Dappa Dan

Yes. But what's your point? I'm not saying get the players to lose. I'm saying ND will play his oldies and get us to 11th when our better players return and do what they do best. If Neale plays mostly kids and we get there, then that's ok, at least we would have gained 10-15 games experience in what is the future of the club. I love how if someone expresses the desire to get a top pick he's accused of WANTING his club to fail. They're not the same thing. I watch all these other clubs recruit players I'd LIKE to have at the club. And to be honest, McLean is the only dead-set future superstar that I have ABSOLUTE confidence in. Any coincidence that he's a top 5 pick? And don't even think about quoting Sylvia as a good example of how it can go wrong. I think if we asked CAC he'd say he'd rather a top 3 pick if he's got his eye on a specific player. Look. I never said I wanted the club to TANK to get top picks. All I said is that I wanted top picks. If the cost is playing kids, and not being SO disappointed that we lose more games than we win, then so be it.

Yeah, I reckon we have recruited some of the best kicks in the league, and somehow they're missing easy kicks, as well as the hard ones. Trav can hit a player on the chest who's standing behind a brick wall. But he misses a lot of easy kicks, or at least he did earlier this year. Green has one of the more aesthetically pleasing kicks, especially with set shots, that you're ever likely to see. Luckily last year is over and he's kicking better, but he's not perfect and his field kicking isn't as prolific. Yze was once like Green, but he lacks some penetration these days for some reason. I dunno, maybe it's that when under pressure he struggles, but no-one's scared of his boot any more. Bruce used to be an elite kick. I remember hearing he's having leg or foot problems, and if that's the case it wouldn't surprise me, but regardless his kicking has been costing us. Pure and simple. Neita's a great set shot still, and when he gets it in play he's still a sensational kick.... but he's not finding it enough to make an impact, and when he is he's missing ones he should kick. I guess he's not below expectations though. Beamer's a bit one-dimensional with his kicking. His boot's reputation is exceeding its effectiveness at the moment. Sylvia is missing shots he should kick. Many dees supporters haven't seen much of what he can do with his right foot. That goal on the siren was an example, as was the one Robbo nicked from him in the aints final last year. But then he misses ones he'd kick at the blustery TBO. Weird. His kick, pure and simple, is prodigious. An absolute thing of beauty. When he gets right, watch out. Wheatley is apparently this amazing kick. And on occassion we'll see it, but for the most in his career he will be remembered as "the guy who kicked the first 9 pointer." Byron.... What a kick. Low, flat, quick, penetrating, accurate. And again, when he gets it he's great, but other things are robbing him of his brilliance. White is a sensational kick at goal. Actually he's a sensational kick anywhere. But I reckon his brain gets in the way ALL the time. His field kicking is simply wonderful for someone so tall, and his set shots are well above average in terms of skill, but he's just not doing it when he gets his go. maybe it's a lack of genuine experience at set-shots. He's never played HEAPS of time inside the forward fifty. I don't know. Maybe it's the fact the team has been focussing on tackling, hardness, running speed, set-ups, handballing instead of kicking accuracy. Maybe they think the team's good kicks are all good enough not to need help, so they consentrate on their weaknesses. Who knows? It hasn't reached plague proportions yet, but it's certainly true that we are a kicking team, and as recently as last year we were probably the best in the league by boot at times... To give some credit, there are players who are kicking beautifully, and above their perceived reputations... Bartram's boot, if Sandy is any indication, pre-injury has improved. He was slicing 50 metre passes down players' throats with NO conditioning. not supposed to be a good kick, but good kicking is as good kicking does. Bate's action is daaaaaaamn ugly. But i trust him. I'd say his set shots aren't GREAT. But he seems to LOVE the extra distance when kicking, and there's nothing that gets you more excited than a young kid bombing them from 55 on a startlingly regular basis. Bell is a known good kick. Out of defence I don't trust anyone more, except maybe Rivers and Wrecker. Davey wasn't supposed to be a great left foot. Just a good one. But some of his passes rival his running ability for spectator value. Dunn is a beautiful kick of a football. His set shots particularly. One of the best things about him. he is the quintessential "Likely type" by the Commetti definition. Godfrey. living the dream. If 3 of his kicks hit targets, I'm thrilled. And if he stops taking long shots at goal when running at the fifty, I think he'll be liked more as a payer. For now it seems he's trying to give off, and I couldn't be happier for him. Cj is a GREAT deliverer of the footy. Sigh..... Jones, I reckon, has some technical prolems with his action, but he has startling effectiveness, even when kicking long. JMac kicks it accurately whenever he MUST. Plays to his strengths SO well you barely ever notice any problem. Petterd ALREADY has gained his fans' trust when dashing out of defence that the ball will not be turned over. Well done CAC.

