rpfc

Congratulations, and who knew this would come on the 21st of December, but this is officially the oddest comment on Land this year! It was a tight race between, well, other Dee-luded comments but also Freak, and others too...

DC - What happens when Frawley gets injured? You replace him someone who isn't as good. You cannot replace your best players. And I hope we aren't going down the track of 'depth' because good depth is a contradiction in terms. Having a decent 28th player on your list is great if the 16th best player gets injured, but you cannot replace your best players. As GGR said before - Garland is a tall defender in this new world of fluid backlines and definitions of roles. I don't think Garland is best suited for a flank, I think any blind monkey can play there (hence why I want Grimes to have a crack in the midfield). I want Garland to beat Fev and make him get a spray because his man is racking up the effective disposals forward of the centre. I want him to continue to do what he is doing.

Well that is an odd one. At least his parents can vouch for the usefulness of the trip then... Actually, I was being kind to Cameron here. Whispers to journos can be attributed to the player aswell as their reps. It's no better either way. And you?! This is the crux of what I am saying and I notice you didn't bother replying. He effed up. We'll see him at a b+f in 10 years.

Well, he can't do what Garland can do. It stands to reason, and I will be more than willing to get into a metaphysical, semantical, or philosophical argument to back this up, that a player whose primary responsibility is the negation of his opponent will be able to exert more influence in an offensive manner. He plays on Fev, Fev doesn't like to worry about what his opponent is doing and usually they are just standing by his side, he likes that. Garland doesn't do that, he will run off and create and be all the more damaging because he is playing on Fev. It's Backline Play 101.

I didn't know that?! How did you come across that, because I know that Cameron didn't go. Where have you been? Nixon is his representative and your club had to put up with him giving Ralph material in the Hun about our 'disrespectful' contract terms (when he leaves for less) and our awful treatment of Junior (while Bruce chatted with Hawthorn before said 'awful' treatment). And when isn't it? When you are told by someone his folks went to China? When Ralph writes it in the paper? When Clarkson is quoted? When Pelchen blurts it out at a premium members event at the HawkS? Things are rarely win-win. Things are rarely a zero-sum game either. But we lost a vice captain, and indirectly, a captain because of this nonsense. And we were dragged through the mud by the most vile player manager out there. Cameron didn't handle this well at all - and he should have reigned in his pitbull. He didn't and he lives with the consequences.

Pinch hit. When does a pinch hitter become a starter? (sorry to finish off the baseball metaphor for those lost) He has been doing this well for a couple of years now, helping to lower the average score against by 5 goals since 2008. I have said it before and Doggo isolated it - there is a massive benefit in not just having a negative player who might have a couple centimetres and kgs on Colin. The value is working over the Fevs of this world so that they don't just have to worry about beating a bloke - they have to worry about where their bloke is when their team doesn't have the footy. Make Garland a flanker, which he has not been, (and I am pretty certain won't be) and you will end up with him being shadowed and it will limit his effectiveness.

He can hold it down. And it would diminish his value for him to play on a flank. I would prefer he mitigate and run off one the 'focal points' then be placed on a flank and have some Dunn-equivalent shadow him around and negate his influence. There are plusses in not 'freeing up' players.

Hey, Neil. I just don't understand why we have to throw money at mute, pant-less bears when we have so many great footballers playing in second tier leagues waiting for a chance?! Couldn't agree more. Now we are off to our next caller who is complaining about the fluffiness of kittens these days. Caller? They are just too fluffy, Neil. Too fluffy.

Because you can have a rookie on $30k a year whereas the minimum is around $65k (ish). And, yeah, it is a little counter intuitive. And they are having a chat as Ox said, about getting rid of the RL. Although the VL is good one as it keeps the older players in the game longer. As half the salary of two 10 year players can be paid outside the cap. Assuming they sign the contract.... (I would put an emoticon here but I don't use emoticons)

Well posted. Frawley and Garland as focal point defenders. Rivers helping them out. It is what we will go with for the foreseeable future.

By being non-existent at training? Sorry for being flippant but people won't forgive/forget Davey's 50s but Green not being in the leadership group at the start of last year (09) for being a ghost and it's a point of pride? He's a great player is Brad, but don't PDMNATMIR.

