titan_uranus

We could put Steven Silvagni on him, it's not going to stop him, because their midfield is going to annihilate ours and deliver the ball on a platter to him. Frawley will start on him. Best defender on best forward. Can't see why he wouldn't take him. But it's going to take a team effort to stop him.

Well there we go. Someone with as little IQ as a cactus. Deliberately smearing blood on someone is, in your opinion, acceptable. Deliberate. If Howe didn't do it deliberately then this isn't an issue. But the idea behind the charge is that he did. According to you, the game is weak because we don't tolerate the smearing of blood on people. Might as well just smear crap on them too while we're at it, right? I mean, to not do so is just weak. You're an idiot. So are you. And you. Yes, I'm on our side. Sorry that I don't agree with the idea of smearing blood on other people.

If he did it, then ridiculous stuff from Howe, and regardless of what Buckley got, deserves to spend weeks out to think about how idiotic he was.

What a shocking thread. Moloney has been the same player for the last 3-4 years. Which is exactly his problem. He hasn't got many strings to his bow and when his form dips, he stands out. Hasn't been getting the armchair ride from Jamar due to Jamar being down/injured. Trengove has been injured; whether the club says so or not, I can't believe otherwise. But he hasn't been that bad anyway, we've had way worse. Grimes in my mind has improved this year, and the only effect coaching has had on his game has been to move him into the middle, a clear improvement. His kicking is atrocious, but that's been an issue for years now. Frawley has not been as bad as people think. We concede way too many inside 50s to allow him to dominate forwards. Davey has been on the way out for at least a year now - not Neeld's fault. Jamar has been disappointing, but injuries have played a part in that. At any rate, what has Neeld done to make him worse? Just a bad form slump. Bail was great until the concussions (too many forget how good he was) and hasn't been the same since, which really shouldn't be a surprise. Still a part of our future IMO. Magner is a first-year player. What a ridiculous assertion. Petterd is simply crap, pretty much always has been. A few good games here and there, like Bate/Dunn, doesn't change that. Terrible thread, really.

Unfortunately, as an MFC supporter, we have a lot of possible years to choose from. 2012 to me is as bad as any other year. There were high hopes, misplaced maybe, led by a new coach and having Clark. The level of uncompetitiveness that we've managed to display at times this year has been nothing short of embarrassing, simply terrible. 2008 was the same. 2009 wasn't much better. In terms of disappointment, 2007 was also terrible, given we'd made the semis and been the top-ranked Victorian side in 2006, but that year was derailed with injuries and the Daniher saga. What a happy thread.

I saw 0% of the game last night, which, it seems, was a blessing in disguise. However, I've read about it, I've heard about it, and I feel like I know exactly what happened. I think the reason why the negativity seems to be higher this week is the fact that we lost to Port. And I think that's something that needs to be acknowledged. I'm as used to losing as anyone else, and I am as apathetic towards this season as many others are. But to be generally very poor against a side who, in all fairness to Port, is no better, and potentially worse than we have been recently, can't be brushed aside. I don't care if we lose to good sides, even when we're smashed, because we're simply no good. But when we come up against crap sides, I want to see a contest, and from what I've heard of this game, there were periods in which we weren't competitive, and that to me is not good enough. Having said that, the simple facts remain that we have a very poor list which we are trying to re-mould, and that we are missing key players. You put Clark, Watts, Jamar, McKenzie and Jurrah into our side and we no doubt improve. Losing your ruckman, your All-Australian-bound full forward, a key playmaker from defence, your hardnut tagging mid who gives 100% no matter what, and your x-factor up forward, and clearly you suffer, and that isn't an excuse or a reason, it's nothing but a simple piece of truth. We can't be at our best given our terrible list when we're missing 5 of our best 10. I think the extra negativity and disappointment is warranted, but some of the ridiculous conclusions that continue to be drawn by people who refuse to consider the impact Bailey's insipid tenure has had on us, and the fact that we can't just turn things around with the click of Neeld's fingers, are just out of place. In the end, this year has given us Clark, Watts, McDonald, Howe, Rivers/Garland as forwards, and to a lesser extent, Magner, Nicholson and Blease. It has also confirmed to me, and hopefully to everyone else, that we have a lot of candidates for delisitng: Bate, Dunn, Morton, Moloney, Petterd, Jetta, Spencer and Bennell surely head the list (contracts aside). In other words, we will clean out more of the Daniher/Bailey-caused deadwood, and Neeld will be able to focus on the core strengths of our list and continuing to develop a gameplan which actually might stand up against decent sides.

Gone. I hope.

Couldn't have asked for a more exciting and well-matched round, but three of the four top 8 clashes have been letdowns so far. 67, 49 and 48 point margins. Don't think anyone expected those kinds of blowouts in any of them, except maybe Adelaide-West Coast. Fremantle-GWS aside, I don't think the remaining games will feature big margins, but we'll have to wait and see. At least I don't think ours will be a big margin...I hope.