Yeah yeah, righto you lot. I get what you're saying, that you don't want to instill a "losing culture" into the squad. I have 2 things in mind when I start a thread like this. One, is that yes, good recruiting is more important than high draft picks. Just look at West Coast with Judd and Kerr. Both are of more value than their picks suggest. BUT, the club has a problem with a lack of genuine superstars. While this could change in the coming years with the young guys who are actually at the club NOW, it still will help if we get pick 1, 2, or 3 instead of picks 8, 9, or 10. Yes, getting a high pick is no guarantee, but it is a general rule that the class of the competition comes from higher up. There are always exceptions to the rule, but generally a first pick will do more than a pick ten. And before you get a head of steam up, don't waste your time by quoting examples of ordinary top selections compared to excellent second-round selections. EVERYONE knows it's not an exact science. My second point is this. Jase Dunstall the other day said on SEN that the recruiters had recognised surrounding the year Roughead and Franklin were recruited that there weren't any REALLY great KP players coming through. For those few years, forwards like Buddy were at a premium. Whether or not you agree with him is up to you, but it highlights a good point. According to many, a good small player will never be as valuable as a good BIG player. When players like Gumbleton, Leuenberger etc etc come up in the draft, generally they'll be snaffled up quicker because good talls that can make an immediate impact are like hens' teeth. If we had pick 3 or better in last year's draft we may have recruited a genuinely good ruckman or future FF to replace Neita. BOTH of these positions will be spoken about a LOT in the coming years, since we already have good players playing in them that are nearing the end of their careers. The same may be true of this year. A young 199cm ruckman/forward is killing them by the name of Matt Kreuzer. If the press about him stays the same, he'll be recruited in the top 3. If we're 13th or higher, we'll miss out and may end up with a different type of player. Look, I ABSOLUTELY agree that bottoming out for long periods a la Hawthorn and Richmond is NOT the right way to go. There's been no proof that THIS is the way to win flags. St Kilda haven't won one using this model, and the Tiges seem to be going backwards. Brisbane, you could argue, have used it well, but they had 2 teams' worth of early pick to choose from, with a tried and true coach to coach them.... SO.... I reckon having great players there to show the young potentials how to do it is important. We have that now, at least with the likes of Neitz and JMac. ANY recruit will benefit from their example. But I digress. Mostly I think to have impact you must get the most you can from the early picks you INEVITABLY will get at some stage in your club's life. Judd is an example here, as is Brock. If you want to know how we go without a single first round selection, you only need to look as far as the first 7 rounds of this year, then see the difference when Brock returns. We are in the position where we KNOW certain ladder positions are out of our reach, even as early as round 7. Those positions are 1-8, if you're honest. With THAT in mind, I don't CARE which position we end up in, though I'd like to avoid the wooden spoon if possible. I'll take another Brock over another Bate/Jones (and I LOVE those players) any day. And I'd like to see what CAC will do with an early pick, to redeem himself for Molan (which he's already done with Brock anyway). And for the record, Sylvia is still in the running to repay CAC's faith. I like it.

Was over a couple of weeks ago. But that's ok. The media is for the most part leaving MFC alone, and focussing on Daniher and the injuries. They still say the team and list are pretty good, which means there's still hope for small glories. I'm hanging out for: - Brock to come in and further stake his claims as a leader of the competition. - Robbo to do some more of the unfathomable. - The number 1 pick, and first pre-season pick, or 2nd or 3rd, whatever happens. - Neitz to play his 300th. I'll be there, maybe even if it's interstate, which it looks like it will be. - Davey to press on towards AA forward pocket. - Yze to lead the club in kicks, disposals, so that when he does retire in the next 2-4 years, it won't be as a league and MFC punch line. We could do without another one of them. - Rising star nominations to Jones and Frawley, to go with Petterd. - Best of all, that ENOURMOUS list of young guys to come in and do things, like Bate to dominate HFF, Bartram to HBF, Dunn everywhere but in the guts, Jones nowhere but in the guts, Newton up forward, Petterd and Bell off the HB line, Rivers where he belongs, Frawley to come in and make an immediate impact, PJ to stake claims as a steady but unspectacular starting 22 player and go from there (like all REALLY tall players do), Godfrey to maybe even make the top ten in the B&F by beating all comers (I don't like him as a player, barely any of us do, but it would be an incredible effort and achievement even in a bad year), CJ to finally win a spot in the side and win 25+ possessions in a game, Pickett to show some ticker and make an effort to stay on the list for next year, the return of Wrecker... and the biggest one.... Sylvia.... If you don't know what I mean after yesterday, you never will. All these small little pleasures are great to come to the footy for. And there's a sort of illegitimate relieving calm that comes over you when you know that even if you do lose (by 5-6 points) good things will come of it in the form of draft picks like Franklin/Gibbs/Murphy.... Kreuzer. We can all be immature enough to whinge and moan about the club, but also be mature enough to realise that every team has it's time, both on the bottom and on the top.

