Axis of Bob

old, I'd give GWS three first round picks for O'Meara. I'd negotiate if that wasn't enough.

Who does Collingwood drop out of their back line - Tarrant, Reid, Maxwell, O'Brien or Goldsack? You're really not going to like it next year when Davis is playing in the backline too!

Exactly Nash. I think people want to be angry with it because they want to show everyone else how tough they are and how they (cue spewing noises) 'won't accept mediocrity'. Also, some of the writing off of performances of guys who played well have been really hard to read. People tell us that Scully was rubbish (he had 11 contested possessions, second behind Beamer's 12, plus had 6 clearances, 2nd behind Beamer's 7, and did it at a efficiency of 79%!) when he was clearly very good for us. I think he's been down, but he looked good today. Also, I thought that our structure looked much better this week, and that we are using our backline much better now with Garland playing a more attcking, zone role using his speed to defend and counterattack. We had a very young team and, while we didn't set the world on fire, I certainly found a lot to be happy about. This place is a weekly rollercoaster, where we are either 2 years from a certain premiership or bound to the wooden spoon until the coming of Saoshyant. There is no middle ground. It can be frustrating to read.

Jared Rivers would want to have a big preseason next year.

Lockett retired at 33. Fevola will be 30 at the start of next year. Unless you are talking about Lockett's 3 extraordinary games in 2002 comeback, after which he promptly retired as an old man. Ablett retired at 34. He was also Gary Ablett. And the game was different when he retired in 1996, because he was allowed to just stand in the goalsquare and wrestle. That doesn't happen anymore. This is aside from the many other factors against Fevola, such as culture and that he's taking a spot (and a draft pick) away from a kid that we really need to get the experience. It's just not a good idea.

I would be surprised and upset if we picked up Fevola. I'm not exactly happy that he's playing for Casey, to be honest.

Tall defenders is the least of our problems. Frawley, Garland, Rivers, McDonald, Davis, Warnock ..... how many do we need? Ask Adelaide and Hawthorn how much they would be willing to pay for a backline that read like that! I'm not worried about the tall forwards either.

Aside from Bate, who was excellent, I thought that Casey's best was Bail. We have missed his ultra hard running and you could see this today as he turned the ball over many times and used it well. He looks a class above VFL now, which is a great sign. His hard running is sensational and should be a starting 18 player next year, if he isn't already. I'd be surprised if he didn't play AFL next week. Fitzy was pretty good, but tended to flash in and out of the play. When he did get involved he was excellent, taking some good marks and using his speed. At one point a Bullants player corralled him, thinking that someone of his size would prop and look to handball. Instead he just took off, burned his man, took a bounce and goaled from about 20 out. Gawn was easily the best ruck on the ground. He'll be a damn good player, Max. He took some good marks, controlled the taps, but his running and follow up work was great for a man his size. He isn't just Peter Street, he's a very good ruckman who just happens to be 6'9. I liked Davis down back. It looked like he started to tire later in the game, but when the heat was on he was one of our best. Played half back and played a dual role of shutting down an opponent but also zoning back to help out and give real drive from defence. He's very powerful, not just strong, but strong and quick. Won some excellent contests on different sized opponents. Very good signs. I would be more than a little surprised if Matthews was drafted, given his deficiencies. But he is a great player to watch because he is so competitive. Throws himself around, competes for every ball and is a super team player. Deserved every one of his goals. I honestly thought Casey would get done today, given that Carlton had the bye and the number of MFC players out of the side, especially through the midfield. But Casey's pressure today was brilliant. They turned the ball over repeatedly and moved it crisply when they did. Bail, Nicholson and Lawrence did this very well (from MFC) but also Casey players like Matthews, Collins, Petropoulos etc applied pressure. But it was all over the field too, with Fitzy doing a great chase down tackle too. The pressure caused turnovers, but also allowed the defence to pick off the kicks easily, with Warnock, Mohr, and Davis especially good.

Fitzy, Joel Mac and Nicho miss out. Morton, McNamara, Howe and Jordie are the I/C.

Actually, having a powerful forward line is an excellent reason to play defensive football. If you look at St Kilda and Sydney, they had two of the best forward lines in the game which allowed them to kick goals even when the opposition had extra numbers in defence. They'd kick the ball into Riewoldt and Kosi to take big marks, and then have Milne and Schneider pick up the crumbs if they missed. The rest of the numbers were waiting to turn the ball over if they didn't kick a goal. Conversely, Geelong had a poor forward line but a great defence, so they played an attacking game and backed their defence to beat their opponents without as much help from team mates. They ran forward, provided options in attack and kicked goals, because if they turned it over then they would back Scarlett, Harley, Egan, Engright, Kelly and Hunt to win the ball back.

A credible scientific journal would be a good start, Hanna.

"I'm invincible, I'm paying money, the girl's happy, she's got no money, I got my rocks off, ah how good is this?" Quality radio. Vale Armitage Shanks.

Premiership player? You have to be pretty special if you are to make it as a slow player in the midfield these days. I don't think Tommy is Greg Williams or Sam Mitchell.

