joeboy

I'm a long standing Demon supporter and member , and I'd just like to refute the fallacy that we all locate to the snowfields around this time every year. Also , just leaving an opening for any intrepid Demonlander to take over the ownership of ' My 3 Word player analysis ....' this week.

6- McKenzie ( not just a stopper , but got his own possessions ) 5 - N.Jones ( as usual, never stopped ) 4 - Viney ( rough, but so willing ) 3 - Watts ( an easy role , but performed with aplomb) 2 - Garland ( rock in defense) 1 - McDonald ( excellent rebounding game )

Trengove - had an impact Grimes - was rarely sighted N.Jones - great at stoppages Watts - set up well Viney - courageous and involved Byrnes - experience counted little Sylvia - needed more involvement McKenzie - wonderful stopping game Dunn - solid all game Strauss - not the answer Garland - solid and safe McDonald - excellent under duress Nicholson - disposal from hell Kent - rough but effective Tapscott - some important possessions Davey - suited to sub Davis - provided regular contests Spencer - provided regular advantage M.Jones - was rarely sighted Terlich - needs quicker decisions Fitzpatrick - continued to impress Clisby - doesn't lack confidence

Find him a Melbourne girl ( the place, not the club ) ..... that should do the trick

Hard getting motivated

N.Jones - our only player

6 - N.Jones ( never stopped trying , unlike most of the others ) 5 - Pederson ( I hate him, but he actually did some good things ) 4 - Clisby ( rough , but ready ) 3 - Watts ( for a reasonable first half ) 2 - Trengove ( seemed to be interested ) 1 - Toumpas ( tried )

More like a far cue

Too easy to align the blame on anything other than the fact that most of the players are devoid of fundamental skills. In yesterday's team, I counted only 3 players who could be classified as having the required skill set to be regarded as of AFL standard: N.Jones, Watts, Sylvia. These three, under normal circumstances find teammates by hand or foot the majority of the time, whilst the remainder are more than likely, most of the time to turn the ball over with a minimum of fuss.

6- Frawley ( kept a good opponent in check ) 5 - Dunn ( see comments above ) 4 - Sylvia ( maintained intensity and care ) 3 - N.Jones ( only because everyone else was crap ) 2 - Fitzpatrick ( I like the name ) 1 - Grimes ( needs an encouragement award )

Trengove - was embarrassingly inept Grimes - was rarely sighted Jones - couldn't break shackles Watts - the bad Watts Toumpas - poor decision making Dawes - gave us nothing Viney - provided little drive Frawley - never stopped trying Byrnes - what's the point? Sylvia - classy and cared Dunn - beat his opponent Blease - went backwards again Pederson - dumb and fat McDonald - was taken apart Kent - cannot justify inclusion Tapscott - lots of nothing Davey - time has elapsed Gawk - tried but destroyed Howe - continued poor season M.Jones - poor decision making Fitzpatrick - rarely touched ball Clisby - mistake- riddled performance

Just provide some words ( 3 ) to back up your argument ... nothing more , nothing less.Using the 5 players you listed as examples from the top of your head , how would you have described their performances on Saturday , in 3 words?

From that mindless response I get quite obviously why people have issues with you

Lol. The Age gave votes to Trengove for yesterday's game , so to take heed of any of the media's analysis , as you've done , best sums up your feeble argument . Please indicate which of the 'critiques are laughable '

Excellent analysis.. I can't disagree with any of it

6 - Frawley ( has returned to all - Australian form ) 5 - Viney ( endeavor, vigor, and courage) 4 - Watts ( excellent for most of the game ) 3 - Grimes ( stand alone captain ) 2 - Davey ( clever and precise ) 1 - N. Jones ( not prolific, but ever-present)

Trengove - slow and unsure Grimes - safe and steady N.Jones - couldn't break free Watts - an impressive performance Toumpas - embarrassingly underwhelming game Dawes - failed to command Viney - enjoyed his vitality Frawley - season's best game Byrnes - unsighted for periods Sylvia - tried but failed Dunn - was mostly effective Blease - failed one percenters Garland - a significant loss McDonald - was rarely sighted Kent - lacked awareness again Davey - some important possessions Gawn - was well beaten Howe - too easily distracted M.Jones - failed to impose Terlich - disposal still problematic Fitzpatrick - impressive once again Clisby - had little influence

6- N.Jones ( loved the conditions) 5 - Frawley ( fantastic , despite overwhelming odds , including a suspect hamstring ) 4 - Byrnes ( got up against his old team , and enjoyed the slower pace of the game ) 3 - M.Jones ( prolific ball winner , though couldn't use the fact for the greater good ) 2 - Gawn ( performed manfully , and won his share of the hit outs) 1 - Toumpas ( showed some encouraging commitment and application )

Trengove - was barely seen Grimes - was barely seen Jones - outstanding all day Watts - was barely seen Toumpas - showed some signs Dawes - was barely seen Frawley - strong all day Byrnes - our only forward Sylvia - tried but failed Dunn - was barely seen Blease - had no impact Garland - just a game McDonald - was well beaten Nicholson - expectedly failed miserably Kent - devoid of awareness Davey - couldn't get going Gawk - lone handed performance Howe - career worst game M.Jones - many meaningless possessions Terlich - not as prolific Fitzpatrick - abysmal in conditions Clisby - was rarely noticed

"Try watching the game, and you will see on this occasion he is not

I rarely try to defend myself and generally leave myself acceptably open to criticism, but I believe many of my detractors here are getting carried away by the 'feel good' factor of a reasonably meritorious loss . The reality is , we were comprehensively DESTROYED in most of the important statistical areas , including the score-defining centre clearances . For whatever quirks of nature deemed that we put up an improved performance, for the most part, the realty is we had very few 4 quarter winners , and Sydney missed countless , and very easy , set shots and running shots for goal . Our skills , at many times, were deplorable , and we did not deserve to be anywhere near as close to Sydney as we were in the end. Notwithstanding the above, we definitely are displaying an improved mindset, as evidenced by the number of positive comments I've applied to a majority of players. Finally, I'd ask all those who have just flippantly derided my comments , and made disparaging remarks, to offer us all their own takes on the players' performances , restricting themselves to 3 words in the process.

6 - Fitzpatrick 5 - Garland 4 - Terlich 3 - Watts 2 - M.Jones 1 - Rodan

I'm realistic , and say it as I see it.Had Sydney kicked straight we'd have lost by over 100 points

Trengove - just a game Grimes - needed the run Jones - was weighed down Watts - played with purpose Toumpas - was totally lost Dawes - made an impact Frawley - excellent until injured Byrnes - made little impression Sylvia - seemingly without passion Dunn - good but flawed Rodan - took wrong options Garland - rarely made mistakes McDonald - held up well Nicholson - should never kick Kent - seemingly lacked awareness Davey - little was good Gawn - showing exciting glimpses Howe - rarely got involved M.Jones - intelligent , but spasmodic Terlich - a fine impression Fitzpatrick - may have arrived Clisby - exciting but raw

ANDGary Lyon didn't select Neeld expecting the walls to collapse around the club within 24 months and would justifiably have had as much positive expectation as Geelong had with an unproven Scott brother