Yep. We'll be stuffed by round 10, but still win ten games by the end of the year because Danners wants to keep his job, instead of playing the hard line and going for the picks by playing young 'uns. 9th in 2007... Mediocrity thereafter...

Rivers? that was random. Plooease explain.

Actually if both the dogs and blues were the only ones with the priority it would have gone, Dogs (priority), Blues (priority), Dogs (rd 1), Blues (rd 1) Dees (rd 1).

GOLD! Especially the trav one!!! Love your work...

I see. No, fair enough. Demonland should really organise more nights like that one in round 22 last year where we had our worst loss for the season!!! I can't help but feel if the little punks who were smashed hadn't gotten in, and we had actually played well it may have become an annual AAMI stadium match to view at the Leighoak. If we KNEW it was happening, then you could come up for the day, and meet all and sundry. It actually was a pretty good turnout in the end. And with a bit of luck, you could wander down to Sandy the next arvo. It would be just the icing on the cake. TBO really is a sensational place to watch footy. Wonderful atmosphere.

Why 191?

Has nothing to do with MFC losing, I can say that, but I am losing interest in the game too. Last week vs Port was a classic example of the game morphing into something other than the game we love. Bith the missed in the back and the paid in the back were horrendous, then the deliberate out of bounds. All ridiculous. I wasn't all that [censored] that we lost. More happy that we put in an effort again and had winners up and down the ground. But as for the actual game, the annoying thing here is that we would usually get 1-3 games that were that "effected" each year. Now it's 1 in 2. Oh, and I'm sick of these stats about the game making 10% more money now than before or whatever. If it was taken care of properly it'd be making 100% more money.

Ok...... Doggy with Archie Thompson's sister to create the perfect running backman with INCREDIBLE footskills. Flash with Cathy Freeman to create the ULTIMATE speedster. Might be some genetic problems there, as I'm pretty sure they're related Robbo and (the abovementioned) Lauren Jackson to create a player who'll smash their head on the Dome's ceiling. And just for me.. Cameron Ling with Amanda Vanstone. They'll create a player so ugly no-one will tackle him.

I was so close!!!! Pipped by 3 points!!! Someone start another thread for next week, I want another crack.

Yep. Article about it in the Hun today. Within about 3 sentences he was talking Father-son rule. In about 18 years, if the rule stays, we're going to have exactly the same team-sheet as we had in the late 90s! Lyon, Schwartz, Yze, White... Someone, ANYONE go on whatever dating website Neita is on and do the right thing by MFC... Jaded, I'm looking at you... That is if you're not too busy with Brock... Or Belly. :D

