Jump to content

Ham

Members
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ham

  1. Ham replied to DeeSpencer's post in a topic in Melbourne Demons
    Blaming the club for employing a ruckman as a forward/kicking coach. Go and employ the right person for the job.
  2. Ham replied to DeeSpencer's post in a topic in Melbourne Demons
    Just because they've made a decision to employ him in that role, doesn't mean it's the right one. Go by that logic and all the coaches they let go of last year would still be at the club. MFC need a new forward/kicking coach as far as I'm concerned, Stafford isn't doing a good enough job.
  3. Ham replied to buck_nekkid's post in a topic in Melbourne Demons
    Huge [censored] flop by Rich, he's the one who should be fined.
  4. Ham replied to DeeSpencer's post in a topic in Melbourne Demons
    You didn't address the point I made, at all. Weideman hasn't had ANY decent development at all. He contacted J. Brown in the off-season for 'advice'. Whenever that's happening (like King going to Lloyd) it's a sign that SOMETHING IS WRONG (and clearly in the St. Kilda case, they didn't like it, so they put a line through it). Put the correct people at the club (like they have in every other facet it would seem) and we may see some improvement with the development of Weideman. Why do we have a ruckman as our forward/kicking coach? The reason we're winning is our defence. The reason we aren't putting teams away by 50-80+ is because we have a ruckman as our forward/kicking coach.
  5. Ham replied to DeeSpencer's post in a topic in Melbourne Demons
    Under what type of development? MFC have let Weideman down, monumentally. If we're going to point fingers, it needs to be right at the club, not at Weideman.
  6. I'd love to hear from all the Petty doubters right now, where you at? He's been solid tonight, like he has the last few weeks.
  7. Of course they had to give a soft as [censored] free kick. How is that holding?
  8. He should be rest assured that I am also disappointed.... That he still get's paid to talk into a mircophone, he's [censored] moronic.
  9. Where's all the pessimistic [censored] bags now? Go on, speak up.
  10. Your having a [censored] laugh... at least they know how to tackle.
  11. Get Melksham out of the [censored] team.
  12. Ham replied to Demonland's post in a topic in Melbourne Demons
    Steven May came back earlier than anticipated.
  13. Ham replied to Demonland's post in a topic in Melbourne Demons
    Out: Melksham In: Sparrow
  14. Apart from Melksham, it's a good looking team.
  15. Shocking calls in the end, the crowd won that game for Adelaide.
  16. Ham replied to Lord Nev's post in a topic in Melbourne Demons
    To be fair, Gawny lives in Blairgowrie, he's certainly going to appreciate a trip to Casey Fields over going to Gosch's Paddock.
  17. He is FAR more versatile. Applies more pressure, moves up and down the ground more/better, get's himself in more contests, is better under his knee's. The acquisition of BB after 2019 would've been a knee jerk reaction, but would've made sense. The acquisition of BB after 2020 just didn't make any sense.
  18. Ham replied to Demonland's post in a topic in Melbourne Demons
    You mean in 2019 when everyone played like [censored] and 2020 when he was played in the wrong position?
  19. Ham replied to WERRIDEE's post in a topic in Melbourne Demons
    Would much rather Salem over Kelly.
  20. Ham replied to Demonland's post in a topic in Melbourne Demons
    This, 100%. I can't believe people want him back in the team, but at the same time want Nev and Jones out. Melksham was good for 1.5 years (2017/2018) and 2018 looked a lot better as the whole team was performing and bringing other players up, that otherwise wouldn't have been. He is incredibly past it and shouldn't be played anymore.
  21. Good win.
  22. Geez, these threads are a cesspool for the complete and utter donkeys.
  23. This one's a ripper.
  24. Ham replied to Lord Nev's post in a topic in Melbourne Demons
    Goody will still play him. BFF.