Rodney (Balls) Grinter

We shouln't be wearing the Bali singlet tops any of the time. Our traditional jumper never clashed with West Coasts original royal blue jumper. I don't see why we couldn't wear either the red backed one as we did against the dogs or our retro 80s royal blue one. Either would have looked better that the crap we wore on Thursday - Sydney jumper from the back, bad Bail singlet from the front. Back to writing to the AFL in protest.

Watching our team in those disgusting clash jumpers hurt my eyes.

It will really hurt them when Shaun Burgoyne goes down hilll

The biggest problem I see with the rule is that it penalises defenders disproportionately to forwards and has the potential to gift too many goals via free kicks, which when it occurs really destroys the spirit of the game as it has the potential for games to be too heavily influenced by bad umpiring.

I'll take others word that Weed is a player for the future based on what he has shown at VFL level, but for pretty much all of the preseason comp he has given us less than Chris Dawes did last season. Given he hasn't got a game at top level yet this year I'm guessing Pedo isn't a realistic Rd 1 option. Based on output during preseason, I'd play Pencil as the additional tall option ahead of Weed.

If we beat the Staints Rd1... I will not throw my empty VB can at the TV like I did when Montagna took the game from under our noses in the last 2 seconds of that game in 2015.

Yeh, didn't like it at all. Agree it was paid reasonablely consistently in terms of was paid consistently for both teams (one against Bernie was a shocker though). How I don't think it is paid consistently though is: 1. Was paid more frequently against defenders; 2. A huge number of spoils for which the clear intent was to find the boundary, but we're not paid; 3. I'd also contend that on many multiple occasions players intentionally allow them selves to be tackled out of bounds - in my view this is a soft option and it should be paid either holding the ball or deliberate out of bounds of a player is tackled across the line. Accept in the most obvious of cases, I really don't like this last touch type deliberate rule.

I would have to bet so much on St Kilda to get any sort of semblance of satisfaction, that it would upset me when we win. I know no doubt that Goodwin and co will play it down, but in my mind round 1 is a must win game. If we are going to be a decent side this season and aim at making finals, then we must put away teams we should beat (Essendon, Carlton, North, St Kilda, Richmond, Gold Coast,Freo etc). We win round one, I'm happy - simple.

Disagree. When he is not doing something good with ball in hand, he is putting on good physical pressure and presence, which the Weed just isn't up to yet. So many punters here have complained about game being gifted to young players in the past in the name of development and due to lack of depth, so what is the difference here? Won't nessasrily hurt Weed to spend another year in the VFL while he develops physically. Someone also mentioned Joel Smith playing ahead of Garland. Whilst I loved Smith's tackling and defensive pressure, he was shown up big time most times when he had the ball and couldn't dispose of it in good fashion or to the right option. Was great to give him two games exposure at the top level in preseason, but it's either Garland, Jetta, Frost, Hibbard or Harmes come round one for me.

Seriously, are you people still talking about this? In terms of the club not being fully open in the media what do you expect - Club: "we think this is Jack's weekness" Opposition: "great, let's target that weakness verbally or physically" OR Club: "this is how we want Jack to play within our team" Opposition: "thanks for passing on your game plan for Jack Watts" I guess the club could give some kind of BS decoy of a reason, but that is going to be seen through in an instant and wouldn't stop the chatter, speculation and inuendo. If this were most other player, the dead bat response from the club would have been accepted and everyone would have moved on... Which is what I'm doing right now, only to return to this thread when Jack is either delisted or more likely puts in a blinder, kicks a bag of six and or wins us the game some other way off his own boot.

Has been a faithful, loyal and sound servant of the club over many years. I'll go out on a limb here compared to many here in this forum and state that I think his best footy is pretty good. It certainly would be a great footy story for him to break his way back into the side 'play his role , and taste some team success.

