45HG

But Rhino, his perception amongst the players, especially the younger ones, was affect because of his injury. I believe if he had been injury free and amongst the playing group throughout the off season of next year, he'd have certainly been voted into the leadership group. Who made the decision to include him mid year? Was that the coaches, or a new vote? Either way I'd be happy for Brock to take over next year, or for Brad to lead our club for a few years. We're filling our club with passionate people, and great kids, and I think Brad would be a very good figurehead.

Go to http://imageshack.us/ you might have to make an account, not hard just email and password Click browse to search a photo from your harddrive (click resize for avatar) Then copy the address in the "hotlink to forums" category Then go my controls in demonland Edit avatar and then in enter a url, paste the url address. It should work, if not try one of the other addresses it gives you

Great work Theo, thanks a lot for that!

I don't think it's food for thought at all really. I don't think any base list of quantitative stastistics are often food for thought in fact

I think a GC team coming it at all is...well...stupid. The whole thing makes me angry, but that's what's most likely going to happen. Didn't all the other clubs agree to the proposed draft picks though?

Should we just go the whole way through the draft? Obviously a large part of the reason they are given these picks is so they can trade many of them away. In effect they're being given a "plug and play" lineup, full of the best youngsters in the draft topped up by decent players that can fetch a first round pick

I thought it was the first 5, then i think 4 in a row early teens, and then the first 3 at the start of each round. Edit: According to Big Footy

What I don't get is if he had 1 hitout in 19 matches, how is his average .3 per game?

They'd probably say that now, but you can't admit they picked the best KPP available and also claimed they took the best available. I don't think they saw these two as the two best players available at the time, but the two that would best fit where they wanted to go

I just don't get it. I've tried, but....

Stigga, I heard the Hawks recruited Roughead and Franklin because they were the best KPPs in that draft (and possibly for several years)

I see what you mean about Lee, but I also think it's a bit far-fetched. Of course any player who has a poor overseas tour, and then follows it up with two poor home tours would then be in trouble. No big surprise there. Yeah, NZ batting was pretty woeful. Though I felt, and perhaps it was misguided, that many of their cheap wickets fell from frustration at not being able to keep the runs flowing easily. It seemed they would stick around for 8-10 overs, unable to rotate the strike, and then play a ridiculous stroke trying to force the play. (The Brisbane test is a difficult one to get a gauge on, as both teams played incredibly irresponsibly (Save for Katich, Clarke (in one innings) and Taylor. It's an interesting article you quoted, I love Roebuck, but I think it also underpins the lack of intelligence in the Kiwi squad at present. Application is their biggest problem IMO

Lee may have had a poor tour, but I do not think that would've warranted him being dropped. Of course there are simple tactics a team can use to try and gain the ascendancy. I think the NZ batsman were able to stay at the crease for periods of time, but while they were doing that they were not putting any pressure on Australia. They saw out overs without purpose, and when they attempted to change the course of the innings, they were found wanting which is understandable. What frustrated me was when they looked like building a partnership, they didn't seem to try to tick the scoreboard over. They allowed the Australian bowlers to find their rythym because the Aussies knew the Kiwis would either not score or would throw their wicket away. I'd call it lazy cricket without application, hopefully they can learn the necessary application...

Vettori fits the standard, he carries that team, no matter how mediocre they are. Bond should be allowed back

Surprised to see McCullum at 7 since we're talking of the NZ tail. Their problem, in my view, is that they have no distinct strategy, especially when batting. They seem to go into "test match" mode or "one day/twenty/20" mode and struggle to find a balance in between. Their batsmen would either get stuck trying to defend, blocking out over after over to survive at the crease, or would go hell for leather attempthing to add quick runs to the total. The first hour in Adelaide saw half an hour of 7 runs, and then half an hour of 35. They started their second innings at over four an over, yet after losing their first wicket spend the next 20 overs going at under 2. (28 overs for 45 runs) Periods of "test match" mode let the Australians dictate terms, to pick a target as the batsmen refused to look for the quick, easy singles (something NZ really should be pretty good at), and whilst in "one day" mode would all too often, as is to be expected, gift their wicket away. I'm not sure if the Kiwi team had the talent that it once had, but it certainly used to have more brains than it seems to at present. And I honestly do not believe Brett Lee was ever in any immediate trouble, certainly not before Stuart Clark. His 56 wickets this year, 62 in the past calendar year, at sub career-averages certainly points to his standing in the australian team and relative safety. He's hardly the first fast bowler, or Australian bowler for that matter, to have a tough time in India, especially with such little support, and I doubt he'd have been dropped unless he endured a poor Australian Summer. And I'm talking the full 5 tests plus the one-day series.

Queen, better hope he doesn't have one more bad test, or he'll be in trouble again!

No SMS for me but I'm very happy the club is on the ball with this. Dad has gloated about his Hawks SMS' for years, including after a win over the Dees

Let's bookmark this and see where we end up

Can this thread be locked? It's going nowhere, with no new arguments or angles

Anything to [censored] off an Essendon supporter Queen, especially buying a Dees membership in the process!

Sponsorship issues have probably come into the picture of late, but the club has also been saying for months that we would only draft players under the age of 23, obviously Cousins does not meet this base requirement

Nugget, I'd give it to this because this is essentially an investment. Depends what you want I suppose. But the club will not direct funds from Debt Demolition to allow kids to get to the footy, that's up to us supporters to let that happen. Working with kids I can see how amazing an opportunity this would be for many kids that otherwise would not have the chance to get to the footy. I'd love to run one of the groups to, but that's for another day. Essentially, this is a way for you to directly give kids a shot at becoming Dees fans for life, Debt Demolition is great but serves a different purpose

What a great idea, God I love this club...or is that Satan

2,800? Wow, I would love to see a league-wide table at the moment. Go the Dees!

I'm sure Cousins could teach C.S. lots of things...