Thanks Q. Yes, pretty much. Look, for all we know these players could develop vastly different games in 3-5 years, ESPECIALLY under a different coach or specialist forwardline assistant coach. BUT if they're not given the guidance NOW they'll stall, and eventually you'll notice their growth will be stunted. I think my point was that of our young up-and-comers, not ONE has anywhere near the attributes or ability Neita showed at the same age. When Neitz was approaching 21, he was already crashing and bashing, as well as kicking beautifully and playing well below his knees. Criterion 1 - Dunn's weight is a problem at the moment, but it will be overcome soon. But it's the second part of criterion 1 I have a problem with. He can mark, and marks well on the lead. But what made Neita a great player at the same age was the knowledge and ability to use what weight he had. Dunn isn't even aware of that yet. Now I'm not calling him soft. I don't think he is. But I AM saying he doesn't have a love of the contest that many do. HOPEFULLY he'll bring this into his game, but as yet, I've not seen enough evidence to think he's as tough as a Neitz replacement would need to be. Newton doesn't have the body yet, but LOVES the crash and bash. LOVES it, particularly though the air. Garland is very young, and more of a lean dasher. I see him roaming outside the fifty more, maybe playing more as a Tarrant. It's FAR too early to glean too much from him. Bate is weird. He can handle so much physical stuff when in the packs and on the ground. But when going for a mark, especially when opposition is on his hammer, he loses just a touch of confidence. But yes, there's no doubt he has the physical attributes. And you make a fine point about playing your strongest player where he is needed. Criterion 2 - Here's where we might disagree a bit. Dunn, yes. I like him as a player, but needs to mark overhead under pressure. I DO love how he causes spillages to advantage, but that's not enough to play him in a key position. Bate CAN mark. I've been drilling this all year and he proved me right last week. But to be fair, that was one week out of 6 where his opponent wasn't fast enough to pressure him, and he was playing 1 out all day. Place him closer to the square, and we ALL saw what happened there. He was lost. Garland can mark beautifully, and is smart and an opportunist. Once again, probably a bit small just yet, and FAR too young to go screaming into a spoiling Glenn Archer. If you want to see hands like a vice, wait until you see Juice. But where he has Bate beaten is in the air and in packs. picture the image of Bate leading from the square into a pack of 3, about30-40 metres from goal. Or the "hot spot" as they say. Bate may as well be Davey in the regard. He doesn't jump. Newton not only would be a strong chance to mark with a run-up and some space, but he would DEFINITELY cause a spillage and follow it up. Criterion 3 - Garland is on ok kick at goal. Not mouth-watering though, and not Neitz. Dunn is a ripping shot at goal I reckon. Beautiful action both on the run and even more as a set shot. Juice is a beautiful kick of the footy. Bate is simply incredible on the run from outside fifty. But his set shots don't fill me with confidence. Over the journey I think we'll find his accuracy may be a sore point. It's this and his pack marks that are his biggest (and just about ONLY) deficiencies. Criterion 4 - It can, but we're just starting to count the things we need to teach them now. Neita was a goer from before he was recruited. Criterion 5 - Dunn is the standout here. Bate is good too, but better when not getting smashed by a flooded backline all gunning for him. I don't believe his sideways movement is sharp enough to evade as Neitz does. Haven't seen too much of Garland below his knees. Juice may not be in Dunn's class on the deck, but he goes alright, and is VERY wily. When he's on, he has enough 2nd and 3rd efforts to more than do his job. You say Bate is your preffered option. I think he can certainly play there, but there's a differenc between playing a flexible player like that for 120 minutes week in week out and playing him there as a resting forward. I don't see Bate as an 60-goal a year forward, put it that way. We'd be robbing Peter to pay Paul. I hope you go along to see Juice one of these days. I really can't stress enough how much he looks like a genuine KPP in the forward line who is EQUALLY at home as a CHF or FF. Even playin second fiddle to Sautner, who knows what he's doing. There's no doubt in my mind that if you compare JUST the physical and statistical leanings of these players that Newton is the clear leader. But that doesn't mean he'll be a career forward in the AFL (none of them are assured of that yet) and it doesn't mean Juice has the mindset just yet. It's clear the footy department think there's SOMETHING wrong. What I'm saying is that it has nothing to do with skill, or knowledge. And on Garland, I think you're right. I stood next to him at Sandy and he IS quite slight. I'm 6'1" and while he IS taller, I didn't feel he was a big guy. In fact I thought he was one of the pimply teenagers running around (he wasn't playing). His strength is not yet his physicality, it's his skill and nous. But yes, VERY early days. I admit I'm very unsure when it comes to Colin. Allege is the word. I just said if you put Miller's heart in him etc etc. For the record, Juice HAS got a ticker, but from what I've seen and heard, it waxes and wanes from week to week and within a match. Miller may not be gifted, but he goes full tilt 100% of the time. That's not something people have ever said about Juice. I will say this though. The kid does know HOW to try. Someone must have given him a spray or something at training the week before I keep turning up, because he gets in and under like a midfielder when I'm there. And to answer your two questions. Had Juice turned up in a tutu he would have been drafted, such is his talent. As CAC has said, of the 3 drafted in his year, he had the most potential upside. Needs work, but he's overloaded with ability. I don't know why his contract was renewed, perhaps it has something to do with his only having had 2 years in the system, his being injured, the fact he's bottom age, the fact he'd kicked big bags (albeit at the Sandy 2s), our desperation for KP forwards. Had we had a full compliment of young forwards, maybe he might have been squeezed out. Who knows? My feeling is they see what he has and won't let him go until they can PROVE he hasn't got what it takes at AFL level. I'm confident he'll see another year. And the way he's going, if he's delisted, someone else will snaffle him. I wouldn't say either. But I guess more of a Tarrant than a Pavlich. Bate has nowhere near Pavlich's marking ability (but then, who does?) So true. I just hope their deficiencies can be built upon, a la Green. I tell you what, that's not half bad. I don't know about Bate's ability to kick to a tight lead, but yes. And I think he more or less played that role against Port didn't he? Sorry about the long post. Nasher, I blame you. :D

