old55

As posted by someone wise - desperately searching for "Dislike this" button again

Well that's just not going to happen under the current plan - have a read of Mick Malthouse's assessment of the Collingwood game plan changes and think about Melbourne under Neeld in that context. I was disappointed to see Watts not even contest one particular marking opportunity along the boundary line. He needs to be a major marking presence there with the way we play.

I realise that the midfield is the problem but it's strange that McDonald trained all pre-season with the forwards and is playing back and Sellar all pre-season with the backs and is now a ruckman-forward. I don't actually have a problem with these roles for these players, in fact I though McDonald was really good back last year under Viney. I guess they realised that Martin and Clark aren't contested marking threats, Watts forward has been abandoned for now and McDonald is just not ready for that forward role so they've had to try Sellar there. A lot of plans have turned to ash. I think Moloney is a very big out against teams like Richmond.

I'd like to see a real reference for this and not just hearsay ...

He didn't pick himself at 13 - take it to the Craig Cameron thread or the player development thread.

Agree Hawkins was fantastic on Monday (and in last year's finals), he's really backed it up when there was early significant doubt he could attck the contest.

It's all about the midfield. Richmond has class but some of it is inexperienced. Jamar is going up against a plodder, not his master, this is the situation Moloney often thrives in. We're not without a chance if we can really get on top in the midfield. I hope we stick rigidly to the game plan for 120 minutes whatever happens.

According to Demonland Fitzy was a delist dud too until quite recently.

Rubbish article - as Choko says BP went after good ball using skills, endurance and contested ball winning skills - universally useful attributes. To make a case based on the narrow focus of Naitanui v Watts v Hurley and Shuey v Blease is ridiculous. I notice he quickly glossed over Strauss v Swift. What about Gysberts and Tapscott? There's a prevailing view that our recruiting is crap and that BP is a dud - this will be proven incorrect when sufficient time plays out for the players he selected. As Clint says - good players with a balance of attributes is what is required - if as many would like - we now go solely for one-paced endurance bulls we'll be sorry.

Very keen to hear from you exactly which GC midfielders are out of contract that we should target - there's Caddy and .... ????

Wellingham was BOG against us last QB when Swan and Thomas were out - do you really think that Gysberts, Blease, Strauss and Tapscott are superior players to Wellingham, Beams and Sidebottom - that's the level of pick you're so worried about "wasting". You're going to end up with another 18 yo.

Why would a decent mid move clubs? 1. Chance to play in a flag winning side 2. Big, big $$$$$s 3. give a 2nd stringer the chance to be the main man and get paid accordingly I don't think we're offering #1 in the medium term, Clark came for #2 and we must have some limitations in this area now. I think #3 is a possible attraction for us. Wellingham, Beams or Sidebottom might get squeezed out at Collingwood if they re-sign Cloke on big bucks. I can't see one of St.Kilda's guns like Dal Santo, Goddard or Montagna being faintly interested in joining MFC. I don't think we're going to be able to add a mature gun. I think we're going to have to build incrementally from within - develop our existing talent e.g. Jones, Trengove, Gysberts, Blease, - transfer suitable players from other areas e.g. Grimes, Watts, Howe, - maximise our draft opportunity, we're going to take Viney and should have a pick inside the top 5 in the "super-draft" - trade our mid first rounder for a 2nd stringer e.g. Wellingham, Beams or Sidebottom

My line is - 96pts, - 4 goals a quarter.

FMD - you couldn't make crazy [censored] like this up if you tried!

He needs to be able to mark in the forward line, that's integral to his role as "2nd ruck". He can't do it now but the encouraging thing is that he gets to the contest which is more than half the battle.

I've re-considered. We're going into the cauldron over there so we need to cook carefully. There's no better place for Moloney Green and Davey to show redemption, if we ditch them after R1 and only one chance, then there's probably no way back for them - ever. I think we need to show a little more "blind faith". Green and Davey may get a bit more space to operate in at Subi, I think it's crucifying Green to ask him to play medium forward with our kick-long strategy, the only possible way he can succeed there is marking on the lead, he needs to be played up in the midfield. I've taken out Blease and Green from the forward line, Watts needs to spend some more time forward in addition to the midfield role he played on the weekend. In: Sellar, Couch Out: Macdonald, Blease

You've completely missed the point.

That's a disgrace. How about talking to Mark first Grant? Thomas " After talking to Mark I withdrew my comments" so withdrawal makes it all OK, does it?

The emergencies from this week: Sellar, Dunn, Couch The Casey bests: McDonald, Morton, Couch, Sellar, Bennell Injured: Petterd Couch and Sellar are likely ins, with Dunn McDonald, Morton, Bennell, Petterd all in consideration. Moloney was pantsed by Collingwood's 6th best midfielder's kid brother, I don't think he'll get a 2nd opportunity - in Couch. The backline has a structural problem without Sellar in there, one of Rivers or Macdonald has to come out IMO. Green just cannot play in that forward role with way we go long, he was good in the midfield against Collingwood in the NAB Cup and may warrant a run through there, otherwise it's career over - Dunn or McDonald in. The FD was clearly not happy with Blease since he was subbed - Petterd in. But really the problem is the midfield and Couch is the only midfielder there and he's not going to solve our problems, particularly at Subi. Gysberts lack of engine will hurt him there too so I don't see him in either. We could move Grimes to the midfield and bring Bennell or Morton into the backline. So: In: Couch, Sellar, Bennell, Dunn, Petterd Out: Moloney, Macdonald, Green, Blease, Davey.

Clark took Brisbane's key defender Maguire and Stef had the 2nd tall (note that if Brisbane wasn't forced to use Merrett forward he would've had a different opponent). Stef made it to a heap of marking contests but can't take a contested mark. He's a far better option than say Paul Johnson was who just didn't even make the contest. If he can learn to clunk a decent percentage then he'll be a very effective player. Right now he doesn't judge the flight too well.

Merged with Locker Room: http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/29382-stef-martin/

I think you're in for some pain

Saturday was a special form of torture. We played contested and stoppage football and got murdered in the stoppages. The midfield was the big problem. No wonder Neeld was tearing his hair out, his premier mid got pantsed by his last year 6th rated mid's kid brother. We were smashed in the clearances - not just the numbers but the cleanness of them. There's no Pendlebury, Swan, Ball, Thomas or even Wellingham. I thought the backline looked well structured early until the avalanche from the midfield started. But I want to see Sellar in there, we're just not big enough. The forward line was mixed. Clark's not Travis Cloke but played an anchor role. So Stef got to a heap of contests but just cannot take a contested mark - but Brisbane's key defender was in their forward line. Green just can't play that role any more. Howe can't just go for mark of the year all day. Davey and Blease were not dangerous. Moloney, Green, Davey and Rivers got ditched from the leadership group and some are worried about Neeld's judgement? If Simon Black played for us and Stef held a third of the marks he got to we would have been very close. Should Neeld change his plan to suit our personnel or develop the personnel to suit his plan? We going to get the latter first and then some of the former. Hardwick started out with umpteen straight losses 3 years ago and we're probably on a similar path. I think Rohan Connolly is on the right track in today's Age. Buckle up.

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/7415/newsid/131813/default.aspx I don't think he means negotiate a consensus.

What would you prefer ahead of "comply"?