stevethemanjordan

[censored] Essendon. I hope we standup and play hardball on this one with Hibberd. I want the MFC to be the club that dictates the play. Too many times have I seen us be bullied by stronger clubs like Essendon. Makes me sick to the stomach.

Edit: Deleted my post as I realised a few of those players were rookie upgrades as people have already pointed out. Shiet.

I know he has said all of that. But I couldn't in my wildest dreams ever see someone like Fyfe leave Freo. He just doesn't seem like the kind of guy to leave. Unless of course he had a fall-out with the club.

Generally a really smart and good field kick for a KP player, is Jesse. Which is a handy attribute for a CHF to have. As soon as the Weed is ready, I'm sure we'll see the move made.

Quite the contrary, OD.

Ban him mods. Ban him.

You'd think so. I think it's clear Hogan's attributes and strengths suggest he is a traditional CHF. Weideman is a goal square FF. Watts to play third tall.

Possibly robbed him from a rising star nom also. Was a joke of a decision. Trac-man is showing the signs we all thought he would show. So exciting. As soon as he realises he doesn't have to play on at every opportunity, the better. No doubts about him though. A player you want in finals.

That's a significant drop in price and I'm not certain he'd take it.

Yeh but his 'technique' hasn't changed from last year to this. So where's the argument going? I didn't hear anything when he kicked 7.1 against St Kilda. Daisy refuses to detail what part of his technique it is that is 'flawed'. And everyone else just seems to say that it looks awkward. Which it does. But again, of what significance is that if last year he had exactly the same technique but was kicking more accurately?

I'm yet to hear what it is about his technique that contributes to his inaccuracy from you. Solid. You've made absolutely no point.

Well wtf are you arguing/whinging about ? The only thing it's potentially inhibiting is his distance. Have you checked the bloke's accuracy? What is it about his 'flawed' action do you see that needs changing? Do you understand that the last few steps he takes before hitting the ball are fine and his ball-drop is generally fine? And that that's the most important part of his 'technique' and kicking a football in general. What you're basically saying is that the before bits like his stutter steps etc are contributing to his inaccuracy? Is that right? How can you argue such a thing when to date, he has been pretty damn accurate with the exception of a few 'off' days. What are you arguing mate?

The ball is always positioned more favourably in his left hand on his approach which is what makes it look like he's left-footed. He also takes his first step with his left foot, (I think). It's unorthodox, but works for him. The last few steps and then the ball drop are usually fine. It's everything before that, that looks like a mess.

Cool. I'm giving a reason as to why he has a set-shot run up like he does. He is Jesse Hogan. Not Robbie Flower, or countless others.

Excuses? Mate, everyone has a little more penetration on the run. But a set shot is not an on the run kick and Hogan has always lacked penetration. He can kick 50 if he runs around on a slight arc but you minimise your chances of making sweet contact if you do that which is why sometimes he doesn't get the distance. But in general, he is not a booming kick. How can you say he doesn't feel comfortable with that routine if it's the one he's had since coming to the club? Do you mean to say that you don't feel comfortable with it? That would make more sense.

People continuously overlook the fact that he is left-hand dominant, (Tasks/activities with his left hand. Eg; Playing tennis, writing, drinking tea, shaking hands etc). However, weirdly enough he is right-foot dominant. That is a [censored] up of hemispheres and I'm sure this makes it extremely difficult for the brain to make his set-shot routine look 'smooth'. If people knew that, they wouldn't bang on about it. And I wish commentators would get the mail on this too because it's becoming infuriating. His run up is what it is and if he feels most comfortable kicking this way, then he should be left to it. Especially given the uniqueness of having two opposing limbs that are dominant. We all know he lacks penetration. But that's always been the case and I don't think he'll ever change that significantly.

He'd be an upgrade and offer more versatility than Pedo who he'd likely replace in a hypothetical. And given we've only offered Spencer a one-year deal, it suggests to me we're keeping our 'options' open in regards to players like this. The importance of keeping Gawn fit and on the park cannot be underestimated considering the advantage he gives our mids and side in general. And I think that will be the thinking here. Gawn needs support. Goldstein and Nic Nat both have better support which allows them more breaks both forward and on the pine. Gawn needs to be managed carefully, he is like gold to us. To me, most of the top sides have 'ruckmen height' talls in their forward-line who provide solid relief for their side's number one ruckman. Pedo has provided admirable support at times but I'd be very surprised if supporters would prefer him to a 200cm forward/ruckman who'd potentially provide further relief for Hogan as well as offering better assistance when in the ruck due to his height. But like others, what's hard to envisage is a future forward-line of: Jenkins/Gawn Weideman Garlett Watts Hogan Kent Seems to be too top heavy.... But at the same time it looks awfully difficult to match up on.

Who is Dan? Or did predictive txt just have its way?

