titan_uranus

You probably don't exist in the AFL's world.

Yes, well unfortunately he can't. Nor can he get more than 10 disposals in one match. Nor does he impose himself on the contest. Nor does he seem to know what he's doing when he's out there.

Essendon will beat us. Other than that, I think you're about right M2W. WC and Freo should be beatable at the G, which gives us 3. The fourth is likely to come from one of Collingwood or Richmond. Port really should beat us, and we never play well at Etihad, which gives North a head start. Sydney's very up and down at the moment, but we don't travel well. We aren't a chance in the rest of them.

Agree. We should use another 5 or 6 picks this year. I think that's being a little harsh on a 2-game kid who, let's be honest, played pretty well in Round 1. I'd be upset to see him get the flick if we kept any of Bell, Dunn or Bate. Not every AFL player needs to have speed. I think Cheney showed enough to be persisted with.

Add to that the fact that Emma Quayle rated him as the 25th best prospect in the 2007 draft (albeit she did name him 'smokey' of sorts). This week is as good a time as any to give McNamara a go.

Dunn wasn't a good stopper. He might have a had one or two good goes at it, but Bartram does it much better than he does. And Bartram doesn't mind getting the contested ball or putting his body on the line. I agree with Hannabal above where he says that Dunn's best chance is as a third forward. He just seems to have neither the aerobic capacity nor the skill to play in the midfield. And as for defence, well I think there are better options down there. Cheney should be in front of Dunn in terms of a half back flanker/back pocket.

There's a tidbit in today's paper which says that Bennell could have played cricket, as he was in the WA Under-18 Indigenous Team (or something like that). Shows the boy's talent I guess.

How is Dunn versatile? As yet, he hasn't had dominant performances, or even good enough performances, to suggest he's capable forward, back, or in the midfield. As it stands he is a bit player. With Frawley, Jones and Garland, people at least knew what position they were playing. With Dunn, after 4 years, we still don't know where his best position is, and he hasn't really shown enough in any position.

Ignoring contracts, you would say that the following players would not be on our list next year: Dunn Newton Bell Whelan Wheatley McDonald Possibly one of Jamar/PJ Now, McDonald will retire, Whelan might also retire (if he doesn't he'll be delisted) and Wheatley will probably be delisted. You have to think that one of Dunn, Newton or Bell will be paid out, because we just cannot afford to keep these list cloggers as we begin our ascent up the ladder. Next year is so vitally important to this club, and we cannot risk taking in those who are just bit-players. So at least one of Dunn, Newton or Bell must go. This of course says nothing about McNamara, who we may think isn't good enough to hold his spot after he gets a game this year (I don't think this will be the case, but I'm thinking of Weetra here, who got 2 games last year, which was enough for all to see that he wasn't going to hang around), nor Buckley, who I think the club will persist with.

I don't know about ready to step up, since we haven't seen him yet. I think he's ready to be given a chance at AFL level though.

There's no chance Ess v Carlton would be moved, you know that. St Kilda has agreed to play 1 match this year at the Gold Coast, which, along with Carlton's and Richmond's, makes up for North Melbourne reneging on their Gold Coast deal. So that match won't be moved either. This leaves Ess v Brisbane, which seems a likely candidate to be moved. But that same day, Etihad already has a match scheduled (Western Bulldogs v West Coast). Same problem with North v Bulldogs in round 13 (St Kilda v Richmond is on at Etihad the same day). So neither of those can be moved to Etihad either. Your point about moving another match between Etihad-tenant clubs instead of us is valid, though.

OK, I have done a bit of research, and I found this on Champion Data's website: This was from http://www.championdata.com.au/files/rankings.pdf, which explains how they come up with those 'Ranking Points' that you see in the Herald Sun's stats after a match. This might be a good way to look at what statisticians mean when they say 'effective disposal'.

Exactly. Yes, St Kilda are 7-0, and look very likely to play in a GF against Geelong. But what happens if the AFL make this decision to switch venues, and then St Kilda hits a form rut and the game loses some of its appeal? I agree. I also don't think it's fair on the Bulldogs, who last year wanted their Geelong v Bulldogs match to be moved to Docklands instead of Skilled Stadium so that more of their fans could see it. It didn't happen. Different circumstances and arragements, sure, but there have been plenty of instances where clubs have wanted venue switches and haven't got it. The AFL choosing to do so this year, when I haven't even seen St Kilda publicly ask for it, would reek of money, money, money.

Minson does, and will, go forward. That's about the only thing Minson is capable of. I certainly cannot see Martin going to Aker. The speed is a big issue.

I was tossing up between Moloney and Miller, and chose Miller. Moloney shows great on-field leadership, and Miller can at times, but I think Miller would do a better job of the off-field stuff. I wouldn't have any problem with Moloney being captain though. What's sad is that 2 years ago this thread would have been pointless because the vast majority of us would have said McLean. Now, he's currently got 5.26% of the vote.

You know, in previous years this would have done very little to excite anyone on this site. In fact it might have had the opposite effect. But I'm guessing that many people here are pleased, or at least glad, to see that Jamar's available and could be back in the next few weeks. Does this cost money, because if it does then it's something that the clubs should question the AFL over. It seems obvious to me that, in instances like these, the rookie should be allowed to stay on the senior list without having to go through these ridiculous formalities.

But that was the SANFL... Nah, I'll take your word for it KrazyJay.

McLean urges Dees fans to show for Dog fight

Grimes. Bennell should get one as well. Watts would if he played, but he'll probably get one next year. Taylor Walker won't play a better game this year, and he missed the nomination because Ziebell did the same. How unfortunate.

No he hasn't. He's really only played 1 or 2 good games, and the rest have been average. Don't get me wrong, I'm more than happy with his progress so far and his potential to become a future gun, but he can't be classified as 'nearly our best performer' yet.

Yes. 32,767

Agreed. Now why would you do that? He showed improvement from his effort last week, he had much more of an influence, and he needs the game time at AFL level.

Agreed. Now why would you do that? He showed improvement from his effort last week, he had much more of an influence, and he needs the game time at AFL level.

Surely there's no onus on the player to give the ball to the opponent if he doesn't have it. I mean, there have been millions of instances where the ball has been lying at the player's feet, and he's just stood up and waited for the other player to come and get it.

He has his own show? What is the world coming to?