donny williams no 25

I thought I would have a look at Jones compared to Black and after looking at his stats agree I am being too harsh on Jones. His disposal rate and effectiveness of disposal the 3 weeks prior were all good. His kick to handball ratio was well up against the Hawks which I believe is his issue. He should be given the opportunity to prove last week was just a bad week and play to his strengths of handballing to a first option.

Bloooody hell!!!! You now say we have read all this rubbish for nothing?That will be a relief to young Nathan, the fact that a great judge has changed his mind!

Where we were KILLED last match was in tactics in the centre at ball-ups. No-one seemed to have the faintest idea as to how to stop the ball being tapped out the back by Hawthorn rucks, directly into the path of a runner such as Mitchell. And the same happened the previous week.Hopefully that can be addressed by Jamar's inclusion, although I don't think it was P.J's fault

I could only make it to the 2nd half on Saturday. My friends told me about the great game Paul Johnson was playing. Aned even after half time he played wwell around the ground.

But we were absolutely smashed in the centre. On the radio after the match I think I heard 19 centre clearances to 8 after half time. And many of them were clear-cut leading to an immediate Doggies score.Much discussion on 693 about this and its decisive effect upon the result

The previous week Johnson put in a herculean effort against Cox. He'd obviously studied the video intently. I was amazed how well he matched him. But then we got slaughtered by Lynch when he went onto the ball.

It's not Johnson's fault. He's done wonderfully well and we've learned something I believe. But unless you have key forwards who can take on the ruck work in the forward line--as David Schwarz did very well, you'll get caught out playing a single ruckman. On Sunday Maertin was required in defence--he couldnt help out.I saw Dunn and Sylvia contesting boundary throw ins and in the last quarter at a vital moment, Miller had to contest against Hudson right alongside our point post and the ball was whisked away to the other end.

What do you think?

While I am a big wrap for Barty's courage on the field and obviously wish him all the best with what his family is going through his form this year has hardly been sensational. He beat Brent Harvey in round but really I think Brent Harvey was having a shocking year before he got injured really only dominated one game before his injury (I cannot remember who. Anyone?). Then at the weekend he spent a fair bit of time on Cooney, who is a match winner but is making his way back from injury and an interrupted pre season and I don't think Bartram blanketed him really at all. And when he has the ball he panics and his kicking is horrific. He coughed it up twice really badly on Saturday. He really needs to be put on Mitchell or Sewell this weekend and see what he can do as these players are matchwinners and in form. If he fails he needs to go back to the reserves.

I personally think Daniel Bell should be brought in for this game and put on Mitchell or Sewell with a view to earmarking him for this defensive midfield role. (Sorry to steal another poster's view in another thread) He has obviously played well in the VFL at the weekend and I think he is a better option than Bartram at the moment.

Bartram has never really got back to his 2006 form before he was injured. Have a look at the supercoach points from the weekend. Bartram is down the bottom of our team's individual point totals.

There is no room for Bell down back anymore and I am fine with this. The dees core backline group of Garland, Warnock, Rivers, Martin, Frawley, Bennell, Whelan, Cheyney is exciting and needs to play together as much as possible.

Bell when he was drafted was regarded as having a beautiful kick and I hope he can get back to this been a strength at AFL level.

What do others think of Bartram's 2008 form?

Is he in our best 22?

Two entirely different players are they not. Bell doesn't have the dogged persistence which Bartram displays week after week.Just can't picture Bell as an effective tagger.

I agree with another poster, that Bartram should NEVER be entrusted with the kickouts

Agree. Out of all the kids, he excites me the least.

Perhaps a delist-rookie scenario may be the go here.

well he'd be very stiff! He was great in round one--one of our best and everyone raved about him.

To be honest I'd say that his game that day was better than any of the games played by, eg, Jetta or Bennell since--does anyone disagree?

Agree. Out of all the kids, he excites me the least.

Perhaps a delist-rookie scenario may be the go here.

Bloody Hell!

What did he play--3 games?And wasn't he in our best 4 or 5 in round 1. In fact wasn't everyone, coach included, raving about his game? He'd be mighty stiff to be delisted in my view.

Anyone who's on the list this year and doesn't get a few games, assuming he's been available for a reasonable percentage of them, must have been judged by the coach etc, to be no good. Therefore I'd look at Bail and McNamara, unless they get a few games and do alright. We seem to have had no difficulties delisting Weetra last year, though I understood he had a contract for this year.

