Redleg

Spot on!

Absolutely. Also even though many will disagree I feel he should retire and go out on on top, on his terms. He has played good footy this year before his injury, but is turning 34 and age catches up with all of us. We have a number of young players who need to be tried out or fitted into the team and I strongly believe that this should be his last few games of a great career with the MFC.

Unfortunately for all concerned, has turned out to be the worst trade deal we have ever done, based on return.

Agree!

Who says? Why can't you sign a contract that starts at the end of your current one?

Nice work.

You have named the two boys that I have followed closely this year. I prefer to concentrate on a lesser known player each season and hope that they improve during the year. Both have done very well and if not for injury Rohan would have played many more games. Jordie has far exceeded my optimistic expectations. I believe he is now an essential player for the team with his tackling and clearances, 12 & 7 to lead the team against the Swans. Rohan has also shown patches of very good play and only needs an injury free run to keep improving. I hope they have long careers with the Dees and are part of the success that will come our way.

That was the year we lost it for salary cap infringements. We still did very well with our draft despite the penalty.

What about "Hi Fi". ( JB Hi Fi ).

Your last line is spot on. I thought he played very well and created many opportunities for us with his defensive pressure and passing. Moloney and Trengove might need another week and Junior was not in the best players for Casey and they may not want him to fly this week.

He is injured.

What about Walker, his looked bad and he got a reprimand. Could have crippled the Swan player.

I am not talking about trading our first pick and am not talking about a Jonathan Brown but a Leigh Brown type. I am saying that instead of taking for our tall picks only young boys who will require years to develop like Watts and Fitzpatrick we look at one who is a mature strong slighly older player. As I said he could be taken as a mature age rookie or as a normal rookie if young enough. I am talking about mixing up our philosophy of only young players for one pick. There are a few good 20-23 year old VFL playes for example who could possibly fill this role. I just think we need a strong body now to help the young guys along.

No, Leigh Brown is not coming to us, but as I have posted previously he is the type of player we need for the next couple of seasons. Big and strong and capable of bursts in the ruck, or playing up forward and kicking a couple of goals or helping set them up, or even down back on a gorilla, he is the type of player we desperately need while our young talls mature. While our young talls take time to physically mature a hard strong body IMO would be invaluable. He is keeping Fraser out of the team and that shows his value and versatility. IMO we should be prepared to take a player of this type even though he will probably only be useful for 2-4 years. Whether we trade for one or find one in the VFL, SANFL, WAFL etc is up to the recruiters. You might even get one as a mature age rookie. I don't see the value when we need to start making an impression to keep taking only young talls who need years to develop. A guy like Brown could really help the younger players now and that is worth going after IMO. Sometimes you have to recruit a particular player for the NOW and not for LATER. PS. I am not advocating chasing Brown but someone like him.

Agree. This is a sad day for his family and the club. My condolences to all close to him.

Poor journalism as he also said in another article that all of the Dees 50 metre penalties were for minor cribbing on the mark. Actually most were blatant penalties for a player being taken to the ground after a mark. Also the inference has been that we got 7 goals dierectly from these penalties when in reality 2-3 of them were close to goal before the 50 was given and IMO made no difference. PS. Gieschen and now all of the commentators have (reluctantly) said that all of the penalties were correct decisions.

Summed up beautifully.

Agree.

Just started reading then have you? What about if they gave up pick 50 for Bruce and then they retain an extra spot for an uncontracted player that they may want. They wouldn't want or need pick 50 but they may have their eyes on more than the 8 players they are allowed as uncontracted picks. Do you get it now? Obviously it is just another rumour and we all know most of them are wrong, however, Cam and his new family might like a couple of years by the sea in the sunshine.

It was replayed on Foxtel sunday night. PS. Love the first part of your name.

If you are correct and both parties want it to happen then IMO it would be most likely done as a trade rather than an uncontracted player selection. Cam is a Life Member and has had a great career with Melbourne and if he wanted to head north for a couple of years I am sure he would want us compensated immediately and to ensure he left on good terms. A swap for a draft pick could be negotiated fairly easily as the GC will have plenty of them. That will leave open their chance of another uncontracted player from another club.

Your Hawk player got it wrong, wrong club and wrong Jordan. It is actually the Tigers' Jordan McMahon. They are looking for a player who can kick a goal to win a game after the siren, from about 45 metres out. PS. Ask your Hawk player if Campbell Brown has a liking for the sea and sun?

I saw that too and thought it was pathetic. Given that Bateman called for the ball the umpire should have used some common sense. Byrnes should also have explained to the umpire and even spoken to the other umpires to sort it out. That is not what footy is about.

Incorrect. Read the rule again. If you have had prior opportunity you must get rid of the ball by kick or handball "immediately" you are correctly tackled. That means you get a chance as long as you take it "immediately". That is where so many umpires get it wrong. As soon as a tackle is laid, if there was prior opportunity they pay the free before allowing the tackled player to get it away. The rule allows you a very small window of time to dispose, it is not sudden death. The umpires also stuff up the other alternative as well. If you have had no prior opportunity and are tackled you can avoid a free by attempting to dispose. What often happens now is that a player is on the ground and the ball is held to him or even held by another player or he is literally buried beneath bodies with no possible way of disposing of the ball and is freed for not attempting to dispose. Totally incorrect decision.

Just watched the replay and noticed that they appeared with 8 minutes to go in the game. Smart birds as they arrive just as the fans are about to leave and the scraps are then theirs to grab.