pitmaster

A positive is that we did not capitulate but really gave the other mob a fright after looking like we might go down by 10 goals. There was not the spread and control through the middle we had last few weeks and maybe some of that is down to Norf's stronger bodies. I thought it was key that Jamar was not able to control the ruck the way he has recently. They had three very tall rucks and the Russian was giving away 7cms at least to McIntosh. We should have finished closer than we did but the umpiring in the last term was schoolyard stuff. That free to Hale for holding when HE was doing the holding, and that so soft one - well no it was simply WRONG - to Wells when he ran into Joel Mac who had eyes only for the ball was an absolute Barry Crocker. It hurts to lose to mobs like Norf but it gives us a reminder we are a long way off yet, but we know the improvement is there in the players.

Now what do you think, now he's pulling Brownlow votes in our best win for maybe four years against a highly rated opponent? And I understand you're "so sick of apologise threads" and that's too bad, but just one week ago you made some big, unqualified statements about Bate and if you are going to insist on your right to hold players accountable then what goes around, comes around. FFS.

Me too. We had more errors in those last 10 minutes of the third quarter than for the rest of the game, I reckon. We lacked run, Ricky P could not keep his feet and even JMac was creating blues. We really needed the spell that the break gave us. Once we had the first goal of the last term we were home but there were signs of fatigue in the third quarter.

Not only you. I checked the umpires section of the AFL 2010 handbook to see if this clown was born in Brisbane (or Scotchmer Street North Fitzroy) and the fact is HE IS NOT THERE. No Number 24. Looks like he was a ring-in from the Eastern Suburbs league, or something like it. Agree we benefited from a couple of crook decisions also, but the Bennell mark disallowed, and the free to Fev were both goal-worthy decisions. In other words we were screwed, which makes the result all the more pleasing.

Yes but, we are going to need a key tall. Eventually.

Best thing about the game against the Lions for me was the self-belief evident with the players and their willingness to take responsibility for kicking goals: 1. Bate marks 48 metres out and could play on to Green but goes back and does it himself, superb kick; 2. Likewise in the third term when the Lions are threatening to come back and Jones just rips out of a pack says to hell with the handball option I'm doing this, runs through 50 and nails it 3. The skipper in the last - not a noted goal kicker - and it was never in doubt from about 45. 4. Sculls likewise - what a ripper to ice it.

Calm down? I wanted to get in first. And I think he is going to improve from here. But you damn him with faint praise. He has been busy with leads and was a real avenue to goal this week. Yeah, that tap in from Ricky's rescue of the ball from the boundary was merely an opportunist goal, but he has done better than that. He does appear slow - had to laugh at the bloke calling him "Gumboots" in the MCC section since I guess it means he runs like he is wearing them - but he does have straight ahead pace when running towards goal as he showed against Adelaide. My lingering doubt with him is that he does not seem to run with the same intent when pursuing an opposition defender, but along with Dunny and Ricky he gave our forward line some real intent and plenty of options. I haven't reviewed the game via replay yet but my recall is that he pulled in a couple of contested grabs, Stuey. Maybe we define the term differently.

I've been a fan of Bates for a while and had to defend him from noisy so-called Melbourne-supporting Bate baggers early last year - when he went on to finish 4th in the B&F. He was slow to start the year then and again this year apart from flashes. Just as Col G is a bit scratchy but will run into form, so has Bate started slowly but he was really effective across half forward yesterday. On that form those who have been slashing him can start queueing to make their apologies.

I expect the charge to be withdrawn and put it down to McLaren being a dill (in his 350th match yet!) In this morning's paper the report is down to Kennedy. Should still be withdrawn - it was a legit shepherd. The surfer dude was in play.

Strewth! It's just a local-boy-making-his-way-in-the-big-time feel good story. Lighten up and give the girl a break. The suggestion his position is in jeopardy seems to have come from Jordie.

Yeah, I want to add my two bobs worth. Bruce was serval times outpointed - outclassed really - one-out by Burton. Dees2010 needs to be more respectful of others and not jump down their throats.