Having said this, there's also the small matter of the Mc Namee contract--perhaps costly?

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.

'one or two good goes at it"?

I don't think so. At the 150th celebration dinner, the senior player at our table commented that the team was pleased that at last they had a tagger of a size big enough to run with the tall mobile players who have killed Melbourne in the past--I recall Embley being mentioned. The sight of Godfrey or McDonald running around with Goodes was ridiculous

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.

Short Memories?

Last year he played a heap of games as a go-with negating player and received much praise from the club for that role. It [censored] me off because I thought it was a waste of forward line talent.

However I also recall that the first thing Norm Smith did with Stuart Spencer in 1952 was to place him in the back pocket, which similarly irritated my old man! Spencer in 1955/6 was the best rover in the league and I think, won at least 1 best and fairest. A few games on the backline might help Dunn, just as it helped Neitz.

He has talent--stick with him!

I agree not tough enough, and in the pushing and shoving last weekend he was on his back like a mongrel dog, didnt want to get up

This form of attack on Dunn [and it occurs in relation to Newton also] irritates me. I've watched him closely this year and have seen 1 occasion on which , on one view, he appeared to show not enough g and d. It was an incident in the ist quarter v Geelong, on the outer wing when a ball came over his head and he didn't mark it. Otherwise I've seen nothing and share the generally expressed irritation that he's not played regularly in attack, because he has good kicking skills--better than most of ours. He kicked half the team's goals v Adelaide and also a critical one v Richmond when they had put on a spurt in the 3rd quarter.

It's interesting that this perception of cowardliness is often raised against talented forwards. Pardon me for showing my age but I vividly remember Jack Dyer--then a respected radio commentator--absolutely bagging Hassa Mann once when Hassa was about 20. I can recall exactly Jack's comment--'the least said about Hassa the better in my opinion--he doesn't go in"

Well he ended up as captain, kicked a hell of a lot of goals and featured in Melbourn'es team of the century.

You've got to cut these young forward types a bit of slack in my view

Can someone answer a question for me?

I was sure when we recruited Bate he played his first few games in the midfield.

Was I dreaming, because we need to do something to give him some confidence. He's a mess at the moment. He needs a shift in focus IMO.

No--I remember Bate's first games, on a HFF, and he played well, including kicking a vital couple of goals in a Finals match v St K in his first season.His form' has dropped after he was tried as a full forward, which he aint!

At a social function a few months later [Dec 2006] Neale Daniher commented that he thought that the club had recruited well that year. He named Bate, Dunn,Warnock and Bartram as likely to play 200 games for the club. A year or so later we would have thought he was mad as to Warnock--not now! Both Bate and Dunn have talent and I would stick with them, and Newton also. And as the Club rated Bartram as amongst our best last week, I can't understand how someone can suggest he should be dropped

Bartram - Welcome to Casey

Bate - Not his best

Bennell - Showing some promise

Bruce - Good & bad

Davey - Creates the play

Dunn - An honest effort

Frawley - Best effort yet

Green - D'oh D'oh D'oh

Jetta - Skills need improvement

Johnson - Just did enough

Jones - Good hard worker

Martin - Rock solid Stef

McLean - Looked alot better

Meesen - Slotted in nicely

Miller - Hit packs hard

Moloney - True demon heart

Morton - Always finds time

Newton - Provided good target

Petterd - What a tackle!

Rivers - The Defence's General

Sylvia - Brilliant 2nd quarter

Warnock - Beaten not disgraced

ll see why Bartram won't be at Casey any time soon and how much better was Johnson, than you have rated him

I got home and watched the replay as you do when we win. Newton was lining up for goal and his age came up on the screen - 21! (22 next week actually). I shouldn't have been surprised by his age but I was. He's still a kid finding his way and developing his body. My god we can be harsh critics at times. Let's not write him off yet. Instead praise him for a good game yesterday and hope it leads to many more.

What annoys me about any player (regardless of ability) is if they don't have a crack. Newton has been accused of this in the past but yesterday he had a crack and he had some successes. Give the guy that much credit.

well said! And talk of watching the replay let's mention 2 others. I thought Bartram was ordinary[whilst at the game] But watching the replay showed how important he was in the 2nd half. 8 hard-ball gets--he and Miller were equal highest--sure he coughed it up a couple of times but i'm not surprised both the MFC and The Hun rated him amongst Melbourne's best.

