beelzebub

Quite simply we wont need the Daisy's or the Buddy's. We will have developed our own crop of decent players. if we will have turned into the kind of team that would attract either then it stands to reason we need neither. Other teams in stead will be looking and wishing they had a Clark, or Viney, a Hogan a Toumpas etc......or whoever it is that steps up Distant fields etc. Its not those particular players ..the Thomas;s etc that really make it or break it, its the teams culture and group mentality as a playing unit.

Today the club sets the tone of response. Today its called to account for alledged indescetions. Today the club can tell the Inquisitors to go *%#! Themselves !!! Today is d day

<d-day>

Prices will ne bent out of shape again !!!

Nature doesn't muck around eh Red. Good youre safely back.

good to see ppl getting it :-)

<tomorrow >

<2>

Last time i looked noones been charged with anything . Media seems blinkered to that. How surprising (not)

Wish the bloke well...wish most peope well. But I'm now sick to death reading or even needing to hear abour him, especially here on DL. Can't we just move on to the present ... Melbourne's present and leave LJ to history.

<3>

<4>

no problem with you giving some poor sod a smack, but you of all should know and understand the sanctity of maintaining no $ go zone lol

<5>

I must confess i have a simpler view at times. Mitch gets ball, ball through sticks.. No attack out of defense. Yes, We'll wait

WJ number is till HE has to answer OD's chargesMy number represents the club. Happy to adopt your idea

I disagree that you cant to a minor degree luxuriate in the playing of a known power forward out of the square. That doesnt mean he just stands there. it simply recognises he wont have the legs ( sts ) to run around at CHF all day . He is very able bodied. Many of his marks were actually quite static tussles near the square. Hes a brute. He can be fit enough to play without being in prime nick to play the half forward role. . I see no reason , really why you cant switch Dawes and Clark for an interim. it still gives coaches an almighty headache of matching up. Take Mitch off and its far easier. You get match fit by playing. At some point you have to roll dice. If , again IF, hes fit enough to take to the field. IF his foot is ok, then why wouldnt you. How exactly does a defender run someone into the ground if they leave them ?? Great..Let them leave him alone. Its a nonsense.

6

:-)

May we remind some this is a NO T$ thread !!!!!!!

think or know ? Yes I think he will. Know it ? Can't possibly lol My only caveat is I expect his training to start ramping up soon. Providing he can take to the field in some useful fashion then I don't see why he couldn't play out ogf the square whilst he builds match fitness. If he can kick, he'll play. No real reason not to. (If foot given the aok by the docs) All indications suggest he's on track . His own forecast was to play round one al things being equal. Why should I second guess him :-)

Amazing how quickly people not only jump to conclusions but proceed to enshrine them as psuedo-fact. Some ought to get jobs in the media lol

and the next quiz ???

had a banana up and go...and just went !! lol

Its an interesting conundrum for sure. My take is that ideally Mitch will play in or around the line and Dawes in the box. But if Clark is say nominally 80-90% fit but still quite capable of taking the field id swap them up til Mitch comes up to speed and distance. Mich is a very VERY good contested mark off few steps. He would still be a massive headache in the square.