rpfc

KS has moved into off field leadership aswell, but my concern is with onfield leadership. And that is something I can judge. I don't like pointers, do what you are telling others to do. I don't like frontrunners. If you stay at the back of a pack (on the defensive side) it tells me that you are committed to running back if we don't get the ball, and being apart of the offense (as the ball is invariably taken out the back of a pack by a team so that they can then move forward). I see alot of pointing and yelling from Green, Bruce, Moloney, Jamar, and Davey when things are not going our way, but not a great deal of action on what they are yelling to their younger teammates. I also don't like the way Bruce handballs to less experienced players under more pressure to deliver a kick he should take the responsibility for. If you think that your left over 30m with little pressure is less a chance of helping your team than Jones or Trengove with 4 players near them, then it is time to hang up the boots, Cameron.

You're excused. But it still isn't irony.

That isn't irony...

Rivers has always had, and Green has developed, a willingness to disregard their own safety in contests. And I realise that Macca also is courageous. Ugh. Why are we stuck on courage here? That does not encapsulate leadership. I still maintain Macca is our only first rate leader. And I still maintain our dearth of leaders is affecting our onfield performance, and will, regrettably, effect the development of our young talent. Maybe they can lead themselves from next year? A leadership group where no-one older than 26 and a majority younger than 23?

Green has developed into the second most courageous player on our list behind Rivers but that isn't leadership in and of itself. I love Brad Green the player but I want him to plead to his teammates to play on and run from half back trying to get a handball he may not receive, I don't like the way he will situate himself across half back when we are in trouble and look at getting cheap kicks. Let the kids do that easy task, I want him to run and guide his teammates through his actions rather than a flailing arm that tells his lesser experienced teammates where to chase his kicks. You chase, you run, you do what you're asking others to do and you'll be a leader my son. Watch Macca get a cheapie and then gut bust for 80m to provide an option for a teammate without options because others have seized up. It's inspiring, or at least it should be.

You tell me how he leads - what you see him do.

Green is courageous, plays consistently well, and is an important player. That does not make him a good leader of men. He does not get a pass, and I'm staggered that we are letting a 29 year old off the hook so easily. No wonder we have such poor leadership, we only ask so much of them, and we're satisfied.

Green has played consistently well this season. That does not make him a good onfield leader, nor does it give him an exception for what happened on Saturday. Leadership isn't playing well when 15 of your teammates are playing well. Leadership is driving those 15 players to play better when they are flat. Parking yourself off the half back flank and picking up cheapies isn't what Macca does. Run your guts out. Don't sit back and direct where others should run. Get to the bottom off the pack. Don't wait forward of a pack pleading for the pill. Take the tackle and give it properly to a teammate. Don't indiscriminately handball or kick just to avoid contact. And whoever mentioned Sylvia is kidding themselves - the bloke can barely lead himself let alone anyone else.

Should those same senior players offer Bailey an apology, BB? Our onfield leaders are great off-field leaders. And if that isn't blunt enough for the masses out there - Bruce, Green, Moloney, Davey, Jamar, and Rivers talk a great game and deliver very little when the chips are down on the field. The fact that I was willing Scully, Trengove, McKenzie, Grimes, and Watts to pull one out of their collectives, instead of the previous 6 is a pathetic state of affairs. McDonald is the only exception. And that is why he is Captain, Cameron and Brad - I know you have been wondering.

If only Dave Schwarz was on the coaching panel...

None of the above. Play another runner. Why do we automatically keep the 22nd spot in the team for an underperforming back-up ruck? For the handful of instances Jamar isn't in the centre, rove to the opposition ruckman. We'd be doing that with PJ anyway...

I wouldn't put it past me...

Yeah, he'll be a great ruckman. But as I posted before that particular draft - we need a 196cm CHF/FF with great hands and smarts to convert the ridiculous amount of footy that Scully, Trengove, Morton, Grimes, McKenzie, Gysberts, and Blease will shove down his throat for a decade. Comprehend?

