Tricky

Thanks...

That's the point isn't it? Rightly or wrongly, it was a strategic decision to bring in a tall? A plug n play draft pick sitting in the forward line isn't much good in a side functioning the way Melbourne are currently. Dropping a C.Judd in the middle would be a different story of course.. "They (tall players) were all there at the pick. This year the planets aligned a little bit ... [Lucas] Cook's kicking and decision-making was as good there was in this draft." BARRY PRENDERGAST, recruiting manager 2010 draft by club

Have I seen MFCFS somewhere also?

Thought the same thing watching him last night. He was the difference...

The same longer plan that includes Jack Watts. Fwiw I'm not defending it necessarily, just sayin the decision seems to fit the plan, as opposed to merely being worried the kid was some kind of nasty headline waiting to happen.

so replace this stat with the inside 50 stat and get the same result...we sucked

Yes there were some potential question marks over character but I doubt the decision was anywhere near that simplistic. Was it also that 12 < 26? We weren't the only ones to pass and the decision to take Cook is in keeping with the longer term plan.

Great to seem some perspective amongst the frustration - good post. Again, well said. Ditto. I never expected to win this game but the extent of the complete and utter on-field chaos was embarrassing unacceptable.

Never mind, i get your point - we sucked.

Is that tackles inside our 50?

Night all...

are you calling Karmichael a mongrel?

I know, Frawley, wtf - where is the cry emoticon

Yeah, i can't single him out

Yes, we are playing foosball

or at least near...

mute button

lol

I agree the free for in the back was there. I also agree they pay the head-duck as high way too often - actually it drives me nuts and players are exploiting it more than ever. I'm surprised you thought it was there... I didn't realise Roos was commenting the game, only saw the OTC stuff.

Jamar Q&A leading up to 100th

FWIW the free kick you are talking about was paid for in the back, not high contact. It was a text book case of the player with the ball ducking his head. This detail was missed by most, so much so that Geesham released a statement to clear it up (which they also read on that show).

Actually I think Beamer did that all by himself....

He's a chance apparently. readme

Wait...Moloney is gone? Ahhh, you meant that metaphorically, right? He certainly isn't painting that picture on-field.

put the crack pipe down and step away from the keyboard.... but seriously, very creative use of the style buttons