grazman

The stuff of adolescent fantasies...

To defend McLean today he did have his nose flattened. He's alternating between having a good game and a bad one. Not having seen the game today Maurie, do you think his getting caught is simply a lack of awareness or a lack of options to kick it to? (I think one of his weaknesses is his over reliance on disposing of the ball by foot)

Yes, but were they leaders today or bit players? I disagree with your assessment about Ooze's goals. You want you senior players to stand up under pressure and do the right things. No one likes an actor. If we're relying on staging for free kicks, it's no wonder we only kicked seven today.

It's unfair to blame Bailey for this situation. A lot of very experienced footy watchers on this forum have long lamented our lack of genuine "hardness" and the failings of the core group of players. I'm sorry, but if people were expecting (but not necessarily hoping) anything different from today - then obviously they haven't been watching the same Melbourne side I have over the years. We didn't get enough from our senior players... the record's been stuck on this track for a long time. Bailey knows what has to be done, but to expect him to turn around a problem that's been years, decades even, in the making is naive. Footy's a passionate game and the easiest thing in the world is for supporters to do is to blame the players for not being passionate enough or the coach for not being hard enough. The reality is that they're throw away answers for complex problems. At the risk of sounding defeatist, such losses are to be expected (and come draft time perhaps even welcomed), the way forward is not to blame the coach or slam the players, it's to recognise the problem exists, tough decisions will need to be taken, but it's only by being resolute and determined in the face of adversity that the problems can be fixed. I don't see what is achieved by ranting. I've supported this club all my life, I hate losing, but I won't give in to emotion and attack the thing I love.

Agree. Unless Grimes has returned from injury. Anyone know the Sandy sides?

A real good chance if Matthew talks up the coach and his prospects!

In the interests of sanity. Pavlich re-signed last year, he can't go into the PSD and its highly unlikely Freo will trade him. Carlton swapped pick 3 for Chris Judd (the pick WC used to get Matsen). They also had pick 1 in the PSD which they used to bend WC over. A Club won't get Daniel Kerr cheaply. (unless they can use the PSD)

His problem this year is his inability to get on the park. He's had two very bad hamstrings... plus a silly suspension. I rate him right up there with Judd in terms of midfielders. There's no ifs or buts about his ability. Daniel Kerr is a double A plus midfielder If West Coast do offer him up for trade then you'd have to think that Daniel Rich aside, there's certainly got to be some sort of cultural issue there as well. Two words: Due Diligence. The other interesting aspect is the means West Coast would adopt to get Rich... at this stage they could go the Carlton route and assure themselves of getting him without having to worry about trading a player to get the pick... it appears some clubs see the danger to developing a winning culture by deliberately losing games.

Agree 100%. When he actually realises how good he can be - he is going to dominate games.

From a West Coast supporter on the ever reputable Big Footy: make of that what you will. But if he is on the market (which I think is highly doubtful) he is worth a top three draft pick.

No they aren't - but the interpretation of them can be.

err no... if West Coast do trade him at all it will be for Daniel Rich or Nicholas Naitanui. Either you seriously underestimate how good Kerr is or you're taking the [censored].

Without Neitz we needed another tall forward capable of taking a contested mark to allow Robbo some space to compete one out rather being double teamed. If Benny doesn't come up then Yze is another option to play a Brad Johnson type role. If Robbo doesn't come up then our forward line is going to start to look pretty thin. I'd prefer Green off halfback, but if Jared comes back in, this may release him to go forward.

Is he out of contract at the end of the year?

Excellent post DD, I'm glad someone's picked up on that. I looked at our side a couple of weeks ago. We had 7 guys who'd played less than ten games. The amount of improvement in guys like Garland and Warnock is very encouraging. Sure the Hawks were missing Hodge, Lewis and Crawford, but they were in rd 1 as well and belted us by 104 points.

Crows, Power, West Coast, Freo, Gold Coast, West Sydney, North, Bulldogs, Brisbane, even the Swans would all be candidates (remembering that we need to pull more than 25K to the G to break even and we struggle to draw crowds for these teams when we or they are playing poorly). Big drawing home games such as against the likes of Collingwood, Essendon, Carlton, Richmond, Hawthorn even the Saints could all still be played at the G.

Well it depends whether you're only talking about revenue from AFL sources. There are U18 championship games being played out there at the moment. There's the U18s, VFL, Carnivals that could all contribute as well as the AFL. If they're serious about reintroducing the reserves then we'll need to find a ground to play in as well. As others have pointed out the fact that Geelong play 7 matches at Skilled Stadium instead of having 22 played there in a season doesn't mean it isn't viable. I don't know whether the whole thing is a pipe dream or not, but it's a fantastic initiative by Gardner to put this in the face of the AFL. Something has to be done about the inequalities in the system.