Ditto Paul Johnson-a close watch of the telly showed just how much work he did--worth a vote?I didn't think so but a much better game than I'd thought whilst at the game

I remember him taking one mark running with the flight of the ball facing the direction it was travelling. It was a pretty good mark but it was uncontested.

I also remember him at one stage running back with the flight of the ball facing the kicker (Morton?) only to have the ball sail over his head. I suspect that he is a good judge of the ball in the air so what am I to make of his tentative and cramped backwards strides?

He was given plenty of opportunities today and he created none of them. He was weak and sometimes didn't even bother to raise both of his arms when "contesting" a mark. I remember him lying on the ground in the foetal position for long minutes around the forward flank after some negligilbe-looking contact. Perhaps he took a decent knock and was winded, it does happen. But he could have sprinted for the bench and he still would not have got off that ground quick enough for me.

Having said all that, it was probably his best performance so far. Make of that what you will.

edit: P.S. Thank you BRAD MILLER for yet another inspirational 100% effort.

I gues we have a problem that you and many others have not seen the replay.How on earth could anyone say "he was given plenty of opportunities today and he created none of them?

Do yourself a favour and get a tape of the match. His first mark [ist quarter] was heavily contested, on the chest in the end. [sure, he missed the shot for goal]His first mark in the 3rd was the result of a good lead and a sliding, low contested mark.[He kicked the goal from well out] He then missed an easy goal after a good mark with the ball coming over his shoulder, but atoned in part with a decent snap a minute later. He also during this period was totally responsible for Davey's goal which resulted from a near-mark after which he followed up, got the ball against hot opposition and handpassed to Davey. At times he marked deep in defence. It was a damned good game and as Stuey Spencer has pointed out with Newton in the side the forward line had structure--something it has lacked up until now

I'd just like to see us compete and show more heart than we did Round 1 last year.

Crowd will be 30,000-40,000.

heavens--spare us please!

If I hear any more of this 'let's try to be competitive' nonsense I'll be sick! I point out again that in a 2 horse race, the loser finishes last.Prior to the seasdon this is a defeatist position and must be murder for the club trying to sell memberships. People must be queuing up to buy tickets in the club aiming for "close 2nd"

I personally don't see Bate as a key posi player but I do see him as a 3rd tall forward after Butcher & Watts.

Well none of Watt or Butcher [or Baker or Candlestick maker for that matter] seem likely to don the guernsey against the shin-boners in Round 1.I'm simply saying that Newton deserves some sort of a run in a reasonable team--forget last year--none of our forwards got any easy goals from our mid-fielders ever. For a KPF to appear successful, he will have to earn a number of his kicks/goals, but it's also true that if he can move quickly and take a grab, it's likely he will receive some gifts. Neitz did--who will forget some of the passes delivered to him by Brad Green or Travis in the years when MFC was a decent team.

You don't write off a player such as Newton until he's had a chance to show what he can do in a reasonable team. Our midfielders and small forwards should be able to give him decent service this year--at least better than in 2008

B: Garland (Jones), Warnock (Hale), Bartram

HB: Rivers Frawley (Petrie) Grimes (if fit)

C: Green Moloney Morton

HF: Petterd Bate Bruce

F: Jetta Miller Davey

R: Spencer Jones McLean

Int: Johnson Buckley McDonald Sylvia

Based on what I saw at Casey, Petterd must play, and Jetta is in if Wonna is unfit. Cheney in for Grimes if deemed unfit.

Newton is and will always be rubbish. Miller must play a genuine FF.

Melb beat Brisbane at Cairns, with Newton named as our best-kicked 3 goals out of 11?

Bate is not a KPF--Might be a darned good player in due course but is not big enough for CHF or FF.He's in but on a flank.

I think they must play Newton for a few games. And Dunn MUST play--he's ideal for a number of tags even against Petrie around the ground.

Surely Sylvia doesn't just slide back in--if so it's the hallmark of a weak adminstration

No doubt about that one.

I would have added Farmer as well during his time at MFC. Could be devastating at times in playing one of the most difficult positions on the field. However post MFC, other issues in his life deteriorated his brilliance and and he finished a nasty, angry player who tarnished what should could have been a really impressive career.

Well, on a different note--what about Meesen? How on earth did we trade for him? I read that he was to be an answer to the problems caused by huge ruckman and at 201cm that seemed right. Imagine my surprise when I saw him with White, Jamar and Paul Johnson at the dreadful TAC Cup match at Geelong last year--he's no taller than Jamar and quite a lot smaller than P.Johnson.And is there any reason to believe he can play? Andy Lovell was a bit cool on him in his post-season Sandy wrap-up. Adelaide originally picked him up as a high first-round draft I beleve--what's happened to him?Any chance?

