45HG

Where were you blokes 3 years ago? (yes, I know, probably saying the same thing!)

I just don't think the third man should be in such a position to rule (insert cheeky emoticon). The year has started very well thanks mate, lovely kids. Wedding in a month is freaking me out though!

Conflict of interest.

Some of us wanted JG there in the first place (insert emoticon that I can't find).

Thanks guys, though I can promise you I don't really want to find the answer!

How do you find last year's score?

Love to try it again.

Maybe we go with the clean skin against GWS and score 329...

Round 1, 2005 Deb.

Monty took 6 in the second didn't he? Spinners took 19 of the 20 English wickets.

He can be quite good at driving back the infields, I thought.

I'm hoping good.

I was excited by the look of Cook last pre-season.

Ponting has already scored more runs this calendar year than last year.

Just another player, albeit one I'll dislike more than your average.

Pakistam 7-256 at Stumps day one. 94 overs bowled! That included a wicket in the 92nd over. England rewarded for good intent. Compare that to India bowling 76 overs in a day.

Haha love it. I refuse to use Spicer's Paper or Nubrick (not that I ever knew what they were), will only eat Hungry Jack's when I'm heavily intoxicated, will never buy a Camry, will not use QBE for insurance, can't travel to Malaysia now, am not a fan of TAC, refuse to use Mission tacos, wouldn't touch a Collingwood sponsor (Macca's, Nike or Puma, Lexus, Qantas etc etc) and I don't know if I'll buy a Toyota while Vlad is the big boss.

It's certainly a ludicrous statement, but it has made me consider exactly what makes a captain. There really isn't a set answer IMO. There are so many varying situations and variables to take into consideration. Hawthorn's Richie Vandenberg highlights this for me immensely (and I know he's the cliche example). But he came in at a time when Hawthorn wanted to establish a culture. It didn't matter that he wasn't the best player, hell - he may not have even of been their best leader, but he best exemplified what they wanted from a player and culture. Sometimes, a player is so good that they just have to be captain. Sometimes, a player is such a good leader they just have to be captain. Sometimes, a club needs a captain who can set the tone on the field. Sometimes a club needs a captain to help mould the culture off the field. Sometimes, clubs are lucky enough to have all four of these in an individual. Very lucky clubs have several players with these traits. Great teams will, IMO, have these traits imbedded across the team - from the eldest statesmen to the newest recruits. We need a captain that can help mould the culture off the field but impact a game when necessary. I'm in no position to comment on the cultural aspect, but guys like Frawley, Trengove and Mckenzie stand out when I consider on-field.

In fairness, I'm pretty sure James Hird answered, when asked what he did with his time off whilst he was captain, with "Captain stuff."

Jim Stynes has very little-nothing to do with the leadership group of the MFC.

RR, Ponting did it against the same opposition in '03?

I can't see us winning by an innings. I'd say low.

I'm simply of the opinion that your best batsman should bat 3. A bit simplistic to say that he's susceptible to swing (good bowling essentially) early in the innings. Name a batsman who isn't. Out of interest, these are his stats since he's become captain. Versus SL 23 (In at 2-36 off 9.4 overs) 60 (2-5, 3.2) 13 (2-95, 36.5) 6 (3-101, 35.5) 112 (3-188, 55.5) Versus SA 151 (3-40,16.2) 2 (2-11, 5.3) 11 (3-193, 46.3) 2 (3-141, 36.5) Versus NZ 139 (3-91, 27.1) 22 (3-31, 15.2) 0 (3-159, 45.4) Versus India 31 (3-159, 48.3) 1 (3-24, 11.3) 329* (3-37, 8.5) 18 (3-242, 44.5) 109* (3-84, 25.5) As you can see, quite often he's coming in quite early. Whilst he has still failed on occasion coming in early, he's probably failed as much coming in later in the innings, after, say, 150. When he's come in after the team has posted 100, he has scores of 6, 112, 11, 2, 0, 31, 18 - 180 runs at 25.7. When he's come in before the team has posted 100 he has scores of 23, 60, 13, 151, 2, 139, 22, 1, 329* - 740 runs at 92.5 (this obviously includes the once in a lifetime knock but that just as soon can't be ignored and the stats have also left out today's century). That's 7 innings for 180 runs versus 10 innings for over 850 runs. I simply think he's our best batsman and has proved since he's become captain, IMO, that he performs better with the team under the pump than vice versa. Obviously he's in sparkling form and may very well be best to leave his balance alone. I just would rather see him come in at 1-20 rather than 3-40.

I reiterate my previous position, Clarke should be batting at 3.

Much-maligned for how people see him, I find it impossible to see how anyone could say that Hewitt is anything less than an exceptional sportsman. Just gets so much out of himself and is one of the better fighters in sport that I've seen.