We were sh!te today but, really, wake up people. Most on here did their pointless "where do we think we will end up?" exercise at the start of the year and expected 7-9 wins for the year. But as the 15-13 losses come rolling in we don't see the disconnect. Our talent is young and we have poor onfield leaders - this leads to losses like those to the Hawks, Roos, and Eagles. 3 wins, 2 honourable losses (Oh, no! Not honourable losses! They give me the vapours - there is no such thing as an honourable loss!), and 3 disappointing losses. I see it as the inevitable birthpangs of the embryonic team we are building. But that means I letting them off the hook, doesn't it?! Oh, noes! And why don't you try and be a forward coach with Jurrah, Petterd, Wonaeamirri, and Morton missing, Miller out of form, a disinterested Sylvia, a Robbo-incarnate in Hughes, the glorified doorman in PJ, and a 19 year old playing his 4th game. Oh, yeah! It's effing easy...

I only just now have seen your reply in the Watts thread concerning PJ, DD. Here is a snippet: From any reasonable perspective, Johnson is in the 22... because like any good footy judge knows (including you) the Ruckmen are not competing with the midfielders for a place in the starting side. Johnson becomes redundant when we play, say, the Hawks... Or any other side playing only 1 ruckman, because... wait for it... he's a supporting ruckman. And a good one at that. It's typical 'ology/'land groupthink that suggests Johnson isn't up to it. Johnson is redundant as soon as he runs onto the field. I'm sorry for the bloke but he is one of the unfortunate few who wished he was a foot shorter than he is. He is a winger (a poor one) in a ruckmans body. Jamar has his tapwork and contested marking but PJ has nothing to set him apart from my extra runner that would allow him to be in our high-octane run and share gameplan. He does not take contested marks, his tapwork is sub-par, and his second efforts are not impressive. If my extra runner is used as third man up in ruck contests around the ground, suddenly he (Bail, Jetta, Cheney, McNamara, whoever) is more effective in the ruck than PJ! And don't scare the masses by saying that Watts will be back up ruck if Jamar has to go alone. In the few centre contests that Jamar isn't involved in - Warnock, Frawley, Garland, Rivers, or No One will be contesting the ruck before they throw Watts in there. I'm sorry but it isn't group think just because everyone thinks a certain way except you. It is time to abandon ship, DD. He is not good enough.

Pack?! I should have said 'rolling scrum.'

You are asking way too much of whichever young player you think can do what Moloney does. He's got a few more years yet of good footy. I would much prefer a 29 year old Moloney at the bottom of a pack than a 21 yr old Scully or Trengove.

That is saying nothing. Less than nothing. He has "The Project" Spencer, "The Crock" Meesen, and "The Lost" Martin to contend with. I would prefer Jamar spend 60% of the game following and the other 40% in the forward line coming up for every bounce. And play another runner.

It's a government decision, and I would rather clubs benefit rather than some [censored], although the [censored] will always get his un-fair share.

Shouldn't you be contrite? I think there is a disturbing trend in today's society that a simple deflection is sufficient if they have said or done something wrong. Why can't we be man enough to say they screwed up, acted like an idiot, made stupid remarks etc.? Catherine Deveny effs up and says her freedoms have been imfringed upon. Rubbish. She was free to tweet, TA was free to fire her, and she was free to apologise and not make the mistake again. She chose the free path of self righteousness and aggrandisement, and the rest of us are free to say to her - STFU. Huh, my chest is lighter...

Watch our game plan, it would fall apart with out the blokes out the back getting 'cheap' kicks. If AD is doing less, it is because others are doing more. Once Scully gets the tag, or Trengove, watch AD run rampant.

I don't know about Watts but I can't stand the "Dunn was OK" nonsense. He has shown little over the journey and we are going to give him a pass because he has outdone his pathetic standards? Give me a break. Bate is his contemporary and continues to show more than Dunn and steadily improves each year (even if the masses refuse to see it). Bail, Cheney, McNamara, Gysberts, Jetta, and Watts are reasons why Dunn being "OK" isn't enough for him to keep his spot. And one last point - he was rubbish on Friday - kept on giving up the ball and making poor decisions. Give a kid with a future a go.

Isn't it amazing progress that we have graduated from willing the senior coach to move aside to criticising our vastly improved kick-in routine... 6 weeks is an effing eternity.

If that is the crux of your point than we agree. And you are Captain Obvious... "Whenver there is a need to say something inherent or implicit to a conversation - there will be Captain Obvious!" I love you, WYL. But jeez...

If anything, Grimes is too good a decision maker and kick. He will look, as Davey does and TJ did, at delivering passes that are needle threading and opposition breaking and not what the mere mortal kicks in the AFL attempt. Grimes was steady and balanced and played a great game on Friday night, if he makes a mistake he more the makes up for it when his other forward thrusts charge through the opposition.