My concern in the Cousins debate is that at least three clubs, and very probably more, not only put a big microscope on Ben's suitability/readiness for their club but also looked hard at the macro aspects of signing him up in terms of media impact and the unsettling influence this could bring to the rest of the team and the perception of the club culture. Regardless of how clean, enthusiastic and talented he is at the moment.

Collingwood would recruit a half-starved dog if it thought it could move into serious contention and it said no after what was described as an exhausting and intensive assessment which included their heavies meeting Cousins and doing all their background checks. The popular phrase is 'due diligence' and the computer still said NO.

Every single AFL club has said no and probably for very good reason.

For mine, we're better off letting DB focus on our young developing list without him getting caught up in a media circus and attending weekly counselling sessions with attendant psychologists and social workers.

Cousins is a definite NO from me.

ok--I can accept that. But don't you think they gave him a miss because of sponsorship issues?

And, curiously, if I supported a club that might win a flag next year, I wouldn't pick him. I say this because such a club can't afford to be de-railed by a huge media fuss if Cousins falls off the rails.It would be too disruptive, not worth the risk.Not so disruptive at Melbourne in the next year or 2.

. And I'm not seeking him because he might help win a few matches in 2009.It's the teaching of fitness, on-ball leadership, footy smarts that I'd like to see--things that might help the 19yos for 10 years to come. And the relationship with Stynes is something for the Club to work with--a real plus for Melbourne is that we have an outstanding Chairman whose whole life has been with troubled youth.

It could be turned into very positive, rather than negative,publicity--which we could well use!

We don't have the resources or clout to protect him from the media, we don't have the team to offer him a chance to get to finals again, we'd win a few more matches thus weakening our position in the draft, and just because SOME people are in a forgiving mood in regards to his condition doesn't mean they're right. How can SO MANY PEOPLE just make this enormous assumption that the guy will come back and be a saint?!!!! (not a saints player) He could come in and spend two years showing the kids how to train hard, and it's equally as likely that a bunch of 17 year olds will turn around and follow in his footsteps in more ways than one!!!! How could any regular footy fan be so sure that the guy will be clean, unaffected by drugs, and against them COMPLETELY.

I don't know about you guys, but I don't want drugs, or the reputation of drugs anywhere near my club. I'm not stupid enough to think that it doesn't go on, or hasn't in the past, but I'm not about to condone the recruiting of a player that has a history with it and has shown little if any genuine remorse about his drug related past. MFC is in a precarious position and needs, more than at any time in its history to make every step it can towards a flag, lest we fall away again and become even closer to relocation or merger. The Collingwoods, and Essendons of this world can take these risks and wear the damage if there is any, but not us.

And don't give me this wishy/washy addiction malarkey... No offence, but I don't care if it IS a sickness... He can go and be sick somewhere else. I don't wish him any harm, and hope he gets better and sets about repairing the damage he's done to his reputation AND the delicate fabric that is Aussie Rules footy, but I have to be honest I'm not about to put the guy ahead of MFC... It's as simple as that.

Recruiting a 30 yr old to a club that is nowhere near a flag, full of impressionable kids... Jesus I worry about MFC fans sometimes.

So you're happy to keep on the list a player who was so drunk at a night club during the season that he missed a ride home with a murderer. A talented player who's never been fit in his life. No 3 draft pick wasn't he?. You don't think that someone such as Cousins could teach C.S a thing or two about fitness, about trying so hard you're sick, even about getting the ball more than the few times he does.

I repeat--you don't draft him if he's not clean. If the club is not absolutely satisfied about that and about his physical condition, hamstring etc,, forget him. If he is clean, and fit, he's the greatest bargain imaginable.

disagree, Cousins is known for his training and commitment to the game, he would be a great role model for all our young blokes coming through if he stays clean and IMO he will. I work in D&A and the way this guy has been made into a pariah is disgraceful, its obvious that no-one in the AFL or any of the clubs actually knows about addiction and haven't bothered to find out about it.

I agree with this and I'm surprised no-one appears to have mentioned another point.

In my opinion the possibility of joining Cousins to a Jim Stynes lead club is realistic and very worthwhile. If any leader can help this talented but disgraced player it's Jim S.

Since this issue first surfaced many matters have changed. He's no longer an expensive buy. We could have had him at no74 in the draft, and it seems, for very little money.

