QueenC

Sad but true !!! Anyway........ Sheedy to meet with Demons

Trading will and should only be done if you can get someone who is guaranteed to fill a particular void or improve the list in any way. Unfortunately you can only get something if you give something, and Bruce, for better or worse, is probably our highest priced commodity. That being said he should not be touched unless we are guaranteed to get ourselves something a hell of a lot better, or more needed. Because otherwise what is the point !!!

So Demons32 do you think that the club "owes" it to Pickett to have him play 200th game? I have never made it my way to ridicule the players, and my above post was not bagging Pickett. But I don't think that The Dees owe anything to a player who hasn't earned it. If he earns his recall and plays his 200th, then fantastic and congratulations, if not then that is the unfortunate reality he finds himself in. And given he will be recalled this week (through injury) this whole argument is redundant anyway !!!

I agree with you here Paul...... I genuinely love that idea as it ticks a hell of a lot of boxes, both now with our current catalogue of on- and off-field problems, Sheedy would be a near perfect fit to rebuild and promote, as well as having a very firm eye on the future of the club well beyond the next three to five years, in Viney after a great apprenticeship.

I agree with you here Jacey....... I am one of Miller's loudest supporters (& sympathisers given the abuse he has copped) and he will continue to have my full support for as long as he pulls on the jumper (& unfortunately I am not sure all here can say that), just as any player would, but he is slowly wearing my already somewhat stretched patience very thin. That being said I truly don't believe he will be delisted this year (next year however is another thing) and will only be traded on if he is part of a bigger bundle of players being moved about, given that he actually has minimal trade value on his own. But he could be a valuable top up player, especially given his size and age. It has been proven that he is not a CHF. I don't think that this is Danihers fault, but he, as the coach, must take some responsibility for the progression of all the players under his tutelage, even ones as unpopular to apparent supporters as Brad Miller. And on the player management front Neale has many detractors. But despite having to shoulder a hell of a lot of expectations a couple of years ago, Miller was never really gifted enough to hold down that central position, and being forced to, when despite his aggression, he was not capable has done a real number on his confidence, which is important, and is quite obviously shot. But the problem I have here is that saying that he, or anyone, should automatically make a good or even a mediocre defender just because he didnt or couldn't make it as a forward is somewhat insulting to those that play in defence. Defenders have their own set of skills, they are not just people who failed as forwards. That is not to say that I don't think Miller could be a useful defender, because I do, but it will take some time to figure out for sure. As playing in defence is a skill, just like anything else in sport, or life, that must be learned and taught and practiced. And I don't believe that there has not been enough time to assess this yet. And while the last few weeks have not been good for anyone standing in our back six, given the midfield whompings, and certainly Brad has not been able to set any world on fire, I am hopeful (but not naive) that he can learn the skills required, and in time become a useful, if not first choice defender for the future. But I guess only time will tell if he has the capabilities and confidence to adapt and therefore learn what it takes to play a pro-active (not just reactive) defensive role within the side with any skill or aggression at all, and unfortunately for Brad (although not for plenty of people around here) that is quickly running out. Although for some of this to work it will come down to coaching. Just my opinion !!!

Well said Jaded...... I am more than patient with the players, especially when it comes to form because the way I see it, form is fluid and is never a constant thing, but I am less than tolerant with Pickett given the apparent attitude and total lack of conviction, drive and above all commitment he seems to have for the club that pays his bills. No-one will ever argue that Pickett in his day was a damaging, highly skilled and wonderful talent and I understood, and admittedly quite liked the idea of getting him when we did the trade a couple of years ago. He seemed to fill a void and an obvious need that this particular list had. And for a little while at least that was successful, but honestly I think that that experiment has totally run its race and I don't really see him around in 2008. As for whether the club is being unfair to him by perhaps leaving him on 199 games? Maybe, but that isn't really the point. There seems to be plenty of reports saying that he certainly doesn't seem to have done enough to earn his recall, form or attitude wise, and as such he could very well be left on that particular, though unfortunate number. Although at the end of the day I agree with Jaded, Rhino and co. that despite the obvious sentimentality of seeing Byron through to play his 200th, and the fact that we actually have nothing to lose by doing it, the club does not owe him a damn thing. The opposite is so very much closer to the truth, unfortunately, and I don't think we are ever going to get that back !!!

This may seem a bit naive........ But is there a limit (maybe set by the AFL) to the number of players we can delist at the end of this (or any) season? Or is the number just set by an individual club based on its own individual needs and requirements? This would be taken I guess, with the understanding that the club will be able to fill those vacancies in the draft(s) or during trade week (which doesn't seem to be the most reliable way of purely acquiring players, since you have to give something to get something, and we will have to give plenty to get anything at all). And I still think that this "cull" we do need, and everyone is screaming for, should and probably will take two years to get through. Losing too many at once to delisting, even those of the more maligned, while a popular suggestion probably isn't completely viable.

Possibly I'm being proved wrong (player size-wise at least), unfortunately........ And my faith in that they know more than we do is diminishing ever so quickly !!!

I have to say that generally commentators don't trouble me too much, but I was less than enraptured with Jackovich throughout the call. This particular comment didn't really help improve him to me, but I guess he was watching a fairly inept performance from a team that should be better. That being said you do wonder if he was asked the same question while watching Carlton last week against the Lions, would he have said Melbourne?