I think Paul Gardner has played this very well. With the introduction of 18 teams the likelihood of us being punted from the G to other grounds is highly probable. If the AFL don't support the venture (and it appears that the economics and sociology are in our favour) then they have to provide a viable alternative - in short they need to commit to a better solution in terms of the CBF. There are two major problems we have as a club. One is a small and rapidly decreasing supporter base (many of whom don't pay memberships because they get into the MCG for free as MCC members). Secondly we have no real assests - the income we derive is based almost solely from membership and via the AFL. Compare this to Essendon. Even a great season for us in five years time won't be enough for us to break even, let alone the thought of another season like this year. The problems with public transport will be overcome, it's a growth corridor, the facilities will follow.

Jeff's been jealous of the MFC for a long time now... he want's us to die. He'd got form for beating up those that can't fight back. We shouldn't take it lying down and tell him in no uncertain terms to stick it up his jumper and worry about his own back yard and the extra curricula activities contained therein.

If Benny plays he has to go forward, he's too slow and immobile (even more so than before) to play back. A lot of people forget that his victory against Rocca at the G last year was when Rocca was playing on one leg. I just can't see Dutchy being able to do anything other than stand in the hole if he plays back.

When you talk about blokes that have given their heart and soul to a footy club, You can mention Neitz in the same breath as Flower, Barassi and Smith. Absolute Champion, thanks for the memories Neita - you didn't win a premiership, but it wasn't from lack of trying.

I've heard the story about the Freo win and also the other ones about player disquiet... but I'd make the following points. Firstly that Bailey's approach is wrong and that the players were right simply because we won. (I seriously doubt that part of Bailey's game plan is to move the ball at pedestrian pace or to turn it over with monotonous regularity) Secondly that there is any evidence to suggest that Bailey doesn't want to win.... certainly dropping Carroll had nothing to do with it. He sat on the pine for most of the second half against Freo. Thirdly that his plan is not a sham, but what he lacks is the cattle that are capable or in some cases willing to carry it out... I'd argue strongly in light of today's performance we're our team was pulled apart and chopped into tiny little pieces by one of the most professional and accountable sides going around, a game where none of our senior players had any influence on the outcome, a game where we were comprehensively beaten in all areas - That the playing culture and specifically the lack of accountability we've allowed to creep in over the years won't deliver in finals. Neil Craig won't win any popularity awards down at West Lakes, but they're a bloody good footy side and he did a lot to fix the rot that had set in down there. Interesting that the AFL have now lifted the restrictions on how many players a club can trade, if I were Dean Bailey, I'd start taking a few heads and sticking them on some pikes to make my point. If he needs to trade 7 or 8 or 9 players at the end of the year - then that's what needs to happen. Finally the rumour goes that Essendon passed up Damien Hardwick in favour of Matty Knights, because Hardwick was a little more blunt in appraising their chances of making the finals and what to do with the list than Matty Knights. Knights has worked on a free flowing "feel good - run forward of the ball game plan" Are they any closer to making the finals with him at the helm? It's a recipe for disaster IMO. They may make the finals in a couple of years, but unless players work both ways not as a matter of choice, but from habit, then they'll be exposed time and again in big games like we were under Danners in the last few years. I like Bailey it's true, I like his approach, I like his resolve, I really like his selection of assistants... I see the problem as being the players... Blind faith isn't enough for me either, Franky, and I'm happy to agree to disagree, We all have to sleep in the beds we make.

Players are always dropped for a reason Franky and I've never seen it written anywhere that a coach needs to explain every selection decision. Carroll is a one trick pony. He is a negating defender who is reads the ball coming in reasonably well, but loses body contact too often with his direct opponent in doing so. He doesn't play the third man up role particularly well and his disposal is average and decision making is less than average. He's done well to overcome a poor 07, but in general he's a footballer of limited ability. Given the willingness to trade him last year and his 'cultural' issues he may not be part of the club next year. Today Garland, and Warnock were servicible and are improving, Frawley had a shocker (but hopefully learnt a lot) and PJ is filling in till Stef Martin is ready. Bell plays as a small defender so I'm not sure why you'd compare him to Carroll. Adelaide are one of the most professional units going around so hopefully our blokes learnt a fair bit about honesty and commitment. We stuck to our guns in the first quarter, but really did not have a single player that could influence the contest after that. Our list has a long way to go, but there's promise there and at least this year we're seeing some real development from the kids.

Unless there's a fitness test for some of the Sandy players. There'd be some doubt over the availability of Yze and Whelan. No Newton either... still no word on the extent of his 'injury'. There's also the possibility that we'll take two emergencies to Adelaide and they won't play on Saturday.

and Chris Heffernan...