While we only had one goal at half time, Newton's first half was his best effort yet - created contests took a strong contested mark, played on well, and strong second efforts. Give him another run. You're right about Bartram who is back in defence with Bennell going forward. Was cool and mostly controlled, was Clint. Made one bad disposal blue when he grubbed a cross ground pass, but otherwise was a solid citizen.

Having said previously I doubted there would be time for questions at BTB, I have to admit I could not have been more wrong. For those not there, I rolled up at 12.30 and Cameron was holding an informal Q and A with the gathering crowd, fielding questions about Col, revealing he had been replaced in the side, and questions about player welfare and guys like Jurrah, Wonna - anyone at all people wanted to know about. The formal part consisted of a video of the forwards being briefed on tactics V the crows - who they needed to keep deep, who they wanted to move up the ground etc - followed by some more Cam S and then a personal update briefing from Josh Mahoney - who took more questions!! Terrific stuff - those who attended that I spoke to thought it was real value.

Maintain todays effort and we will win more than we lose. But with lots of kids we probably won't maintain today's effort. I reckon eight wins would be a strong year - but on today's form we could be 2-2 in a fortnight.

Wrong. As well as the lead, mark and goal, he created a couple of contests for small forwards to try to feed off and created some defensive pressure in our forward 50. Did not do much in the second half, but warrants another crack. Dunn was better. Bate will improve with time. I know a few want to bag Bate but his use of the ball in midfield (when he kicked it) was good. I know he made a goose of himself once (again) but when he uses it, he finds targets. Will be better for the run .

Wow! Newton in for Miller! Bail for Rivers (inj). No stronger but a strong stance on Miller.

Don't know that there will be time for questions. An intro from Cameron and a briefing from an assistant coach all in about 25 minutes. Some of us will no doubt try to slip some queries in but I wouldn't be surprised if we were knocked back. As to confidentiality, there's no way I'll leak. The statement we must sign was pretty blunt, and I won't do anything to harm the club in any way.

tks

Off with the high hat Enforcer! My questions were specifically about inside info on Jurrah's injury. The surgery, the assessment. Google ain't gonna help with that. If you can't follow a simple set of questions take a breath before you fire up.

Tucked away in the six point section of The Age was the injury list. It included Bell (shoulder) four weeks...Jurrah (shoulder) 13 weeks. Can anyone explain the discrepancy? How bad was LJ's injury? How did his surgery go? What was his specialist's assessment?

Think about it. Results like last Saturday are exactly why Bailey was given the extension. One thing I want to put to rest is this stuff about how the players weren't fired up. Truth is, they were overwhelmed by more mature bodies, but their tackling was great for most of the game. I think McKenzie brought Hodge down once when it looked like he was going to be run over. Last week was the biggest physical working over for years and we were too small, too immature and our game was broken down 15 minutes in. But there was honest effort. Don't believe me, take a look at the replay.

Miller showed promise, and was at his best when Neitz was at FF. That meant the big fella took the strongest defender - sometimes two, at times three. So Miller had a much lesser opponent than he faces now. This is one reason I'd like to see Johnson given a go at FF. Big body, can build up a head of steam although needs to learn to use his weight. But that's a side issue right now. The reason for Miller's slump I think is that he is a genuine number two or three forward, at his best pushing up field and leaving space for a genuine key forward. Now BM's is being asked to do more than he is capable of - I just wish he'd laid a couple of decent shepherds last week. There was no-one keeping Campbell Brown or Lewis honest. Anyway, that's your answer - no Nieta, no Miller.

JMac flew the flag last week - let go a fine right rip mid tackle. In a game in which we were mauled by more mature bodies. I'll go with him.

I had Rivers as our best defender. Nash does tend to go off and to have even Macdonald as well as Rivers and Jamar in the same list as Miller shows how upset he is. Jamar disappointed in the ruck but gave us some aerial strength both ends. Those bagging Bate need to have another look. Underdone but still integral to our most positive attacking moves in the second quarter (along with Dunn). Neither got enough however.

I committed before knowing which games were involved, and I was a bit disappointed none was against a Vic club, but what difference does it really make? You're there to obtain an insight into the FD's thinking about our players, how they take on the game and the types they are up against, so I think it's ok either way. WC, Freo, Swans and Crows all play slightly different styles. It's just that we may be slightly less familiar with them.