QueenC

Yeah we do, but is it really what we want, especially for the future? But honestly I think we really need to find out what we can get out of CJ (among others) on a more regular basis. And this should really happen at least before he gets condemned completely. Just my opinion !!!

CJ would have a slightly different problem though as I see it, and please anyone correct me if they think I am wrong...... He seems to be the perennial one dropped after a loss if he didn't have a commanding game, which he hasn't really had the chance to have yet (at least in the regular season). But on the other hand he hasn't exactly been the most horrible one out there in our losses to date either. Honestly his confidence must be totally shredded by this point, and that is not going to do him or us any favours in the long run. I would think that giving him at least three weeks on end to see if the kid can make something of it would not be out of the question, especially now. Newton hasn't been given the opportunity either because, as I understand it from reading here, he wasn't showing enough when the opportunity arose through injuries to the key Demon forwards, and now that he is showing something, even if it is only for a couple of weeks there is simply not a spot for him now anyway.

We hope that every week in these threads :D !!!

Well said Don..... I am also all for giving the kids a run but only when they are deemed ready for that opportunity by the power that be that know them, and what they are capable of, a hell of a lot better than we do. The thing is when you are losing like we have been we are looking for something, anything to hold onto, and seeing some of our future is definitely one of those things. But at the end of the day the kids have to be ready for the jump. He will get his chance. I am also curious about this, and hopefully someone can get over their anti-Miller bias long enough to explain to me why this can't work in the long run? Maybe not this year, but our full forward is not going to around for a hell of a lot longer (unfortunately) so I am just wondering why this wouldn't work, eventually. I am going to put that in reverse. So why then was Garland selected ahead of Newton for the Sydney game? There was plenty of opportunity for a tall forward (at least in regards to the people missing) to take the opportunity. So why was Garland, who is quite a bit younger and with less experience, given the opportunity ahead of Newton if he wasn't playing that well at Sandy (as has been implied)? Enquiring minds want to know.......

Oh geez sorry mousey, I promise I wasn't aiming for correction, but for conformation !!!

I'm with you Davis...... It was awful at the time, and the horrible result was not the intention, and should not be honoured.

It's up on Demonology as well. Says that it was from a text from the club.

Honestly YM, that really is just silly. And there is nothing default about it. Losing (and we will win sooner or later) doesn't mean that there was no-one working their ass to try and win. And losing doesn't mean that they (and right now Bell, Bruce, Rivers, Miller and Jones would be in the top few) shouldn't get some recognition of that work. Good grief.

Congratulations to Ricky...... Its fantastic news for a definite shining light of a club having enough problems. Well done, keep it up :D !!!

Anyone know where I might be able to get a copy of this? Being in Sydney we get bugger all, and I would love to see the interview. So if anyone can help me out with it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

For what it is worth (if anything) 6. Jones 5. White 4. Godfrey 3. Bate 2. Bell 1. Pettard Apologies to Bruce, McDonald and Rivers......

But he still is........ Someone had to and he was the one that did. Good grief. Honestly, I guess it is to be expected that we will now be criticising him for kicking some goals. Sad really, isn't it? But he gets no respect, no matter what he does anyway. And one bad game was all it was ever going to take for the berating to start (again) around here. And if we go on the lets drop them after one bad game scenario (which we shouldn't), then plenty would have already been shown the door. ETA - Its early, I am unwell, and this post, along with my attitude in this regard is more than a little pissy..... and although I stand by what I said, I apologise for being rude.

Yep, add me to the Nathan Jones fan club...... He sounds like he has a good head on his shoulders, and is certainly a pleasure to watch. And with comments and an attitude like that he is definitely a leader of the future :D !!!

