Dappa Dan

Hopefully Bell gets some time on Williams. Firstly, Williams isn't going great, Bell could use the confidence, and he played well on him in the NAB cup, for whatever that's worth.

Fair dinkum BB take a long hard look at yourself. READ THE POST!!! I said SHOULDN'T get a shot at round 2 but PROBABLY will. Bruce played a shocker, even you must agree there, blinkers or no blinkers. But he certainly WILL play round 2. When I say shouldn't, I mean he shouldn't based on his last 4 quarters. If he were someone expendable, he'd get a game in the VFL. I KNOW Bruce is important... WE ALL DO!!!! Give it a rest already!!! Sentence 3 above... Are you talking about me? Or RR? If it's RR, I'll leave you to it, but If you meant to type DD then we need to sit down and have a little talk. You name the patheTic statements I come up with and I'll tell you how you need to recalibrate your brain. My favour to you. On Miller. Agreed. Many people DON'T want him to succeed. I'm not one of them. For season 2007, rounds 1 and 2 at least he is most likely to be our best option at CHF.

Wrath, you're a gentelman and a scholar. Long live demonland. Bub. I thought that was pretty funny. Oh and Little Lucifer, for what it's worth, I admire your loyalty. But trust me, we really are behind the demons despite it all. Nobody's off them just yet, but I reckon even the players would be willing to cop a fair bit of flack for what they put up on Friday. Hopefully the noise we make as supporters makes a difference, and they feel the fire in their bellies to prove us all wrong. That would make me a very happy man.

I HATE the White rotation policy. Firstly, he plays his best footy when he gets more ground time. Secondly, he is NO Full Forward. Maybe as a high flying pocket or something. They say they're going to try it every so often and it always fails miserably.

You'll be given a couple of weeks to get some match fitness, but I'll be watching. At the moment I'm in the VFL and I'm knocking on the door. This ratings thread is a hard team to break into...

That's right WJ. I need to see a bit more personally, but if he plays, say, 2 good ones I'm going to start opening threads on him. The biggest problem is neither Robbo or Neitz, who both were good on Friday, are going to get dropped, even if they start misfiring. The only KP hole in the team is at CHF or maybe on the bench as a rotation against a team with a tall defence. Until there's a hole, he may not get a go. Also, when Dunn comes back you just know hes going to make it difficult for Newton. Must remind myself. Don't get TOO excited. It's only early days.

Is anyone ever really ready to play CHFin the AFL? No. He would be brought in as a third tall option, and depending on the situation may get a run there, but wouldn't be relied upon in that respect. One thing I forgot to mention was his incredible defensive work around the fifty. Kept picking players off, grabbing marks from kick ins, tackling and getting frees that he would dish off for team-mates' goals. Seriously finding it hard to come up with things he HASN'T done at Sandy... Ovulate maybe? Yep. Just because he looks good now doesn't mean he wouldn't be an absolute waste of space in the big leagues early on in his career. The one thing that I can't help but think is how his brand of footy would transfer. He can hustle and bustle like Miller, lead and mark like Neita, Jump and take outstretched marks like Robbo (but not on the chest, that's Robbo's domain), can take a mark in a pack flat footed, and he likes a sneaky one from the boundary like Ooze. His set-shots (thought inaccurate today) are studied too, and he has a routine. He has a kind of arrogance too. Perhaps confidence. There's no reason to think he'll struggle because he's too small, or skinny, or can't kick... Unlike Godfrey who will get found out every time, Newton seems to be a born AFL footballer, at least skill wise. And all these people who say his head might get in the way, well I've seen absolutely NO sign of an attitude problem. I absolutely retract all statements about Buckley and leave it to others to comment on him. I was there to watch the forward line mostly. Valenti. How old is he? Going on today he should be playing AFL, but he is VERY tiny. Let's see how he goes for the year. If he drops back to the pack then that will make sense. HA! Sorry about that. Naah, I meant shattered as in buggered. He was blowing pretty hard just at the end of the third quarter. If his groin was giving him trouble he didn't show it. He was fine. He's closer to getting a game than I thought Bartram was a week ago, and look what happened there. In one sense, Bartram ended up getting selected, but in another sense, you could say it was premature.