I pity the fool that thinks in this manner. He's contracted until the end of 2017. It's a waste of time and energy.

If all of the pointless threads, from all of the football forums, formed their own forum - OF POINTLESS THREADS - In that forum, this would be the most pointless thread.

Not sure about others, but I reckon Terlich and Grimes

I don't think anyone is disputing that we had a young side in, as we did the previous two weeks. However I refuse to say the loss came down to 'inexperience'. That's just garbage. Conceding seven goals with such ease is not solely down to inexperience. Dunn, McDonald and Lumumba have plenty of experience they all had really poor games. Not average. Poor. Pederson had his worst game for the year, Vince refused to play tough footy and Dom Tyson wasn't near it. Sure some of those players are still young and so off days are forgivable. The trend is there. We have players, including senior ones who are far too inconsistent in their output. The difference between McDonald's best and worst is far too great. The difference in Dunn's best and worst is far too great. The list goes on. It's the number one contributing factor as to why we still have what many supporters would call 'Melbourne moments'. We saw it with Frawley, Howe, Jamar, Bail, Grimes etc etc and with Garland who is playing ressies. Over a career at AFL level, the hope for all clubs is that the players who last the longest on AFL lists are the ones who will be the most consistent performers at their clubs. And if you look all around, you'll see that all other clubs have them. This has been the norm for all AFL clubs excluding ours which is another reason why we've been the laughing stock. We have one home grown player who fits the description. One. Nathan Jones. Jesse is part of a new breed who everyone is hoping will buck this trend at the MFC and I'm sure he'd be excited at the thought of what they could achieve together. However, I also strongly believe that he'd look at guys like Dunn and McDonald on their underperforming days and question whether or not these more senior guys have the ability to help carry the club also. As for the satisfaction comment. He is 21. Frawley was 27 when he left I'm pretty sure and went to the flag favourite who had just won back-to-back. Very different. Jesse would have a myriad of clubs to choose from unlike Frawley and lists with just as much talent and much better leaders. Jesse will not leave because of a 'loss'. He'd leave because of the perpetual underperforming of senior and experienced figures that have contaminated the club for years.

Lose sometimes? It would have absolutely nothing to do with losing sometimes. It would have a lot to do with the downfalls of periods of these games that are the reason we end up losing. These are trends and are inherent problems that still exist within our current group and are visible to outsiders watching. Why do you think during that third quarter capitulation, people say it's the 'same old Melbourne again'? Where does that come from? And what does that mean to people? I can't understand these reductionist posts. Whilst Saturday's resulting 'loss' this early in the season is hardly worth crying about, it is the same patterns and trends that continue to concern. Why do so many seem to miss that? Quite obviously it's got nothing to do with 'one loss'. I find it hard to believe that any supporter wouldn't think that Jesse wouldn't have those things on his mind in regards to how far this club can go and how far he can take his footy with this club. Especially given what he's endured since arriving and what he would be able to see on game day in regards to old habits and new. Again, supporters are kidding themselves if they believe a Saturday's loss can be reduced simply to 'inexperience' or 'losing a stat count' ad nauseam. Here's one small example: Having two of your most senior and experienced defenders in Lynden Dunn and Colin Garland playing as if they are first or second year recruits. Neither can find consistent form. Both have played VFL this year. Neither provide inspiration nor instill confidence within the back six because of this reason. Tom McDonald. Our second start up KD. Clearly has more time on his side however a trend emerges here also. Inconsistency in his performance. He has some elite attributes for a defender and when he is playing well he is clearly a really vital part of our defence. But when he's not, his more valuable to the opposition given his inherent skill and decision making problems. Turnovers resulting in goals, leaving his man to make an ineffective spoil resulting in goals etc. I would go as far to say that I think Tom McDonald's weaknesses are as bad or worse than any other key defenders in the competition. His best attributes are up there with the best. His worst are horribly bad. I'm giving examples of three players whose gameday output is hugely influential to how we defend, instruct and move the ball out of defence with confidence. This is one area of the ground. Dunn and McDonald were incredibly poor on the weekend and Dunn not only rarely contributed positively to our side, he gave away free kicks, a 50 metre penalty and he turned the ball over. No doubt there were other players on the weekend who not only were off but were simply horribly underperforming. Pederson, Frost, Vince, Tyson, Gawn whilst a host of younger players were also well down on output and touch (more forgivable). But I am talking about trends and habits that I continue to see that are the main reason behind such dramatic dips in form. Jesse would without a doubt identify these kinds of problems that remain at the club and wonder how and when it will change. And ultimately, unless things like what I just pointed out actually CHANGE, I honestly don't think he'll want to hang around.

Pedo, T-Mac, Dunn, Vince, Gawn, Tyson. They were all extremely poor. It's not just about inexperience. It's when most of your side are playing their worst football. And for some reason we see it too often.

Was a great vintage for reds in Coonawarra.