What impresses me about this possibility is the on-field leadership he could give in the middle of the ground. We haven't had it for years. Neitz was a great leader but full forwards are in a hopeless position as captains if the game turns nasty. Cousins , in a season, could teach our on-ballers so many football 'smarts" they're not otherwise going to learn.

And I agree--he's the hardest trainer in the competition. What would we give to see Colin Sylvia [as an example] bust a gut the way Cousins does.

All of this is predicated on the club being satisfied that he is clean. If he's going to undertake the regime required by the AFL, then in my view he's likely to be ok.

Finally, he deserves a chance. He hasn't murdered anyone or even assaulted someone has he?I'm amazed that some are so sanctimonious about cocaine when as Dr Alex Wodak from Sydney repeatedly points out, alcohol is by far the most damaging drug for Australians. We're content that players can get blind drunk, and smash people up--he deserves a go and with Jimmy at the helm we're the best club to offer it

I understand what you're saying I'm all for playing Dunn however I wouldn't put him in the skillful category.

Dunn is most likely going to be a lost cause, I just can't see him playing at a great level to be in our next finals push. This year though we've got a great opportunity, not many teams can afford to play a group of players who are not up to it, hopefully with some confidence and luck he can get better. If he does it will be a great bonus, but I won't be shocked if he doesn't.

John Meeson is a raw footballer,

He has good size, grat engine, and is rated by many in the footy world..

He has had a lot of injury niggles this year, but I expect him to play his MFC debut very soon, as White's back-up, especially now that PJ will play as a permanent forward, which is what he was always meant to be..

Jamar and Meeson will compete for this role, but IMO Meeson could have alot to offer, just needs to get his body right, he was good pre season, and alot of people expect big things..

Just play it slow.. he'll get his chance shortly, dont dismiss the guy half way through his 1st year, id be worries about guys who have been here 3 or 4, and still show nothing!! theres plenty of em'..

have said all along, he is like his old man who took a long time to mature and was in mid 20's before he showed a bit, CJ is coming along nicely

I'm surprised no-one has mentioned that in the 2nd half we were killed in the rucks in the centre of the ground. Hence the quick movement by Sewell etc out of the middle.I was disappointed in Jamar's 2nd half. If White had played I believe we would have won

Bruce - Worst on ground

I do like Bruce but his decision making yesterday was awful I don't know how many times he chose the wrong option putting his team mate under pressure but it must of been a lot and his kicking was as poor as it has been all year, his form over the last month or so proves that he should not be captain.

Bartram - Belted by Bateman.

Like Bell he has been disappointing all year, disposal poor as usual.

Frawley - Belted by everyone

Fevola, Bradshaw, Burton and Williams have all killed him he needs to spend some time at Sandy.

Miller - Doesn't do enough

Everybody else I was pretty happy with especially with Green he was really hard at it unlike some games where he tries to get cheap disposals.

Bate is a gun.

McLean is a very good player who would be a gun if he had some support.

If Davey can get a good pre season behind him he will become a star.

Garland and Buckley are very promising and Aussie is going to be a very good player for a long time.

Bell! Must be joking.No football brain whatever. A great pity-looks a good chap

There has been a lot to like about Colin and Matty Warnock in the past few weeks. Our backline was a basketcase during ND's era but Bails seems to have a bit to work with earlier than expected. It surprised me to see Garland is listed at the same height as Carroll, seems to play a bit taller. Stefan Martin seems to be progressing nicely at Sandy in only his second year of playing footy. He's playing CHB, and at 198cm could be the key to a promising emerging backline for the future.

Our premiership backline? Warnock Garland Petterd

Bell Martin Rivers

with Bartram Frawley Grimes and Cheney rotating through. None of those guys are over 24.

Highly speculative I know but 5 weeks ago I would of struggled to name 6 defenders with a future. As an old full back I'm biased but I believe an at least decent backline is a prerequisite for premierships. We haven't had a full back that elite forwards would have dreaded since Danny Hughes, or a CHB since a young David Neitz went forward.

There is plenty of potential in our under 23's, I just hope Bailey can unlock it

Give us a break! This bloke has played what--70 games? Of course he hasn't and he gets the ball more than most. Stick with him--the other stuff will improve

He is another halfwhit footballer that melbourne will keep for too long and then realise "Oh [censored]" what have we done this guy hasnt given us anything. There is no place for him in the melbourne team. He has the worst disposal in our team and turns the ball over every chance he gets.