I like these, and I did one privately and for the most part we agreed. But I thought with the exception of one player you were very kind to your demons... The only 6 I could find out of all of it was Beamer. Everyone else scored lower. You were harsh on Bell who I thought tried pretty hard and deserved maybe one notch higher. He can't help it if Goddard is much taller than him. And he found himself playing on Kosi at one stage. Surely it was never going to be his day. I thought Carroll had a horror match but could/should have had double the amount of goals kicked on him considering the lack of help from fellow KP defenders and small defenders, and the fact that he had 20 more inside fifties than they had to repel. Fair enough to give him a low score, but I couldn't bring myself to. It wasn't all his fault. You can't give wrecker a 3. A shameless 1, or 0.5 is all you get when you take no part in the game, surely. You were kind to Jamar. Davey was just about WOG. I gave him 1, and I don't think I ever have given a 1 to a guy who's played a whole game. You were kind to Brock too. He had only a handful of effective touches to half time, then was forced to pack it in. Again, not his fault, but he really was a nothing factor except for a couple of clearances. Poor bloke.

Yep. Not good enough eh? Quick note for anyone planning on referring to this subject, next time you go writing stuff about demonland posters check out who's had the highest amount of posts. A Bronze medal I wear with pride in my heart.

Yeah. Somehow missed Jace. Would you believe my wrap was written in a rush? Sorry Jace. But yes. Didn't notice him. You're probably right regarding selections there WJ. Though I think Doggy has a role to play, certainly a greater role than some of the players that played on Friday. On Newton, I had him pencilled in for 1 game at some stage, 3 games if he's lucky and we're going well, and 6 games if he has any sort of impact and we have injuries. All those games in my mind were to come later in the year too, possibly after round 8-10. Now I can see us using him as early as round 4, if the situation presents itself. At this stage there are too many reasons to play him for me to cover. But it's the reasons NOT to play him that will define his selection. As you say, we may only want to give him a run when the team is going well, and against a weaker opponent. Also it has to be the G. He has to play well consistently week in week out. And he has to play well when the real season begins. If Sandy starts to struggle, how he plays in that scenario will make a big difference one way or the other. Put all those things together and he's in like Flynn.

I've gotta say mate. I'm very disappointed at being overlooked here. Surely I have a shot at the 22 in my second season? Maybe I'll just double my word count just to get noticed?...

Oooh... I'm starting, or perhaps joining, a following. I'm pumped about this kid. Thankfully RR hasn't reminded me of my past comments about him. Everyone should make the time to get down to Sandy to see him play. There's only so much my powers of description can cover. He has to be seen to be appreciated.

I was going to cover this but RR got to it before me. Re-read his points if you want to know what I think, particularly the one about forward fifty entrances being a function of the midfield/HBFs. I've got no problem with trying something new in terms of game-plan. God knows we're not going to improve on last year by repeating EVERYTHING we did in season 2006. My problem was ND's lack of foresight to change things around when it was clear the hand-balling crap was going to lose us the game. It was apparent to all and sundry at half time, yet we continued with it in the 3rd quarter and by then it was too late. I would say it was half and half. ND should have changed things up quicker, and the players should have run harder to receive. Brown does this well, play him. IMO, and I stress this is just my opinion CB, I would prefer to see Neitz and Robbo given the ENTIRE forward fifty more often than not. Obviously it's not going to work all the time, but they both excel when given that part of the ground to work in. What you call a weakness here is actually something I want to see the footy department pursue. Pagan's paddock has worked for many forwards, and Neita shines when he's given that kind of room. Our best footy is played with Robbo leading behind Neita, and Davey standing stationary outside the fifty, then running towards goal if there's a spillage. He finds room where there is none so often he must be allowed the opportunity. But other than that, the forward fifty is a no-go zone for all. Having said that, it won't work all the time. When there's a resting ruckman, or Robbo/Neita/davey are benched etc etc. Certain teams/grounds won't allow it either... but in general... Just my thoughts. Not a rebuttal.

