rpfc

It's not just that, it's the way he answers questions in the best possible way. Clarkson will look at you sideways and try to 'figure you out' - hell, we all do that - but Roos just seems to take every question at face value and not be offended by the implicity of any question. And there were a few of those questions when he was thinking of being coach of this club, and certainly when he took over.

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2013-06-06/evans-signs-new-deal-with-dees I don't know if I am following what you are saying. Both were 2nd year rookies in 2012 and they were given seperate contract lengths from 2013. Evans with a 1 year that he extended for two as the article above stipulates, and Nicho got a two year contract.

I had heard that for agreeing to spend their second year (2012) on the RL, they were assured contracts on the PL after that season. Evans evidently got 2013 (as he re-signed this year), and Nicholson must have got 2013 and 2014. So in essence, he got a 3 year contract.

3+1 Has to meet certain criteria for the 4th.

Yes, and this may blow your mind, but I believe the Nicholson contract is a legacy, not of Neeld, but of Bailey... Only at Melbourne...

Apologies for the Nicholson confusion, I made the assumption that we gave him and Evans the same contract but they didn't. I always worry a bit when we don't release details of contract years because it usually means they have been given a contract The Footy World would think is too long... Again, any inside knowledge on Riley, Michie, and Tyson would be welcome.

Sadly JFK is dead. He was shot in Dallas some 50 years ago. He also had back issues so he probably was never going to be a long term answer as small forward.

I paraphrased. You are still dismissing me, not the argument. 'Everyone wearing white' is not only not convincing, it isn't true. Coloured jumpers were used early in the 1860s (Geelong did not wear a white jumper until 1862/63 and only for one year. They then moved to blue and white when we stole their colours - or the other way around - in 1872) when early clubs were formed. Caps were worn but the the jumpers were all distinct. http://australianfootball.com/articles/view/Football%253A%2BThe%2BAustralian%2Bgame/284

That's what I am doing - discussing it. Many don't know about our white heritage and I think we should embrace it. Dismissing the fact that it is because of cricket whites isn't good enough for me. Geelong didn't just use their whites, they wore a blue jumper. This is a club born out of a cricket club. I happen to be an MCC member who is very proud of the role of both clubs in the foundation of the game. This heritage is also linked through the away shorts worn by all clubs - 'white'. Maybe the AFL is right to push white given the games foundations. You don't have to be convinced, but dismissing my view as opportunistic and hollow is not fair in my opinion.

Yes, they would. If you cannot play an offensive or, failing that, defensive forward role - you won't play as a small forward.

If people want to 'point score' what is the issue? We all do it. Even your good self.

We are all in the sand pit at the moment. Did you read my other post about the significance of the white when other clubs, namely Geelong, wore blue jumpers at that time. Why is it so hollow for me to make the argument that white is a part of of our heritage?

Is that with, or without, red shorts?

The MFC has no memory of this jumper...

Posters swapped 'pats on the back' via posts before the like button and there is still that now - Moonshadow/BBO/Biffen/and others constantly do this. If you are simply talking about posters that like the same posters over and over again that would be because they think alike. The button meant one less post. Those that like personal attacks are judged as are those that make 'rah-rah' posts to get likes. It may be more revealing of what the community thinks of an idea or argument as it meant that a post of agreement that was never going to be typed is now a 'like.' That would make it more honest. And this is an internet forum of anonymous posters - sincerity has no place here...

It's a forum. People are going to agree with other people. The like button made it neater and easier to read and navigate.

It is good to have for when we debate and there are two diametrically opposed arguments and you want to largely agree with one side. When that happens we would have 25 'I agree' posts and it was cleaned up by the like button.

Good work. We will get to 40k pretty early and then hit a wall I reckon.

Why don't we leave the jumper thumping until the kid does something?

What do you think a small forward does for most of the game? They are asked to spend 90 minutes of the game looking to, when we have the ball - get to the feet of the targets up forward, and when we don't have the ball - chase and harrass the HBFs trying to clear the football from our forward line. The secondary role is a rotation through the middle. If you cannot do the primary function - you won't play as a small forward. Ideally, he would be able to do both. But you are kidding yourself if you think that we are going to leave the better small forward out of the team for someone who isn't as good a small forward but plays the secondary role better.

Brad Miller tackled Matthew Whelan during a game against Carlton. My dad struggles with Essendon games (when we are not in white) judging by his reaction to who has just won the footy...

Just because it's the same colours reversed doesn't mean it's the same. If I had my way we wouldn't wear anything other than the current home jumper. I am looking for the most acceptable abomination. Reversing the colours is not going to be acceptable and it would look terrible. White looks terrible. The club use to wear it though, we should own that aspect of our history. We never wore a blue yolk with a red jumper.

So put white in our navy blue? It's not our colour and it looked awful.

'Nup'? The ability of a good small forward to go into the midfield is ideal and most desired. However, a good small forward will spend most of his time in the forward line, playing one of the hardest positions on the ground. It is far more desirable to have a player in that position that knows what they are doing for the 90 mins they will be in the forward line to the 30 mins they will be in the middle. You talk about a 'rounded' player but seem to reject the fact that half of that circle would be their work as a small forward. This isn't counterintuitive - you need to be able to do well that to which you do for the most time.

Yes, but having someone who knows what they are doing in the fwd line is more important than whether they have an idea what they are doing for the 30 mins they spend up the ground.