presently borderline VFL development league quality.

In: Trengove, Dawes, Frost (backline), Dunn, Oliver Out: Viney, Oscar, Garland, Neal-Bullen, Newton

Trengove is the obvious replacement.

The most disappointing aspects are that if Viney is held there's virtually no-one other than Jones to shoulder the load. If Viney is beaten we look limp in the midfield. We didn't work hard enough and for a team that is supposedly built around "competitors" there's nowhere near a hard enough edge. We could have been in the 8 after this weekend, so one must question how hungry this group is.

There are some very amusing comments on the last page. I knew he was weak in the contest, but I had no idea he was so slow. A mile off.

There's been a bit of discussion about Carlton on this thread. It's worth noting a couple of things about their list as they entered the weekend's game (injuries during the game aside). They had 4 former pick 1's, two former pick 2's, a pick 3 and two pick 10's. All up they had 9 former top 10 picks and 11 within the top 13. Half of their team was drafted within the top 13 of the National Draft. To put that in perspective we had 6 players from Saturday drafted within the top 13; and that includes both Hogan and Viney. Our average age was 23.5 months - there's 25.11 months and our games experience average was 63.9 compared to 98.4. Those numbers present a huge disparity. Bolton is doing a great job, but their experience and top end talent is better than what is being reported. They were the 5th oldest team on the weekend and even older than the geriatrics from Fremantle.

I don't understand your logic. What's this 20, 30, 40 you refer to ? No-one has seen one for over 50 years (if they've seen one at all).

The game-plan is a work in progress and stills needs plenty of tightening. If a couple of players (even one) get caught out of position then we get opened up like a can of sardines. We lack a couple of clean big bodied mids. Oliver and Brayshaw will be those players. Hogan needs another marking forward to take the heat off him. He's an incredible young player. Bugg has his fans. I don't rate him. Neal-Bullen is a fumbler. He's just not a clean footballer and makes dodgy decisions under pressure. He's young, but should return to Casey. And the less said about Newton, Oscar (so slow and awkward), Kent, Kennedy, Tyson the better. We'll be a better team when Trengove, Oliver, Brayshaw, Salem, vandenBerg and one of Dawes/Pedersen are fit and impacting games. Those first 5 named are talented and that's a lot of talent out of the team. Never underestimate talent.

I'm not overly sentimental when it comes to (most) footballers, but I have tremendous respect and empathy for Jack Grimes. He's stagnant on 98 games and deserves to play 100 for the MFC. Some will look at it from a F/S point of view, but that's a distant consideration. He's not best 22, but the club needs to make sure he reaches this milestone. He's not so far behind a Bugg, or a couple of others, that it would compromise our winning chances. It would be terribly disappointing if he left this club without his name on the locker. He deserves it.

All true. As for Dion ? Let's remember that players nearly always get to their preferred destination and I can't think of too many times where the destination club has overpaid.

I'm always amused by someone who doesn't bother tackling the initial problematic comment but jumps on the retaliator. If you felt so strongly about it you should have said something to the originator. I call out your utter BS. I hold your type with complete contempt. Cheers.

I don't think it's that cut and dried. If they're happy with his previous form, fitness and next week's training I don't think he necessarily needs another game at Casey to be selected. A week off might do him good.

You leftues never shut up.