Our percentage is still better than Richmonds, just........I think !!!

I don't think I can remember seeing a game played nearly so completely in one half of the ground for almost the entire match......... The defence was under what must have seemed like blitz-like conditions given the way the ball was being won in the middle and delivered so precisely. Turn overs all over the ground were killing us, and our skill levels and decision making, if possible, are just getting progressively worse with each week. And this was occurring disappointingly even on the few occasions our defence managed to stop Port from actually scoring, but a quick turn over somewhere between the arcs, they feed it in quickly and then end up scoring anyway. Story of the evening (and the season) unfortunately !!!

Vastly logical post there sylvinator.......... (and something, regarding the +30's that was mentioned on the commentary by Gerard Healy the other evening during the game) The way I see it, it will take two years to overhaul this list given how many we actually have to get through. There are some players that obviously have more trade value than others, but this almost solely depends on what other clubs want or need, and they may not want any of the players people here have been so willing to get rid of, and as I have said many a time, unless you can push for something better not just the equivalent, but someone actually better, that will absolutely improve the list in some form or another, then I don't see the club involving itself massively in trade week. Obviously there will be more than last year, but still not massively. A couple of the obvious players may be potentially traded but that may well be it. And while I really do try to understand every ones compulsive need to trade just about anyone who makes a mistake between now and the end of the year, to me it is really not that simple, and a club would only trade for someone of increased value otherwise the whole manoeuvre can be worthless. You end up just changing problems. I don't like the idea of trading for tradings sake. If something better is out there and within our grasp I expect the club to have a tilt, if not then don't. I understood, and admittedly quite liked the idea of Pickett when we traded for him a couple of years ago. He seemed to fill a void and an obvious need that this particular list had. And for a little while that was successful, but honestly I think that that experiment has totally run its race. I don't really see him around in 2008. I also don't think he necessarily deserves a spot on the list in 2008, given the issues and total lack of commitment we have witnessed this year (and I like to give second chances). While we can all [censored] and moan about players such as Brown or Miller, we know that while they may not be as skilled as we would like, we can always count on them at least trying to give their best. Pickett is well short on this front and that alone loses him his spot. A poor attitude is always a killer for me. Which brings me to the delistings, something I am not particularly comfortable with, or as well versed in as others around here, but frankly most of those players that would be included in my list, at least this year, speak for themselves, to me anyway, and they have been mentioned massively in here over the last season or more. But I can't see the club getting rid of more than five or six but that number could very well depend on what the scouts see in the draft anyway. I guess that means about an eight'ish player turnover at best at the end of this season. Of course a lot of this depends, as I said, on the depth of the draft, or who may become available in the PSD, because room could well need to be made to accommodate theses potential changes. However I just don't see everything happening all at once at the end of this season. I think this "cull" everyone thinks we need will take more than one year to put into place. Just my opinion !!!

So what do you think of them now ?!!!

I think he actually took them to four cups...... Astonishing really that this could happen especially since they are still technically in the finals hunt !!!

Cheers BBP...... I was even present for that one, must have pushed it from the memory !!!

Of course Jones can win the B&F and he may well do so....... Is it right to say he is one of the few who have actually played every game this year? I have lost count but if so then he is already ahead of the rest. So that, plus his fantastic attitude and effort, and consistently good form, yep he will be right up there when the votes are read out. And if he wins then it will be a fantastic and well deserved victory :D !!!

Amen to that Graz....... And just how does this particular selection fit into our play the kiddies, get them some game time, and see what they can do philosophy?

Apropos....... Farmer admits drinking problem Maybe now he will get some of that help he most definitely needs.

Its like musical chairs !!! And when the music stops you can all sit down........well almost!!!

I think the priority pick system is based on how many wins you get not where you finish on the ladder.

It was coming in pretty bloody easily though....... The mass clangers and turn overs in the mid field and the staggeringly ineffective attempts to enter our forward fifty were putting our already less than stellar and undermanned defence under an enormous amount of pressure. Hard for any defence to stop when the ball is either raining down on your head or being delivered with the speed that it was. I'm sure they all tried their best, but sometimes it was just too easy for the opposition. Frawley had a dirty afternoon and was probably our least effective defender, and while I understand your call for him to learn at Sandy, right now we as a team actually don't really have that option to tick, given the personnel we are missing. Besides he can, and hopefully will, learn from yesterday. But any defence nearly always needs help from its midfield, and yesterday (same as last week) there unfortunately really wasn't any to speak of !!!

First goal in AFL to Simon Buckley....... Congratulations young man :D !!! But the Kanga's lead at 3/4 time by 45 points (93-48)

Back to back goals to Robbo and Brock....... Currently Kangaroos leading 86-42

We aren't delivering the ball into the 50 with any great authority....... And in reverse they are doing really well in getting the ball into their 50 with little or no pressure. And our defence can't handle it as it is constantly bouncing off their heads. Similar problems to last week unfortunately !!!

The clangers and missed targets in the middle are a real problem. And this is going to be pretty bad in the end. Criticism for no spirit....... Except for Jones who's attitude should be cloned!!!