Axis of Bob

What role was Morton playing? When the club puts a player in the bests that you don't expect, then it's usually because they played a specific role or they were being measured by specific criteria.

Evans looked a lot more comfortable on the climb - it was very encouraging. That was just one short climb and you could get team mates with you if they only needed one effort after being fresh from an easy week. As they get deeper into the tour, it will be harder and harder for Wiggins to get his team around him and he'll become more isolated. Especially on really tough stages with repeat high mountains. It was also not a particularly important stage for Evans to have his team with him, as it wasn't a long climb. The test for Evans will be with the time trial(s). Wiggins' pet discipline is the time trial, so it would be a massive thing if Evans could keep with him. Once the mountains come then we'll see how good Wiggins really is.

Hardnut, I said that I wouldn't justify you with a debate. So I won't. My post that you refer to still stands. I'm happy to leave it there for others' judgement, even if you can't grasp it.

Yep. Sylvia's pace and power is something that is useful. He's a player that Neeld needs to harness and simplify his role in the team. Moloney can't run, so his only hope is that his big body can protect others (or his running improves). I suspect that he'd be a really good pickup for a young team like Gold Coast, and we'd both win from that deal.

It's definitely the midfield, above all else. Yes, there are other areas for improvement but, as Richmond shows, a strong midfield gets you most of the way there. And people ask 'why are we worse than last year with the same midfield?' Under Bailey we played a very attacking style. Our midfield ran forward of the ball and relied on our strong defence to turn the ball over for us. The current football department must have decided that this style wasn't going to win us a flag (like the Bulldogs). Neeld is making players run both ways with their opponent. This requires a lot more running, plus it also requires explosive running away from contests so that the midfielders can get free. Last year they got free because they 'cheated' forward of the ball in the hope that we would win the footy. Look at the number of time Moloney got free forward of the ball last year (as a slow midfielder without great aerobic capacity) compared with this year. This style of play relies on the running ability of the midfield far more than it has in the past. Our midfield are, generally, poor runners. That's why there has been such a focus on building that running ability into the players, which will take time. I'd be very surprised if we don't select midfielders that have very good running ability (speed + endurance) with our early picks. Look at who our best players have been this year and then match that up with their running ability. There aren't many poor runners that have flourished under Neeld, while those that run well (like Jones, Howe and McDonald) have generally done well.

Classy thread is classy.

I have stated my position. And engaging your views would only give validity to your position, regardless of who wins the debate. And I'm glad that you don't think that I insulted you.

Which is why I don't feel like insulting you! And I definitely agree that posting can been exhausting. I tend to post in waves, generally when I'm in the mood. Try what? Insulting you? I don't think I need to.

I have no intention of insulting you, Macca. I'd seriously consider insulting Hardnut and tonatopia, though. Their opinions are awfully thought out, if at all. But don't play the martyr card. If you offer an opinion then you offer it to be challenged. Just in the same way that you challenged my offering that your binary approach was too simplistic. If you are wanting to offer opinions that go unchallenged, then Demonland is not the place - try writing your own blog. There are people whose opinions I find to be ridiculous and laughable, but they probably find my opinions to be the same. If I post something then I expect it to be challenged. "See the oppression inherent in the system!!"

Macca, you said that it was a debate between those that 'have too much faith and those that don't have enough'. Who's to say that it isn't a debate between those 'that don't have enough faith' and everyone else? Neeld has only been coaching for half a season. It's clearly not long enough to determine whether or not he can coach (based on the actions on field). Clarkson and Hardwick both struggled in their first seasons - one of them beat us today and the other won a premiership. Can they coach? Did we know after half a season?

Genuine question - it's the reason why humans generalise and categorise people. It has helped humans for millions of years. It's not necessarily derogatory. Is there a reason why you are doing it here? Why is it necessary that all people must fall into either of those two categories? Why is there not room for someone to be an unaffiliated observer?