Yep. Not a bad game to watch, for a praccy. I went down mostly because I was depressed about Friday, and I saw a good style of footy played by Sandy, who deserved to win. Flowing through the middle to a grand total of 3 key forwards plus Sylvia, who was sort of a key forward anyway. Valenti is a star. Brown looked good. Wheatley looked classy coming out of defence. A pretty good preparation really. Gehrig walked past me at one stage. Nearly kneecapped him... Byron: I got there after the first 15 minutes of the opening quarter, and while they handed me a team - sheet with Byron's name on it, he wasn't out there. I hope he didn't get hurt in the opening few minutes. Still possibly could play on Monday week since it's a long break. Maybe they were just keeping him in cotton wool. Doubt it though. Bizzell: The defence was very leaky in the first quarter. Bizzell wasn't the guy to blame though. He had a job on a player and he did it. As the game wore on he started to find some confidence, getting some kicks, drifting forward to receive. A steady head back there was what held up the Scorpions' momentum. He went for and even took some important flat footed jumping marks. The problem here is whether or not the dees need that. We had no shortage of players willing to go for a strong contested mark in defence. That wasn't our problem. Don't know if there'll be room for him, but he did his chances no harm today. Neville: Didn't see him, but I followed our forward-line all day. Buckley: Completely forgot he was playing until late in the game, I had my mind on other things. To me he looked different from how he looked against the Hawks, even in the role he was playing. Seemed even a touch slower too. Not filled with confidence, but the fact we're playing against a side he played well against may work in his favour. Once again, he was in defence and I was at the wrong end of the ground. Brown: Had about 12 touches in the last quarter. If what we want is running defenders to receive all these handballs then there's scarcely a better choice than this guy. Went in hard, tackled hard at times and delivered relatively well. Not penetrating long kicks, but useful ones nonetheless. It'll be ineteresting to see how he goes. The mere fact that he collects a lot of possessions may be enough to get him selected. I'm going to say 75-80% chance of playing on Monday week. Garland: Looked like a quiet pocket until the game wore on. I've finally seen why they rate him so highly. He's not that big and not that experienced, but the kid can play. Looks glorious on the lead and in the air. Soft firm hands even when under the pump. Especially when under the pump. Couldn't seem to find the gap between the big posts as much as he would have liked, but he ran rings around a similar aged opponent. Not ready to play AFL just yet, but then neither was Jones or Bate at this time last year. Wouldn't be among the best, but I've seen enough now. I like him. Warnock: My goodness he's quick, and he kicked short, but beautifully today. Switched play to the guts when necessary. Looked pretty good for a few plays. He's that quick along the ground that if someone could just teach him how to play footy he'd be an awesome weapon to have in your arsenal. Doesn't like running off his man, unless he has the pill. He was pretty good, but if a tall's going to get promoted, it's going to be the Biz. Sylvia: Good news people. He wasn't too shabby at all. Last week I thought he played well, but lamented his obvious discomfort and lack of mobility. He ran more, ran harder, ran for longer and even once or twice took off on sensational sprints. Gee he's spectacular when he takes off after it, or after a player in possession. There was one play where a loose ball was heading towards the pocket boundary. We had a runner after their player who was closest, and Col tore off, overtaking the Zebs player and collecting the Scorpion in a ferocious tackle that netted him a free. The only way to describe this play is to try to get you to imagine footage on the discovery channel of one of the big cats (panther, cheetah, lioness) collecting a Gazelle. The opposition player crumbles in a mess of arms, legs, spit, sweat and dirt in a big cloud. Colin takes them to ground but somehow maintains a kind of balance. His head doesn't really move all that much, and his limbs keep moving to improve his grip, just like the paws of a big cat digging into wriggling prey in slow motion. He's born for this kind of contact, that much is clear. Let's hope the umpires don't ruin the spectacle for us. Towards the end of the third he was taking off on a trademaek run and looked absolutely shattered afterwards. After that he didn't have too much to do, and I think he spent some time on the bench. Petterd: Once again, he was in defence, but somehow I saw a bit more of him. I'd like to see him win prodigious amounts of the footy like they say he can, only because he's so highly rated. He played well, but isn't near selection just yet. Newton: Juice is fantastic. His hands are as sticky below his knees as they are when he's soaring over a pack. Sauntner didn't venture far out of the square today, and while Newton went there at bounces, he was at CHF for most of the match. That's right people. CHF. And he did very well too. At one point Godfrey came streaming from defence and drilled it to Sylvia who dropped it, retrieved under pressure on the deck, handballed to Newton, who looked like any good rover would pumping it down Sauntner's throat. Goal. And wasn't big Nick pumped up! He came out swearing and pumping his fists in a praccy match. But what pleased me was how satidfied Sylvia was when he went to Juice and gave him an enthusiastic high five. Didn't over-do it, was just really thrilled to have worked hard and gotten just desserts. Personally I was a little disappointed at first to see Sauntner hogging the square. Sylvia went there to keep him company when Juice wandered further up the ground. I was hoping to see some of Newton's leads, but as it was I was even more excoted to see a dominant CHF performance from a player in the side I was going for. The only thing he didn't do was go for a screamer, and even towards the end, he gave me what I wanted. Didn't complete it, but gee it looked good. In a nutshell, last time I saw him he looked good, and seemed to have more skills than his fair share. He added to those today with his work below his knees, in tight, and his difficult shots on goal. From what I've seen, I'm yet to pick a weakness... Even when he missed, he missed well. He took a difficult shot from fifty in the third. Did the grass in the air thing, started it left which was the correct thing to do, and it drew back, just not quite far enough. He had the right idea, was just a touch unlucky. Go you good thing Newton. Is he a chance to get selected? I'm finding it hard to find reasons for him NOT to play. Dunn's out, and Robbo and Neita looked ok. But if they want Miller to go, we could do a lot worse than Juice. One of two things will happen with him. Either he'll come on and kick 4 goals in the 20 minutes Daniher gives him, or he'll take WEEKS to make an impact at senior level, steadily improving as he goes. Perhaps it's premature, but I'd love to see him get a game. PJ: Not bad. Certainly mobile, but he doesn't EVER go for marks. He punches and hopes he'll be quick enough to retrieve it. That's certainly playing to his strengths, but he needs to make some changes if we want him to kick on. His pre-season was unfortunate in that he couldn't learn new things as he was in recovery the whole time. Looked ok in the ruck actually. Didn't see a whole lot of Gardiner though... Godfrey: Was Godfrey. He could win the Liston if he played enough, but he just doesn't know how to make that next step. Kicked 2 goals, one from a controversial fifty, one a ripper on the run. His second half was pretty strong, made a lot of runs, and didn't try to do too much by foot. A confidence builder for him, and given our atrocious midfield 2 days ago, I wouldn't be all that surprised to see him play. Would be some peoples' BOG. Neaves: Quiet day. Rucked well, and a lot, but didn't have too many telling possessions, and had fewer marks. Looked better than in recent weeks, but is a way off last year's form. Wheatley: Would be among the best, and is probably my MFC BOG. Kicked an unbelievable nine-pointer. Ran VERY hard, made room, and even seemed pretty quick compared to my memory of him. Did what Brown did, only less possessions and FAR more distance with his kicks. Is a class above at this level, and looking very fit. The favourite to come back for mine, along with Brownie. Fergsuon: Looked a bit slow and unc at first, but by the end was beating his opponent to the ball comfortably. Strong game. Inline for a call-up, but behind to many to be seriously considered. Of the Sandy players, Valenti was my BOG. How has no-one picked him up? Even at his size. Led like a captain all day, kicking goals, kicking into the forward line. he was superb. Here's the thing I don't understand. If we dropped Godfrey from the list and recruited Valenti, we'd have a better player who has many more years left in the comp! Why NOT select him. OUr list will only improve. Tomi Johnson is fast becoming my favourite player. Caught fire in the second half. Liddell is a gun. Sauntner is a crazy man. It's frustrating for us having to see him play out of the square at Newton's expenxe, but Sandy need a regular target, so I can't argue much. Just a thought. The bezt way to watch footy at Sandy is on the grass away from people. How are you supposed to concentrate on the footy when there's that much quality tail wandering around? Footballers' girlfriends are unbelievable. The rock-stars of the 21st century.