I'v ehad this discussion with a number of people. The whole CHF debate, coupled with the Neitz and Robbo replacements debate will be something we'll be pondering for AT LEAST the next 5 years, and longer if we're not lucky in recruitment, development and retention of talented players. My feeling is we'll probably have to trade for an established ruckman and an established FF in the years to come... But for now, Miller is a hard-working forward, that could, if he came into his own, one day be in the mould of an Ian Perrie AT BEST. I don't mind him THAT much, he works hard, presents, has a great attitude and work ethic off the field and is as hard as you want. But is he the future answer? In my book, probably not. I reckon we'll be looking to groom the complete set behind him... ie a FF, CHF, 3rd forward and backup. - Dunn is young, and has a few problems. He's quick, and has a great sense of bring the ball to the deck, where he's at his best. But contested marking is a problem. Or at least it seems it is, as he doesn't really attempt to mark when within 2 metres of an opponent. Other than this, he seems ok. - Bate is useful elsewhere. One of his weapons is his running capacity. I LOVE him on the wing, or running off HBF, but I understand at his height we may be selling ourselves short. As a CHF he has MILES to go before he matches it with the big boys, and to be honest, I don't think he'll ever be a premier CHF... In my mind he's more of a Goodes type. But time will tell. ND loves his flexibility, and when a new coach takes over in the next couple of years, they'll enjoy it too. - PJ shows some promise, but again, he's not the answer as a stay at home forward. If he played there, sure, he might kick a bag of six and a few bags of four. But he's not going to monster the competition. - Garland has shown me plenty. Big engine, beautiful kick, likes to run long distances. But he's VERY young. I see him as a more damaging Nick Davis... More damaging in the sense he could be a heavy scorer, but hasn't got Nick's kick. What I want to see from him before I start calling for his promotion into the starting 22 is defensive work. We all know Robbo has the skill to monster teams on a regular enough basis to let him play his own game. If Garland is going to be third tall, and I believe he will be, he's going to need more than a good lead, mark and kick. These days you have to have another ace up your sleeve. - In my book, and you'll all laugh, Newton has the skill set, body and brain to play as a GENUINE CHF. I've seen him play off flanks, wings and other places at Sandy, and watching him play either out of the square or as a CHF is remarkable. He's like a different player. Now he has other problems, that's clear, but unlike his peers, talent, body, hardness and all the things his mates have are NOT the problem. Put Miller's heart in Newtons body you'd have a sensational future CHF. But then he would have gone top 10 in the draft, so.... The answer to the question is this. There IS no replacement for Neitz and Robbo. Neitz may not be a unique player, but there are few if any around at the moment that are as tough, resilient, hard-working, inspiring and trustworthy... He's the best player over the journey that we've had at the club since Flower, just about. So let's not think we're going to see another strong forward QUITE as good as him. But then why do we have to have one? Again, with Robbo, we can hardly expect a player to be as strong in the air or on his chest as Robbo. But again, why do we need that? The day will come where we may find ourselves with more of a Fevola or Lloyd type of forward. A guy who leads and marks and thinks his way through a game, winning most of his one-on-ones, and kicking more truly than the skipper. Neitz just does the percentage thing. Crash into 3 guys, try to deck them all, and if you can still stand, get the pill and drill it. If not, Flash is there to mop up, and you've likely killed his direct opponent anyway. Maybe when Robbo retires we may find ourselves with Dunn and Juice playing together out of the square? Believe me Juice can fly almost as well as Robbo, but his hands are better, he's more accountable, FAR better below his knees, and LOVES the mongrel involved in pissing off an opponent. So in short, I reckon we've been spoilt with Neita and Robbo, but when the day comes that we usher in a new attack, we will love them too, and for different reasons. Will they be as good, or better? In my book, at this stage, No. But then we're YEARS away from watching these young guys come into their peak years. One thing's for sure. If we want an A-Grade forward line we've only done half the job as yet. Wait and see what CAC has up his sleeve in the next 3 years. THEN we'll have a better idea.