No-one said you couldn't give your opinion, JCB. Here's mine - Rivers is slow and one dimensional (it's a bloody good dimension though), MacDonald is servicable but has noithing on Garland (especially playiong on CHFs), Garland played as a KPD for most of 2010, and Davis is an baby taken late in the draft. And BTW, who do you think are Collingwood's KPDs if O'Brien is a HBF? They had Brown and who in the finals? Maxwell? He is their Rivers, sits in the hole without an opponent.

One vet means that a rookie can play Rd 1 without an LTI. After Rd 11 another rookie can play without an LTI.

I have thought, maybe, just maybe, your comments will be taken at face value and if you believe you have had a conversation with Chris on a bad day you shouldn't mention it on a forum? Or you shouldn't comment on his personality being abrasive?

Rivers isn't quick enough, Warnock isn't good enough. Nor can they hurt the opposition (and their direct opposition ie. making Fev work - and didn't he hate poor Colin's performance on him this season) the way Garland does.

What do you want to do with Rivers then? Where is this 'better than Garland KPD' going to come from? How can you afford him? Who do you trade? Honestly, some of you think this is a video game - where you can mix and match to your hearts content and change players roles on a whim. Garland is a mobile and versatile KPD who can be very effective in a rebounding capacity. And if he is playing on a 'CHF' and is damaging in that capacity then it is a win-win as that 'CHF' must then work hard the other way. Note: I put CHF in inverted commas because I don't want to get hung up on a semantical argument about whether we still have CHFs anymore... We still have tall blokes that mark the footy don't we?!

It's already happened... Waahhhh!! He's hasn't signed by Round 1 and you know what that means? It means he is going!!! He's going! I hate him! We didn't need him in the first place! Blease will replace him! I will replace him! Why didn't we do enough to keep him?! Should Bailey go because of it?! Chris Connolly is so abrasive! All I did was act like a [censored] and he was so abrasive! The girl at the club is so emotional! She cries whenever I yell down the phone at her! I'm conflicted, and on a horse.

04-07 he played a different role to the one he is playing now. 08 was wrecked thorugh injury. Obviously 09 and 10 were very solid years with 09 being exceptional. I would step back from my verbose championing of Davey over this period but I don't think Aaron is as inconsistent as you recall. He is one player where the ball doesn't need to be in his hands many times for him to damaging. I still stand by the 'get over Aaron's acts' point. Too many on here just bring up the 50s he gives away from time to time and not the reason why he is giving them away - because he is being harrassed constantly by the other team (no help from his more experienced teammates) because he is the only player the other team had to worry about.

Aaron Davey doesn't lift? What about from 2007-2010? Who was the most consistent player in those years? Who lifted the team and the fans with their run and dare and skill? I think Davey is undersold by his own fans. More should sit behind the bench and see how hard he runs, and that isn't hard? That isn't courageous? People need to stop harping on the few churlish and childish things he has done in the past and get over it. He was targetted by other clubs beause he was the only one they had to worry about in the dark days of 08 and 09. Just get over it.

Makes me wonder what Bobby said to him...

Heh. What?!

It most definitely is. But Colin has played, and will play on the best forwards (cue the versatility of him and Frawley) tall, medium, or small. He is a key defender for the MFC, he is quick enough, strong enough and has been groomed for this versatile role - in matches and in training. He will develop to become a major player in our backline for a decade (foot problems permitting). I think most of us are in agreement. Case closed.

Yes, it's like hearing voices in your head. As opposed to where exactly - hearing voices in your legs? That's proper mental. I'm Jimmy Carr, thank you.

I have no idea why you are continuing with this 'sleeping' meme - if I am sleeping, you're in a coma... Campbell was/is a ruckman. If he was back there then it was the same way that Jeff White was back there. Rivers will play on those 'men mountains' unless Campbell is in the ruck and following his man down there. AND when HAVE you EVER said THAT Garland COULD play MIDFIELD? Wing is midfield, otherwise Davey isn't a midfielder.

Wide awake up here. He has played on the second tall. Frawley gets the best tall and Garland gets the second best. They try to get Rivers on a resting ruckman or slower tall. Warnock is not a weapon in terms of using the footy when we turn it over and can only play a negative role. Campbell is a ruckman and won't play a defensive role at all, I have no idea where you are getting this idea from. I have heard nothing from the FD that would see Campbell as anything other than a ruckman to support Jamar. And put Garland into our midfield? No spots for him in our blue chip midfield.