Forgot about Sellar. If he's OK to play he comes straight back in and into defence, freeing up Garland to move back to the forward line. Hmmm, interesting. I still think Martin's longterm role is going to have to be forward/ruck so I'd rather see him play there. He looked good in the first quarter. I'm not sold at all on Fitzpatrick (i.e. I think he's crap). Not that I think Spencer is that much better, but I'd rather play Martin as the second ruck because that's his more likely position.

Ah maybe. FWIW. I think 4-2 would be a good bench, which maybe is what Malthouse wants. I don't like 3-1, and I sure as hell do not want to see 2-2.

He was charged with 'misconduct', which allows the MRP to send the incident directly to the Tribunal. Which they should do, as they can't properly assess it using their points system, as there wasn't really an 'impact'.

In: Spencer, three best MFC players for Casey yesterday (or Watts if fit). Out: Jamar, Bennell, Grimes, Strauss Spencer has to replace Jamar, unfortunately (although Spencer did look OK from what I saw of the Casey game). Replace Bennell, Grimes and Strauss with whoever our best three were from Casey yesterday. Strauss needs match fitness, he looked so incredibly out of it yesterday. Doesn't really deserve his spot until he shows form at Casey.

Couldn't disagree more. Clark is not a ruckman. He's a full forward. If his performances in the forward line this year didn't prove that to you, I don't know what will. We need him playing 100% of his game time at FF. Jamar was dominating in the ruck in the first quarter yesterday. When we lost him, and Martin had to ruck, Griffin got on top and their midfield began to overpower ours. No coincidence there.

How exactly did the sub rule work against us yesterday? If anything, it worked in our favour! Don't get me wrong, I hate the sub rule, but yesterday Jamar went down in the first quarter, and we subbed him out. At that point, our rotations were not dimished below Fremantle's because we both had three usable players on the bench. If it was the old 4-0 system, we'd have been down to 3 with them at 4. So it helped us! Good post. Agree with the problems he's had to inherit and hence aren't his fault, and also agree with the problems he's created himself. I don't like his tendency to put numbers behind the ball, and neither did Malthouse yesterday. We struggle enough as it is to go inside 50 and score. Putting numbers behind the ball only hampers that. We turn it over enough as it is along the boundary. If we start going through the middle we're only going to find ourselves further behind. Your posts are becoming increasingly worthless.

Great result all round, really. Karmichael is working really hard and showing that he is most likely going to make it as a good AFL player, Gold Coast get the monkey off the back, and Richmond has a massive spanner thrown into their attempt to make finals. Good stuff.

I thought MacDonald had to stretch to grab that mark. Either way, not the point. He went sideways when he should have driven the ball inside 50. And he still turned it over multiple times. Twice out of bounds on the full in the first quarter.

Great last quarter. Never say die attitude. Spencer will be back next week. Hopefully he takes some confidence from his performance today.

6 - MacDonald 5 - Martin 4 - Bail 3 - Sylvia 2 - Green 1 - McKenzie Wow. That's generous. Didn't really think Grimes did anything special today and he turned it over far, far too many times.

There were definitely some good signs today, we worked hard, spread a bit better, moved the ball well. Losing Jamar and Bennell ruined us, especially Jamar which threw our structures out and destroyed Martin. However, there were still far too many skill errors which hurt us with turnovers. Jack Grimes turned the ball over about 6 times by foot. His kicking is simply deplorable (and before people jump down my throat, at least 3 of those turnovers occurred before he hurt his ankle). His effort, strength, marking and leadership aren't questionable, but his kicking is as bad as any player on our list. I'm sick of players kicking backwards and sideways seemingly simply because a player is free, rather than because it helps us move forward or set up a play. Tom McDonald gave up two goals because he didn't kick precisely when going backwards/sideways. The last goal of the game also was conceded because Grimes didn't kick with precision when going sideways. It's infuriating. We also spent too long with players behind the ball which didn't help us score, and Jones was taken out of the game by Crowley which hampered our clearance work. Pleasing to an extent, but still lots of work to do.

Anyone there? What does the crowd look like? (this assumes the word 'crowd' can apply to the size of the gathering of people that is actually there)

Deserves weeks. That is really a low act.

What it should be: intentional, severe, head-high - leads to 9 activation points, the highest possible, and then the case goes to the Tribunal where hopefully he gets about 6 weeks. What I get the feeling it will be: reckless, high, head-high. Just because the MRP is totally inconsistent and ridiculous in its findings. This would lead to 7 activation points, which is a 'level 4 offence', which means 425 points for rough conduct or charging, which means 4 weeks.

Disappointed to see Bate and Dunn hold their spots. That is all.

If you want to start a thread, go ahead. No one's going to stop you. But if you start a thread that is silly, or your opinion is just foolhardy, then expect people to note that. So if someone starts a thread saying 'We should delist Clark, he's been our worst player all year', then that person would expect to cop more than a few 'dumb thread' comments. It's a forum. For the same reasons that you should expect to be able to say what you want (and you can), expect to have people say what they want about your opinion.

So long as Bate and Dunn are dropped, I don't care what other changes we make.