titan_uranus

More ranting, because I can. Just had another look - Carlton has 4 Sunday games all year. By comparison, we have 10.

Awks.

I don't see McKenzie as being capable of playing as a defensive forward, mainly because I don't see him as being capable of playing as a forward. With his kicking issues, I'm also worried about him playing as a small defender. Assuming Vince tags Fyfe, I don't know if we can afford to have a second midfielder playing a primarily defensive role - one is enough IMO. So I think McKenzie is just being picked as the best available midfielder at Casey to come in and provide rotations, tackling, contested possession and clearance work, and running all day. If he does that, he'll be a decent enough inclusion. If he doesn't, he won't.

Agree entirely. I've been rambling on about this ever since the fixture came out but Carlton wasn't even any good last year, they should never have gotten close to 6 Friday nights (+ a Thursday night). It's indefensible that the football public has to be repeatedly subjected to watching boring Friday night beltings (the remaining games include Carlton away to Sydney and a Hawthorn v Carlton game - those are going to be enormous thrashings). It only adds insult to injury that Melbourne, the Bulldogs and GWS have improved to the point where games involving them would be competitive, maybe even exciting, and definitely a lot closer than Carlton v Sydney/Hawthorn.

I'm assuming it's either Pedersen or Riley for the last spot. Can't see the point of playing McKenzie instead of Riley, and we cannot play any game this year with both Spencer and Jamar in the same side. The FD has one more day to mull over whether we go in with Pedersen as back up for Jamar or persist with Dawes and get extra run through Riley.

And of the 9, 4 first quarters. We're the only club this year to have won all four first quarters. That's kinda cool.

Your description of the rule is spot on, but I can't agree that it's the 'easiest rule to adjudicate'. There are, and always have been, large grey areas - what is 'prior opportunity'? What constitutes a 'genuine attempt' to dispose of the ball? It is, unfortunately, much easier said than done. Nonetheless, the lack of consistency within the same game, let alone across games or across weeks, isn't good enough.

What we can take heart from is that Ayce Cordy was annihilated in the ruck by Jacobs on the weekend, but the Dogs' midfield was harder, hungrier and faster, so it didn't matter. Conversely, even if we even up the ruck stakes, if our mids can't match it with Fyfe/Mundy/Barlow/Neale/etc., our 'win' in the ruck will be for nothing. That's not to say we shouldn't care, but given neither Gawn or Spencer are exactly in form right now, I'm leaning towards leaving them out and going in as we went against Richmond. IMO that's preferable to bringing in an out of form player (not how Roos is operating in 2015).

One other thing I'm loving about the season so far is our first quarters. We're the only club in the competition to have been leading at quarter time in all four games so far. We'd be doing mighty well to make it 5/5 next week.

It's a pity we drew Adelaide over there in a second consecutive road trip, they're obviously not nearly as good as they think they are. Good on the Dogs though. A year in which the Bulldogs and Melbourne are far more competitive and Geelong is far more inept will be a great year, not just for me selfishly, but for the competition.

Believe me, having seen our start to the year I'm dreaming much bigger this year than the last 8 combined. I have much more hope, but that doesn't mean all of a sudden we're the 8th best side in the AFL.

How good is Todd Goldstein? He's rucked completely alone all day, and he's running over the top of Blicavs, Stanley and Clark. Continuing to contest at the stoppages and in the backline.

I have to agree. We must be the worst group of supporters at keeping the lid on our team. Our best is good enough to push any side and beat most, but our worst is bad enough to lose to St Kilda, Brisbane or any other bad side.

North blowing their momentum, just like Gold Coast did last week. Geelong could come out with a second win they haven't really earned.

I don't think Hogan's performance, on Alex Rance and against a finals side from last year, should be considered any worse than McCarthy's just because McCarthy kicked more goals against, who, Rory Thompson? Against a side bereft of confidence and totally out of form. Nonetheless, I'm sure 5 goals is easy to read off a headline for those who DGAF about the MFC.

IMO Howe is a backman, not a forward, but there's no harm in having players who are capable of being moved to either end of the ground. Recent premiership teams have had those kinds of swingmen, and it adds versatility to the side. When he is rebounding off half-back, working hard to link up through the middle of the ground, and cutting off opposition inside 50s with his adept reading of the play and amazing hands (he really does have one of the best sets of hands in the competition), we are a better side for it. I want him to stay.

Just having a quick look at our recent wins (it doesn't take long), it appears our last win over a side who finished the year in the top 4 was when we beat Fremantle in Round 7, 2006. We did beat Collingwood on QB in 2007, who went on to make the Preliminary final and lost by just 5 points to Geelong.

I thought he was better than the first three weeks, though he still isn't anywhere near where he was last year. Last year he looked like he had all the time in the world when he got it, but so far this year and again on Friday he was getting caught with it far too much. But I thought he had more of an impact at the stoppages and I think he worked himself into the game a bit more. Lots of work still to do though.

It's interesting because last year Port was the competition's stand out fourth quarter side. They ran out games better than anyone. Don't forget who they've played so far - Fremantle, Sydney, North and Hawthorn. That's the best three sides in the comp plus a preliminary finalist and possibly the 5th best side in the competition as well. Could not have had a harder first month. They'll be fine. They look much better this year than they did when they made the GF in 2013. More firepower up front, Fyfe is even better, more midfield rotations (e.g. Lachie Neale), better back up for Sandilands. Other than Sydney being really really good, I'm not sure what changed in the second half to turn the game in Sydney's favour, but whatever it was, you'd hope we're able to work out something and use it on Sunday. If we don't, and we let them start against us like they did against Sydney, we'll be done by half time.

My thoughts exactly. Have a look at Dunn's pathetic effort in the second quarter on Edwards which led to their goal in the goalsquare. If that had been Watts there would be an entire thread on it. Instead, it hasn't even rated a single mention as far as I can tell.

Maybe Sydney to do the same? 2.2 to nothing, 20 minutes into the third quarter, margin back to 34... Edit: another goal to Sydney, now just 28.

Port was exhausted after the huge effort against North last week, but their tactics were questionable in that quarter. They put their whole side behind the ball which meant every rebound from the back 50 just came straight back. Hawthorn's good enough to find a way through the flood. Good on them for holding on though.

Well if tonight's games are anything to go by, we at least have four legitimate premiership contenders.

Would be fantastic. Need Sydney to lose a game at some point soon though. A year in which Hawthorn, Sydney and Geelong aren't dominant each week would be a refreshing change from the last 5 years. I'd suggest it's the latter. Port's midfield runs very deep and their pressure, when on song, is second to none.

The key is to find more than enough mids. If we can add Michie to the group, then we keep applying pressure on Newton, Viney, Tyson etc., and we add depth where we need it most.