I agree with you here layzie....... Enough is enough with the rule changes. Maybe there can be a moratorium on any further rule changes for the next couple of seasons to let the game get back to normality without the yelling and screaming and uncertainty that happens each and every time they tinker with something that isn't necessarily broken. The difference here as I see it, and please someone correct me if I am wrong, is that the shoving or pushing of an opponent in the back with your hands in a contest is illegal (and rightfully so) and has been for some time, but the changes that have been made over the off season have had that ramped up to making a penalty out of even placing the hands on the back of and opponent, even if no pushing was involved. And Graz and Rhino are right, the one on Friday night against Fevola was appalling. As he put no obvious pressure on his opponent, he just put his hands there, but he certainly didn't push him out of the contest. Which is what I thought the original rule was established to protect. But if my interpretation is right (and that is totally debatable, believe me!!) then it also becomes pretty bloody difficult for an umpire to actually see let alone penalise the infringement consistantly given that the sport is a body contact one (apparently) and there is always pushing and shoving in and out of the contest. But in the end it unfortunately all comes down to consistency. And that is all I really ask for from the umpiring. And this is something that has been bellowed about for a very long time in relation to nearly everything the AFL touches. But in the context of the second half, the free kicks awarded against us seemed massively out of place and to came from nowhere, therefore they were not constant. Plus that particular rule interpretation wasn't held up in reverse (eg Neitz being pushed in the back, and the Tredrea goal) on a few occasions throughout the game that I can remember. And the McDonald out of bounds was simply a very bad and totally inaccurate call. But at the end of the day, while they certainly didn't help and the finish was horribly frustrating, the umpires didn't really cost us the game, we did that !!!

Congratulations Golly :D !!! And I hope everyone is healthy and happy.

I am with you on this one as well Dan....... He seems to be tarnished no matter what he does my some around here. Daniel Bell deserves nothing but our respect and admiration for the year he has had so far. Honestly why is it so damn hard to get over personal biases and give certain players the credit they deserve? Belly is demanding a hell of a lot better than what he gets on here at times.

Amen to that Dan, well said !!! And credit where credit is due to a guy who is doing the best job he can do, and doing it rather well...... Even if that guy is fairly well maligned around here.

I think you have got those mostly right Joeboy, although Dunn showed much more and was a lot better in the second half. And while I didn't get the win for my birthday, I was happy with the way they fought and the fact we looked on a whole a hell of a lot better. But I am particularly happy with the fact we are no longer on the bottom of the ladder !!!

There were precious few free even awarded in the final quarter, and then it was like "BOOM"!!!

It shouldn't...... So we agree then? Cause I think we do !!!

Urrrgh, well that was a predictable response, honestly :angry: ....... Granted he had a pretty bad day today, but seriously he gets absoutely no credit for the great work he has done this season so far. He has been one of the few actually putting their hands up in recent weeks, and now the masses want him to be automatically dumped. And I agree, generally, with you deanox. He wasn't that bad last week against Sydney and was good in the games prior to that, and certainly not nearly the worst in round one. There are improvements that need to be made, particularly in kicking (but even that has looked better this year), but honestly he deserves more respect that what we give him on here. And hopefully he will not be dropped, and will be given the opportunity to work his butt off (as he usually does) and make a massive improvement on this week. Amen to that Chook !!! And as for the four talls (although Dunn is more of a flanker and did a great job in the second half today much further up the ground) option..... How big is the Doggie defence? And could this be a way to stretch them? Just curious.

A "team" player will work his butt off to make the improvments needed to get back into the side. And would probably see it as an opportunity. But it is an action that should still not happen lightly.

The Brisbane v Fremantle game was a designated Fox game. And Seven piggy backed the feed into Sydney and Brisbane and wherever else there was a double up. The same thing happened last night with the Swans being broadcast on both Ten and Fox. Yep, this broadcast rights situation is working a treat up here :angry: !!!

Punishment is the automatic response, for better or worse, to the possibility of one of our first choice being played at Sandy. But I see your point about it the possibility of it being used as a confidence earner. Of course that's assuming their confidence isn't shot after getting dumped from the starting side :D !!!

I am not convinced he warrants dropping, since his form as been up and down. There have been plenty of good numbers, but he has not been particularly effective for large portions of time when he has the ball. But he still gets the ball, or works hard to get himself in a position to receive the ball. But either way he really does need to find his targets with a little more regularity. But this is absolutely spot on, and not just in regards to Bruce, but to every last one of them. I don't now, and never will advocate dumping someone after a bad game, or even necessarily for a bout of poor form (until it becomes untenable of course), because I like to see them work their ass off to try and fix it, and themselves, in the subsequent weeks. That is a positive mental thing if nothing else. But if a player is seen as ambivalent, or complacent, or lacking in (definitely for want of a better word) heart, or effort then he doesn't appear to value the jumper. And that is where that particular tide turns, for me anyway.