The change of the priotiy pick system was a good move. My understanding is that it went from... Win less than 6 games, you get a priority pick before round 1. to Win less than 5 games, you get a priority pick before round 2. Repeat the same failure in the year immediately following this, and you qualify for a priority in round 1. I'm sure there are specific things wrong with that, but it's more or less right. I love the idea that teams like Carlton and Essendon could conceivably still get a priority pick before round 1, but the likelihood is they've won enough matches already for them to be in the box seat to be denied the right to this bonus. So going by that, let's say Richmond and MFC both end on 4 wins or less, we'll get pick 1 or 2, then picks 17 and 19 or 18 and 20... IMO I think we'll win enough matches to be denied the pick, but Richmond won't. Things aren't as boring as they look at the arse-end of the ladder!

demons by 37

The lottery I'd heard of, and I have NO idea where this comes from (probably the NFL), went something like this. 9th gets 1 ball. 10th gets 2 11th 4 12th 8 13th 16 14th 32 15th 64 16th 128 Sounds silly at first, but it gives the team who comes last just under a 50% chance of getting the first pick. It makes it easier for them to get at it, but makes it POSSIBLE for them to lose it to one of the other 7 clubs. Once a team's ball is drawn, their balls (in the lottery...) are removed and it continues to the next step. Let's say, by merest chance, the team who came 15th get lucky and land the first pick. In the next draw the 16th team will have a 66% chance of getting the second selection. This is a very rough memory, I think they may have mumbled something about it on talking footy years ago. Seems like it's along the right lines to me...

Juice didn't go missing in the pre-season games. He went missing in the ONE intra we had.... severley missing by all accounts. But in the Sandy pre-season he trucked along in much the same fashion he is now. As there wasn't much to see in the red and blue I went down to Sandy every weekend in the weeks leading up to round 1. By the second or third week I was mostly turning up t watch Juice play. Talent galore, and exciting to watch go about it out of the square. Well, first of all, you're right. THAT many talls at once would be a problem. But I will say that Juice can EASILY play as a career CHF in some years. If he was to give Miller a chop-out, or a week in the 2s he might just go ok depending on his opponent, which brings me to my next point. Perhaps one of the reasons ND has been so gunshy with him is that he wants him to play when our most dangerous forwards are out there bearing the brunt of the opposition defence. If he has to deal with a Scarlett, or Rutten, or Cornes on his first day, it may set his fragile confidence back too much. I think the opposite of what people are saying is true. I think they'll wait until Robbo, Neita and Miller are all back to their punishing best before introducing Juice. Better to have him ease his way in with 1 or 2 goals than to be given a job that could mean the difference between 4 points. I don't necessarily agree with it, but it may be the cause.

Had my best week ever, and this was with 2 players in my backline not scoring, and STILL only ended up 2700th or so. I don't know how you guys do it.

Oooooh Mercy! Yep. Dutchy to emergency or out altogether, replaced by Grgic. Vardy UTTERLY doesn't deserve to be there. Gave good service while healthy. If Vardy's there, Byron's headed for this team. Others are ok. Maybe Charles can be reprieved. Oh, and no Moland or Rogers? Or are we doing only players who played? And Tooly? Great thread that has come at the best time. I've been severely let down by demonland's form of late, and you've come up with the goods. Classic.

And your knowledge of football, player development and list management is worse. I agree that you have to give something to get something, but Bell CANNOT be the answer. He'll hurt us in the long run. He's had a number of years on the list, and all that's going to happen is that we'll end up with another Thompson. We'll have developed him, and he'll star for whatever club he goes to. He's been smashing opponents from pillar to post in an undermanned and useless team, with only sporadic help in his 3rd of the ground. Imagine where we'd be without him... Then imagine our chances next year without him... then imagine the HB line Bell, Rivers, Petterd. It'll run for 8 more years, maybe more. Nope. Bell stays.

Are you serious? Godders has been awesome. But I take your point. Going forward I'd prefer Sewell.

There's actually quite a few regular posters that fight the good fight in this regard, Rhino, Jaded, yourself.... but there's some that will just never get past it... For the record, there are posters like occo who don't respect him yet, but claim to be open to the idea that he's improving, and are happy to be proven wrong. This is all I ask, but sadly it's beyond some supporters to simply give credit where credit is due. It's like they pick on Belly because they just feel like having a go at someone... Anyone. And in the end they only make fools of themselves. There is a SLEW of players that deserve more ire from dees supporters.