You believe that you can only be one or the other. Either you're a 'Neeld man' or an 'anti-Neeld man'. Why does this have to be so? Is it because it is simpler for you to understand?

He'll have to get in a line, though. Maybe even more.

He sounds like he's got a torn labrum due to a hip impingement. That shouldn't affect his speed, but he could be protecting it. His game wasn't dynamic and he didn't use any athleticism, but he may just be cruising about of his own design and floating at half back due to the hip. But I'd like to see more of his game uninjured. BH, Stringer 'apparently' had excellent speed prior to his injury. But it was a pretty serious injury.

Yep - Martin has a hint of the specials about him.

Wines is a good player, but not what we need. Honest, hard working, big bodied midfielder. I wonder about Toumpas. What is his pace like? For the outside player that he is at the moment, he needs to be a bit more dynamic. But he's very smart and uses the ball brilliantly. Does his starring game translate into starring at AFL level? Stringer is hard to judge. He's got a lot of wonderful attributes, but he's so ridiculously unfit at the moment that we just don't know how good he is/will be. I'm sure those that saw him pre-injury (ie, 2 years ago) will have a much better handle on him, and those reports are glowing. Can he get back to that? Probably, but it's a risk. Sam Mayes was very good. Super runner and will be a damaging player. O'Rourke was very smooth. Very excited by Martin and is exactly the sort of player we should be targetting. Damaging player who is good inside, outside and overhead. Really liked Wright - fast, direct and competitive, although will probably fit into the area between our compo and 3rd round.

If you're on a drinking binge then you're usually asleep during the early morning recovery session. The rumours around suggest that they were wide awake.

Generally, I thought our application was quite good, but we had a few major problems that killed us: 1- We were poor going inside 50 without Clark and were inconsistent with our defensive pressure when it hit the deck. 2- We ran poorly from contests in the midfield. We didn't spread well from contests and we didn't shut them down well enough when they spread from contests. The biggest problem we have is in the midfield. We are winning our fair share inside the packs, but we really lack the power runners outside that can do damage. Jones does this well and it's no co-incidence that we were a bit toothless without him. We need to look at fixing this at the end of the year with our early picks. We need players with speed and strength that can power away from stoppages after the inital possession.

I read the qualificatiosn you made. So, including your qualifications, name me our best 8 midfielders and tell me why you think they are "as good as any in the league".

Name me your best MFC midfield. Give me 8 names (assumining no injuries). Then convince us of why this is "as good as any in the league".

I'm at the game and had a quick look here at half time. The Game Day thread certainly attracts some ... interesting views. Makes me happy to know that these threads are usually closed by the time I get home.

Jamar led our team in clearances yesterday. Just saying.

Yes, definitely had LARS. I have no idea why. I went yesterday too. Pretty disappointing. And very cold. I think we're going to have to wait until SA comes over.

At the time, the game was much more open. Having hard running players that were could mark well in open space were gold. The game changed with the cluster and then the press. There were more people around and you needed big players to contest it. It went from the multi-purpose players (Ryan O'Keefe) to those with specific roles. Everyone from monster talls like Cloke, to ultra smalls like Blair. It's amazing how the game can change so quickly.

I'd be happy to have a go at Cloke, provided that the wage is in the zone where Harrington is happy. We clearly are going to play a game where the long kick inside 50 will be a big part, so we need people who can compete under that high ball and give us scoring opportunities. Cloke is one of the best at that, and he pushes up to do the same thing on the wing. To have both Cloke and Clark we'd have a great structure that we can use during periods of success. Best thing is that we won't have to give up any of our top picks. Our midfield woes can be solved through the draft. We'll have 3 first round picks, including 2 in the first 5. We should be able to hit 2 good midfielders there, and possibly more. We need a star mid that can take the heat off our lesser mids (like Moloney). We are practically no chance of trading for one, so we'd be best off chasing them with our top 5 picks. We may even have one already with Viney.