titan_uranus

Well that will hopefully keep quiet those who want him dropped or subbed. Even when he's not at his best, and he still isn't, we are best served with him in the side.

Ironically he rucked for us, against the Tigers, in 2009.

Complete and utter rubbish. I've seen more in Gawn's two games than I've seen, ever, from Spencer. How Spencer is automatically in front of Gawn, based on age or whatever you're choosing to use, is ridiculous. Spencer is not as good as Gawn, full stop. Jamar and Martin are our first two rucks, sure, but if we need a replacement, it's Gawn, not Spencer.

Can't see any reason to play him as a sub. He should be on the field from start to finish. He will command a decent defender, taking the pressure off Watts/Green, and he is more than capable of tearing any side to shreds. Why you would waste him on the bench for 2-3 quarters is beyond me. Moreover, he will add little to the side when subbed on as he will roam around the forward line. I'd rather see Morton or Gysberts as sub; Morton can come on and give us fresh legs off half back and through the middle, or Gysberts could give us added firepower in the clearances.

I have no idea why you would consider a first round draft pick adequate trading for Hawkins. Hawkins is awful.

Good changes. Bartram was woeful last week, I don't care how good a job he did on a small forward, he is a total liability with the ball in hand and doesn't deserve to hold his spot based on his negating abilities when he gives goals away via turnovers. I'm more than happy to see him cut and presumably told to work on his disposal, especially given we have Nicholson and Strauss (and Bennell I guess). King being out may have assisted the FD's decision. Gawn is unlucky, but we can't play all three and he's third of the three. But he's had his taste, and maybe in the future if Martin or Jamar look to play more time as a FF, we know we have a fantastic up and coming ruckman to fill the void. I'd look to Morton as the sub. No point playing Jurrah if you're going to use him as a sub: he either plays the whole game from start to finish or he doesn't play at all.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/22/sports/football/nfl-set-to-proceed-toward-deal-with-players.html?_r=1&ref=football Promising signs.

After Nicholson's game last week he doesn't deserve to be the sub. Strauss, Gysberts or Morton for mine.

Doesn't mean we can't take Nick too.

I said that. All I'm saying is there's no reason to look at Richmond and think: 'they're a better team'. If they were, they would have beaten teams of merit. Sure, Fremantle had Mundy and Sandilands, but it was still at the G, where they stink. They went 'close' to Sydney, but didn't really threaten.

This is a fair point, seems to have been lost a bit. Richmond lost a few games ago to Port Adelaide, yet beating Brisbane, the next worst side in the competition, rates as an impressive performance. Truly, their only win of merit is their victory over Essendon, when Essendon were, at that stage, going well. Having said that, you could say the same thing about us. But the point about Richmond remains valid: they haven't beaten anyone of merit.

Oh dear.

Game Analyser is the best IMO. Start to finish, the whole game's there.

Dangerfield. If it's true that he is considering bailing on Adelaide if Craig goes, and he wants to come back to Melbourne.

Yeah I was about to post that; this is our second consecutive six day break, with another one to follow. Same deal, really.

True, I'm not that stupid. I don't mean to compare the topic of Wonaeamirri to the topic of team selection; one is personal, one is not. However, what I'm trying to say is that, whether personal or otherwise, this is still a forum about Melbourne and its players. I can thus understand why people would want to discuss his future here.

By that logic half the stuff discussed on here should be avoided. We know nothing about Scully's contract, so we can't talk about that. I don't know who's going to be picked for this week, so maybe I shouldn't talk about that either. Come on Artie, this is a forum for fans of this club to discuss what happens with this club. I think this topic is relevant.

Couldn't be more ridiculous. What 'good' comes from any thread on here? This is an MFC forum, where people are fairly and honestly discussing Wonaeamirri's future. How any of that is detrimental to Aussie himself I have no idea. If anything at least he can see that there are fans out there who want to see him get back to playing football. Geez.

Rubbish post. Go and have a good look at how Rivers has played this year. I'm not saying he's a superb one-on-one player, but you have given him no credit whatsoever for some of his spoiling, hard running, rebounding, and providing assistance to Frawley/MacDonald/Garland/Warnock/whoever else. He is playing very nice football at the moment. Agree with that, we lose if we play Martin as a defender. We need to back ourselves in. Vickery isn't Jonathan Brown. Garland and Rivers have both succeeded (and failed, sure) against taller opponents. Let's back our defenders in to do the job against a 20-game youngster and not fluff around with what works for us instead.

I think it's also pertinent to note that in only one match (Sydney) have we won the contested possession count but not had more inside 50s. When we get on top in the contested ball, our midfield is more able to give our forwards a crack, and I think we've shown this year that our forward line, given decent supply, can do the job pretty well. Our issue has been getting it down there.

Frawley goes to Riewoldt, no question about that. Can't believe anyone would suggest bringing Warnock in. Rivers can take Vickery I reckon, but we have Garland too. I guess Rivers and Garland will go to Vickery and Miller.

Thought Jack Watts' one-hander might have warranted a nomination over Schulz's regulation pack mark.

That's a joke, right? Yes, we were in front on the siren. That has little to do with us wanting to win. Sure, the players were trying their hardest, I don't think anyone's questioning that. But we played Miller in the ruck, Warnock at full forward, to name a few of our 'odd' decisions. The real reason we were in front on the siren was that Richmond were abhorrent. Try as we might, we were still more talented than them.

True that.

Agreed. Howe gives us everything Bate's meant to give us, plus more. Bate's career with Melbourne is surely over.