Like I said before, if it was a fracture, my understanding is that he wouldn't even be able to have limped around like he did. So that's something. See you all down at Sandy. I need to watch some good footy.

Hang on. So do they doubt that there's no break, or do they doubt that there is a break? Lost in translation there a bit. Occo I'm beginning to rely on you for my MFC news.

ANd that's where we disagree. You think the forward line weakness caused the midfield headaches. I reckon the midfield mediocrity put too much pressure on the forward line. Simple really. Just a difference of opinion. And hey. Neitz did destroy his three opponents. Any 2 marking forwards who can kick 6.5 from 33 entries is doing a bang up job. If they continue that form I'm happy for our two main forwards to get 1 scoring shot for every 3 times we go into fifty. What we NEED is more entries into fifty, and, as you say, more room for Neita and co to lead into that isn't occupied by half the opposition's players!

CB I reckon we're arguing the same thing at the heart of it. Demons we're terrible. We took guys out of our forward-line to do what you said, put one somewhere around the wing or the middle, and another as a floating defender. My position is that when MFC have done that in the past, and certainly when we did it last year, eventually our numbers won out through the middle. We would have more forward movement, the opposition would drop their heads, probably have to remove a forward or two themselves, and in the end we would dictate terms. Where this plan fell down on Friday was NOT in the forward line. They were surprisingly effective. It was our half-backs and midfield that couldn't get enough of the pill, and when they had it, overused it. I'm happy for Neitz to be up there against 3 defenders like L. Fisher, S. Fisher and an unfit Maguire. If that's the case then Neita will destroy all three in every play like a tidal wave, Robbo will be lurking one-out or on his own (dangerous to say the least), and then if there's any half forwards in and around it they'll feast on the devastation wreaked by the big man (Trav, Green, Davey... though I'm not absolutely certain Aaron played). This game worked ok for us in the first final last year because we KICKED instead of doing all this rubbish we saw two days ago. For my part, the problem is mostly with the flankers who went missing, but also with many players in the midfield rotation that were non-events. The biggest issue being that if we dropped all the midfielders who had bad games, we'd have to bring in guys like Godfrey, and we'd be just as assured of failure.