So was @olisik happy with Trac's goal kicking and game against the Carlscum? ...He'd bloody well better be 3 goals and umpteen score involvements is pretty decent showing in my book. Things which impressed me: 1. Some strong bodywork and marking - always part of his game; 2. Great lateral vision and finding of free team mates inside forward fifty - again something at which he has always excelled and let's face it we had free players everywhere yesterday; 3. The big one for me was that he really nailed all his set shots at goal. This is the one area where Trac's game has looked a little shaky in the past (think first St Kilda game last year). That he has his technique and or confidence going in this area is a great sign, because he is so close to the complete package in all other areas. Opposition team in 2017 watch out and Demons fans, enjoy the side show.

I think the approach taken is worth the risk. Jack had a great season last year and played a pivotal role in many of the great team performances. But he cannot afford to stagnate in his development. Should the teams perfoance continue to improve and and result in winning more games, opposition teams will be putting more work into our key players and Watts will be high on that list, so I suspect that he really needs to improve, just to maintain his level of output. But I'm hoping that he can improve significantly again to go from good to great. He has the weapons, last year he showed more desire, but if he can step his level of physicality and competitivness up again, then he could be in for an awesome year. I don't think Goody being a hard ass should nessasrily crush Watts - he is a big boy now and provided the relationship and respect between Goody and Watts is strong (big difference to Neeld here), then I think that Watts will recognize the reasons for what Goody is pushing, take it on board and accept it as a challenge to rise to the next level again. After some good improvement last year that has given many optimisim and hope for a truly competitive MFC again, the worst thing which could happen is that individuals and the club sits back and think that it has arrived. We haven't arrived until we finally get another trophy in the cabinet (or four of them like Jordan!!). Not settling for mediocrity anymore is a great sign IMHO.

Is Jack even capable of breathing fire? (Please read partially as tounge in cheek). If Jack Watts breaths fire, then watch out opposition - that would be some weapon. ... Seriously though what did Max say though? (asides from the Watts thing), I want to be amused by the master's musings.

"Forget to ever take any others"? Stuff that - BURN all the white ones (just to be sure...).

Along the lines of @Chris's suggestion, what about we hit up My Bulla Alpine Resort??! ...and yes I know it would clash with another present major sponsor.

He is only a backman, they are not the smartest players going round. Tommy holds his own pretty well though and after a start that had the commentators salivating that he was the recruit of the year, Oscar did a pretty good job on Cloke.

That's a bit harsh for a first practice match isn't it. BTW didn't he slot through the first goal of the game from a decent way out?

Agreed, I wish this was for four points, but sadly not. Necessitaty, interest and optimism aside, bring on Rd 1 - I really want to beat those [censored]!

Fox commentators were certainly claiming the dogs were down in comparison, but I'm not so sure. Watts, Tyson and Jetta are big outs for us.

I like Jake's hair. Good work, has clearly been talking to Maxy. Let's hope it also transfers to his game play!

So, for what it's worth, my take: 1. No stars; 2. Spencer and Smith provided all the right signs; 3. Somewhat contradictory to the above, we were more dominant with big Max in the ruck; 4. That was the reigning premiers we just played, so that's got to be worth something. All the right signs at this time of year, which is certainly better than the wrong ones.

Royal Blue 80s retro would be a good option against Essendon away: NO WHITE CRAP.

??? Sorry, come again! Watts now looks like a great choice, though I agree that he may be even further ahead with better early development. Appart from Nic Nat, (who may well have got go home syndrome), who was the other stand out? Nic NAT would be almost redundant now big bearded one has turned it on and stayed injury free.

Well done to the club thus far for negotiating a much better outcome than the situation first appeared. This needs to be our one and only clash jumper. That other piece of (white) crap can be relegated to a training jumper for this year and burnt after that (I'll buy one from the club for the latter explicit purpose myself). What an absolute joke that the AFL considered making us wear a 'clash' jumper against St Kilda that looks more like their regular jumper than our traditional jumper in the first place.