Redleg

I think it shows how one bad draft can really affect a side.

Hate to admit it, but neither am I.

We all know who was the worst of that group.

Without revisiting the absurdity of what happened at the Tribunal in the "Headland case", the mere fact that the AFL through its tribunal has now sanctioned violence as allowable, if one is "provoked" by "sledging", ( spoken words. ), notwithstanding that it is outside the law of the land, is to try and rewrite the law and place itself above the law. You can now do on a football field what you can't do in the street. It is not a defence to assault to say someone made derogatory comments to you, as it is not self defence. You are expected by the law to walk away and not assault the perpetrator. In my view the AFL has now brought the game into disrepute. It will also make it harder to get younger players to play, as they can be assaulted on a football field and the aggressor can get off without sanction by claiming the victim provoked him with words. This is an unmitigated disgrace. It makes the Moloney conviction for striking where the video showed no contact pale into insignificance.

When has Godfey ever hit anyone?

Rhino your points are well made. Always good to have the discussion.

That is interesting, because a stat in the paper claimed us as the worst converter from kick ins, in the AFL. It has also been one of my bugbears for several years. What is so hard about practising some variations over the preseason?

There are clearly footballers in other leagues who could play AFL and hold their own. For example Shane Valenti at Sandy in my opinion could play AFL. For some reason we have this infatuation with the young untried 17 & 18 year olds who may never develop and overlook the ready made slightly older players.

Once again Jaded I agree with you. What gives someone the right to say something like that just because he is playing football? We would all agree it is disgraceful and while obviously untrue it would be extremely difficult for any parent to restrain himself if confronted with that type of comment. Headland will suffer because he should have dealt with it in another way, either personally behind the stands or by being made to " dob" , another fairly un-Australian act. Yes the mother/sister comments have gone on for years and they are also very ordinary, but this involves a child and it "is" different. Players know the mother/sister comments will come so they have some ability to prepare and ignore them, but this would infuriate any parent. I don't think it is professional to make these types of comments and if we want our players to do so, then what are we doing watching this game, where this type of behaviour is allowed. You can't racially comment and this should be in the same category. I agree with Essendon that the Rama/chemo comments were sick but this is worse, as this is directed not at the player or his problems, but his child. I would hope we all agree it is a disgrace and that the player concerned, if guilty, should be ashamed of himself. Is that how he wants to beat another player on a footy field by getting into the gutter?

Well as one of those people who presumably knows "diddly squat" about player development, let me throw in a few discussion points. 1. The MFC for a long time has refused to play young players, with a notable exception being Bartram. 2. The likes of Dunn, Bate, Jones, Mclean, Sylvia, Bell, Johnson, Miller, Jamar of the recent batch all had to play a fair bit in the twos before selection. Can we say that the extended period in the twos has helped their careers? 3. Other teams play their recruits as soon as possible and we need look no further than Cox, Dick and Toovey for the Pies. All three are not hulks but the latter two kicked 5 goals and helped their side with pace and enthusiasm win a game. 4. If our players are always needing time are we recruiting the wrong types of players? 5. Is it the Coach protecting the boys from playing alongside older players who play an ordinary style of game? 6. Is the side not glaringly missing pace. 7. Who has more pace, the younger players or the older ones? 8. What is better for the future of the team, playing a Newton ( who may fail initially ) but who has pace, agility, a good pair of hands and can kick a goal and dispose of the ball or playing Holland? 9. Are we better to have the year from hell and finish last and have the one chance we might get to rebuild quickly with the best junior in the country ( who can be brought into the side after 100 games with Sandy ) and also a couple of pre season picks who might include a top uncontracted player and maybe even trade for a CJ if he was interested in us. This group could lift our chances enormously. 10. Are we so concerned with a young player failing that we won't take the chance to see if one succeeds? A lucky goal to a young kid early in a game can make a career. 11. Why do we treat our younger players so differently to the other clubs? Tom Hawkins would still be in the Sandy side if he was on our list. These are a few points some might like to discuss.

Don't know how Jaded will feel about you calling her a gentleman, she may prefer "lady". By the way, Neale, Neita and a few of the coaches like Williams, Riley and Curran make up the bulk of the Selection Committee.

1-7 or we can't make the finals then it is time to see if these kids can actually play, not round 3.

My point exactly. I note that Finks said earlier Newton should not be crucified against a mentally tough defence like the Cats have, well which AFL team doesn't have a mentally tough defence. If that is the criteria we should never ever play any youngsters. Just for what it is worth, who is a better mark, kick and has more speed and agility, Newton or Holland.

On that, does Neale go to all of the Sandy games when Melbourne is not playing ? It is just that I go to quite a few Sandy games and never see him. I am not saying he isn't there because he could come in a different way, I just don't see him.

We clearly have a number of major injuries and in my opinion this was the time to give some youngsters a go. Newton played a good game last week and is big and quick with good hands and a long kick. He has been at the club a couple of years but Neale shows no faith in him. This week Malthouse is playing three newcomers. He is having a go. He is givng his boys experience and his supporters something to get excited about. As a Melbourne supporter what do I look forward to this week, probably only the hope that Petterd gets a game even though I think a big, quick forward would have been better given the injuries to Neita and Robbo. I accept that Newton is not starring but you don't need to in this situation to be given a chance. Petterd will hopefully become a good player as will Frawley but Neale has shown he is reluctant to play youngsters in preference to tried and tested older players. I thought Holland was dreadful in the first game yet he is back. PJ was dreadful last week for Sandy yet he is back. Yze was ok and so was Bizz the week before. Geelong had no problem in playing Hawkins and last year Nathan Ablett, Essendon has Jetta and Davey ( 22 years old ) but new to AFL, etc. etc. We just don't generally give our youth a go. How long were we all screaming for Dunn and when he played he was good. I find that very frustrating especially at this time with the injuries, but probably not as frustrating as Newton is finding it.

What time is it now?

And again. He was dreadful for Sandy on Saturday, dropping uncontested marks and not getting one tap out. Yes he was OK last year but not on Saturday.

Agree completely. Main problem is a failure to gain mid field clearances and then when we have the ball to play direct football.

That is 12 in two games.

Interesting ins. Paul Johnson was pathetic on Saturday. He dropped uncontested marks and did not get one hit out. Pickett was so unfit he played less than half a game and in the words of Mark Williams, who left him off the entire 2nd half " he was stuffed". Then again they should be obvious ins the way we are going.

Unfortunately you can re-injure the same area.

Who is missing from the Hawks this week?

"Holland our best against the Saints". Well I was obviously at the wrong game last week. The bloke I saw get 20 uncontested possessions and turn over nearly every single one of them, our best player. Oh well. Kosi on the radio said they left Holland alone and allowed him to get cheap possessions as they knew he couldn't dispose of the ball and their plan worked to perfection. I will now look for the most possessions to pick my best player. I won't worry about how the possessions were obtained or what was done with them.

Yes. It is one dimensional thinking and planning.

I actually thought Holland was pathetic. He may have had 200 possessions for all I care but he can't dispose at all. A Saint player ( Kosi ) admitted that they let certain Demons have the ball because they know they can't use it and he is the major one. Poor Ferg he may as well leave. The new game plan, Ha ha !