Well now none of that stuff regarding Brock is really good news. After hearing there was no ligament damage I'd taken that as it being a 3-4 week injury. But if there's still a chance of broken bones... I must admit that if it was a broken foot he was hobbling around on, you have to take your hat off to the guy. Broken bones anywhere in your body are excruciating, and I have serious doubts about most human beings' abilities to put weight on a foot with any structural damage in it. When I looked at it that way I came to the conclusion that he MUST have injured something other than the bones themselves. Surely he wouldn't be standing up if there were fractures would he?

Wow. I can't think of anything you missed. Couldn't imagine a better post match report. If only it was a win...

Yes, actually. Shock horror. I don't know if I agree with you there WJ. Yes Moloney was carving it up and we were looking good. But the guy hasn't played too much footy. Most have categorised all but one game of his pre-season as "patchy" or "rusty." If he's not too fit, you'd expect Daniher to save him for the last quarter in case we need him to steady the team. The other mode of thinking is that had he stayed on he could have gotten us 5 goals up and snuffed out the Saints immediately. What if that hadn't worked? We'd have a stuffed Moloney and one less spot on a bench full of bandaged players on crutches. I said I don't know if I agree with you... that doesn't mean I don't agree at all. I kind of have a fantasy that the dees will one day become a team like the Hawks of the 80s or the Lions of a few years ago and REALLY put sides away, time and time again. When we won last year, we'd win by 10 goals at the most. Those teams could win by 80-100 points regularly/ If you do things like rotate the Whites, Johnstones and Moloneys of this world to save them, you'll only go so far. Honestly I'm not sure which side of the fence to sit on there. Good thread though.

I'm confused CB. You say you blame the coach then say the cause of it all was having no forwardline. So you're saying ND told them all to vacate our forward fifty? Neita and Robbo were a damn good forward line on the day. I'd say our midfield was the section that went missing. Bruce, Yze, Bate, Green. They were nearly as much to blame as Davey, and they all had time in the guts. You are right that there was always 1 forward against 3 guys, but IMO that's just a symptom of a far greater problem. Everyone ran back to help out the defence and still Carroll was on his own against Gehrig? If they weren't in our forwardline, and they weren't in their forward line where were they? Oh, I'm getting a headache. My god we were crap.

Doubt it. Eyes only for the ball. A gentle open hand slap that was an accident he apologised for immediately. Head contact could make the AFL take notice, and it's probably a bit hairier than wreckers, but still shouldn't get rubbed out. Knowing our luck, they'll ping wrecker for his accident where he came off worse, and let the Pav off. How dare Ball try and injure another player by headbutting him...

That sounds like an idea. I'm going to do that. But to be honest, I think the results might be misleading. Let's say in rounds 2-6 he takes 3 soft marks a game, and then in round 7 he takes 15 in a BOG performance. He's then averaged 5 marks a game, and with that suddenly looks ok. It's the same old thing in the end, we know he can play great games, it's how he plays them, and how he plays when there's no room for him that's the problem. He'll star at subi, and the SCG, but everywhere else? If only. Neitz always has been and always will be a CHF. IMO we just can't rely on him at his age to do enough there. Also, take him out of the fifty and we lose a great FF and have to find a new one of those... 2 questions RR. Robbo won a B&F (albeit in a bad year) at CHF. What about playing him there? Can we do enough with such a small player at CHF in the modern game? Is he still good enough? Also (you're gonna love this), what about if Neitz plays up the ground, Robbo takes the square and we give someone a couple of weeks in that pocket? Most people will say Dunn/PJ/Jamar/White etc etc. What about Newton? He's listed, and he's shown something on a few occassions. We looked very uninspired there on the weekend, and inspiring X-Factor is one of Juice's strengths. A fantasy to expect him to be right for it, and for ND to select him, but still... worth a thought?

Would you say they were worse, better or the same as us? Or does all s#%t look the same to you?