I don't have a particularly strong opinion on this issue, but that has to be the worst bit of 'science' that I have ever read. It was appalling. It was published for the far right wing American 'Family Research Council' 10 years ago. Actually, the website's main banner is asking me to register for the 'Premier Conservative Event of the year'. It's slogan is, ominously, 'Faith, Family and Freedom'. It's a psuedo-religious site, and it's values are based upon that. And, the paper was awful. It spends its first third saying that all of the research papers into gay marriage and parenting so far should be discounted. Then it spends the second third making tenuous links to the issue with fairly disparate (and highly questionable - eg. "29 percent--of the adult children of homosexual parents had been specifically subjected to sexual molestation by that homosexual parent, compared to only 0.6 percent of adult children of heterosexual parents") figues. It finishes by fearmongering about what gay marriage would mean and then quoting the Pope!! You're definitely not a science person, are you Hannabal.

Nice name change, Hanna. Don't listen to what everyone else has to say. Calling yourself 'Lone Wolf' doesn't make you look like a desperate, attention seeking martyr. You're definitely the most independent person that I've met that desperately tries to attach himself to other people and institutions.

hangon, credibility is the only currency that one has to trade on an internet forum. If you keep frustrating people with gibberish and are unwilling to engage in proper debate then you are going to find your experience here to be a very unfulfilling one when nobody takes anything you say seriously.

This was your response to being challenged on the 'Scully to Richmond' claims. However the best part of the thread was rpfc, who obviously had the same movie quote in his head as I did when reading it:

I agree that we have key forwards on our list that just need to be developed. If we were going to trade for a bi name player it would be a genuine centre square midfielder.

He's not out of contract ..... and, even if he was, he would be in absolutely no danger of being delisted. So, in answer to your question, no.

The only one who couldn't be denied promotion was Morton. He should be an inclusion. Aside from that, it depends on what the coaches were wanting from the players. I think they would have seen a lot (in terms of game style) to be happy with today. I would keep Blease at Casey, reinforce my happiness with his game style today, and make him play another before promoting him. But I could understand if he was promoted based on that game. With Strauss down, we need another defender. Given West Coast's tall forward line, I'd be inclined to replace him with McDonald or Davis. If not, you'd have to look at Nicholson, who was solid enough today. If Jamar's right then Gawn comes out. Sylvia and Jurrah's return would be based on what instructions they were given by the coaches before the game. Lawrence needs more games like the one he produced before he can be considered.

I was at the game today. I'm surprise that youami thought that Morton was 'OK' because, from where I was, he was clearly BOG. He played the majority of the game in the guts and it would not surprise me if he had 10 clearances. Won a lot of contested possession, tackled and used the ball very well. It's first game where I would think he's played a complete midfielder's game. I hope he plays AFL next week and they start him in the centre square rather than on a wing/flank. Blease also played one of the best games I've seen him play. Played on a wing and worked harder than I've seen him work before. The best thing is that he didn't just sit out the back waiting to be fed the ball, but instead he was throwing himself on the ball, getting physical and doing the defensive work (including chasing). I think that game could be a real step forward for him. Kel Lawrence was another shining light. Played forward and was excellent. He had the manic chasing and tackling that you see from AFL small forwards. Played at super intensity. Also won contested ball and used it well (aside from one errant shot on goal). Plus his pace is really, really exciting. Played an AFL brand of footy today so, if he can do it consistently, then he could well find himself as an AFL player. Warnock was Warnock. Very good. I really liked the work of McDonald and Davis in defence. Davis is powerful and fast, and was really clean. McDonald read the ball really well and just isn't beaten overhead. Kicked a beautiful goal running down the corridor. Is tracking way ahead of where he should be, and will be a monster when he adds weight. Fitzpatrick was very good in his first game in the seniors since injury. Really mobile for 200+cm and his kicking is improving out of sight. Took some good marks and was competitive in the ruck against Gardiner. Tracking nicely and a player that excites me. As for the others, Jetta was very good as a midfield/forward, Jurrah was good without starring, Maric OK, Bennell in and out, Campbell strong in the ruck against Gardiner, McNamara solid and Sylvia was OK without doing too much. The problem I have with Sylvia is that he is either all or nothing within a game. When the ball is next to him, or coming to him, he is ferocious - but when it's in transition or moving away from a stoppage, he meanders. I don't think he tries to, but I think he loses concentration when winning the ball isn't immediately possible. Overall, the first 3 quarters (first half especially) by Casey was a teriffic brand of footy. It was the most contested game I've seen Casey or the Dees play for ages. We had all players (even those maligned players) putting their head over the footy and winning it. The game opened up late and gave Sandy some respectability, but the scoreboard flattered them. The first half they didn't look like scoring and the game was played in Casey's half. Morton, Blease and Lawrence were most exciting, and Morton's ability to win contested possessions and clearances in the middle was fantastic to watch. Watching that game reminded me exactly how talented he is, and I hope he replicates it next week. I turned up unhappy after a tough week, but I left in a much, much better mood.

I laughed. Oh, the ironing.

If GWS wants him and the Dees don't want to get rid of him, then there are only two choices. GWS and Melbourne. The only way it will happen otherwise will be if Melbourne decides that they will do a trade.

Cadel showed what happens with experience. He had a mechanical problem and lost a heap of time. But he didn't panic and just patiently took his time back and finished the stronger of the GC contenders. His calmness in a crisis may have won it for him while Voeckler panicked and tried to hold on to AC and AS, and ended up tiring himself out. There's a lesson in that for everyone. With experience you start to recognise situations and you don't panic. As our players gain experience they will show more composure under pressure and our performances will improve.

That stage was incredible. Evans' chase down on Galibier, both days, may win him the tour. He did it completely by himself from both sides of the Galibier and took 2 minutes the first day and 1.5 the second. Simply incredible stuff. Cadel deserves to win this. He's now in a great spot, but there is a lot of hard, hard work to do.