Dappa Dan

I admire the glass half full mentality, and I'm not stupid enough to write us off after one round, but there are a couple of differences between last night's debacle and last season's first round. We were underdone and unprepared in those first 2 rounds last year, then we were robbed in round 3. Last night we had players that looked very sharp, certainly sharper than they did at round 1 last year. Neitz is a good example. Against the Blues we were stunned by a crap side playing beautiful positive footy through Feva. Last night we were stunned by an underdone side playing negative footy. Last year we came good because we had room to improve. Last night we showed signs there are inherent problems with the current list/coach/gameplan. Most of all though, there were players that people think played badly that apparently should improve. Carroll was on his own against a dual coleman medallist who had 50 metres to work in, a dominant midfield and 20 more inside fifties. Holland had our equal second most possessions and 11 marks. Neitz kicked 3.2 against multiple opponents with much less support and entrances inside fifty. Robbo made the most of very little. Our attack all fled to the backline, and the backline were up against it all day, especially without Rivers. The problem is the midfield. Brock is out. Moloney and Jones did ok. We had SO many passengers in there it was ridiculous. Bruce, Green, Yze (played in the guts at least a little) and Bate all had huge problems. Yes they'll improve but will they improve enough? Can you rely on the perennial flakes in this side to suddenly add 15 possessions each to their tallies? With no Brock? Fix the inherent problems in the midfield and we have some hope. They're all pretty damn good players when they're on so why can't we? If Beamer can play his first real game in ages and play THAT well, then any of these fit guys should be able to go alright shouldn't they? For my part, looking at the way the Dorks played tonight it may be a case of meeting the right opposition at the right time. But if we limp over the line against these blokes, then play a quality side and bring garbage like we did yesterday, then what's the point? One of the dees fans I was sitting with said it best. Even if we fixed up our big problems we're still nowhere near good enough to beat the big sides away. And we have to be.

Yeah. Funny stuff. But to be honest I can't help but admire Neitz and Robbo for what they were able to extract from just 33 entries into fifty. The forward-line players themselves weren't to blame. IMO you had Gehrig kicking 4.3 to Neita's 3.2. That's only 2 more scoring shots with about 20 more inside fifties. He was for the entire match up against Carroll one out, which is a challenge for any defender. And if you say we were lucky Gehrig didn't slot those posters? Well Neitz missed 2 pretty straightforward shots too. Given the dominance of the Saints' half backs and midfield Gehrig was always going to have the lion's share of forward entries. If Neitz had the same midfield delivering to him he would have kicked 8.4.

Agreed. It's time to welcome the Biz back with open arms. Rivers will return too and Byron is desperately needed. Looking at the first 3 quarters of Hawks v Lions, they rival us for poor footy in round 1. They've kicked 18 points in 3 quarters. I don't mind that idea of putting Brown in for Ooze. I wouldn't like to speculate on whether it'll happen, Yze did get a lot of possessions compared to many on the ground, though he was as appalling as just about anyone. I'd like to see Bartram given more time in the VFL(though I love seeing his name on the team-sheet). I'm convinced he's not quite right. I was stunned to see his name come up. That said, he didn't have a lot of time to get ready having played for Sandy earlier in the week. The following shouldn't get a shot at round two, but probably will for various reasons: Davey (history/reputation) Bruce (talent, important to the team) Jamar (who else?) Miller (who else?) Yze (lot of possessions, lack of replacements) Then there were a few that you can excuse partially because of making at least some effort, but being too young and inexperienced to get the team anywhere on the day: Bate (Tried hard, will get a second week but I'll be watching him) CJ (Did some good things and earned more than one week given his big pre-season) Bell (Worked his arse off) My god. There's any number of changes they could ring in. Biz in for any one of about 3 defenders, take your pick. Rivers in for Ooze perhaps? Pickett for McLean. Brown for bartram? Jeez, I dunno. I'm comfortable for many things to change, but I want to see a different game-plan. That's really the only thing.

May be gaaaaaaaawn. Took a flying swing at Nigel Lappin late in the third quarter against the Lions. Looked to me like a blatant attempted trip. As it happens it looked like he hyper-extended his ankle in a similar way to Brock and went off in a bad way. Ironic Edit: Has come back on and looks alright.

WOW! So what does that mean? Obviously there's no break in the bones. Does this equate to a sprain?

To all of you who are asking for Daniher's head because of this so-called "new gameplan," consider this... If we played our stronger game, kicking long and basically playing like we did all last year, we will win all our games at the G bar maybe one, and continue to get done by the better sides. If we want a repeat of last season, then we go the way most people are talking here. If we want change something has to be done differently. The worst thing about all of this... ND can throw any amount of gameplans at the dees, and sadly, only one works with the skill sets available to the current list. We will revert back to our A-game and win some matches, but the same crap will keep happening against WC and Sydney. When you boil it down, ND isn't capable of teaching this list a different brand of footy. Maybe it's partly the team's problem in not being able to adapt? Maybe it's ND's fault? Maybe he doesn't have the trainers and support to bring about change? Who knows. All I can say is we're in big trouble. My early season pessimism about the demons has returned, and I'm finding it hard again to get excited about coming weekends.

6 - Moloney 5 - Neitz 4 - Jones 3 - Robertson 2 - Holland 1 - White

Yeah, not bad occo. I'm way too [censored] to offer my own wrap. I counted about 20 reasons to be disgusted straight after the game, and I've counted 20 more since then. Among them, - We lost at the G. We lost once at the G last year and still couldn't make top 4. - I lost more respect for ND tonight than I would have with any 6 losses from last year, including the Blues ones. But then I have liked ND a lot up until tonight. - Yze's game wasn't the worst he's played, and he'll probably play next week only because we carried so many. Did you realise occo? He was the one that was pinged for abuse and handed Gehrig that goal? That should get your blood up if it wasn't already... - Defence is nothing without Rivers. - Brock out for ten weeks will do the same thing as what happened to Bruce a few years ago when he was favourite for the brownlow. He'll be back for only the second half, and even then a structural injury to his kicking foot, on which he can't run to stay fit... Let's just hope it's not 10 weeks. - Saints were undermanned, unfit, and they didn't play THAT well. We were nearly at full strength, supposed to be fitter than ever, and have not played worse in YEARS! - After round 3 people were saying regardless of how well we went from there we could NOT win the flag. I have that feeling already this year. - Davey :angry: - ND has tried to implement another game plan, but true to form has employed it at the wrong time, and failed to alter it when it failed to work. For years we've screamed at him for not having a plan-B, now that he has one, he has no idea when to use it, and has apprently completely forgotten about plan-A. Positives. - Neitz was admirable. - Robbo looks ok, or at least looked ok until the second half. - Beamer was my BOG for MFC. - Jones was good but faded a little bit. There were other things, but I'm going to leave you all to it and go and drown myself.

Yeah, just watched the replay It looked to me like Brock dropped and kicked the ball oddly as a result of the bump. The ball drifted further forward on his foot than it would normally, and from what little I can tell, it put too much pressure on too little area around the toe part of his foot. It looked like it hyperextended a little, and when he was on the bench with the physio poking around, it seemed he was inspecting that part of his foot. It sounds like a silly little thing, but that's all I could see that might have caused it. Once it happened he was enourmously distressed and still tried to run to CHB to contest the next opposition thrust into their forward 50. When he finally made his way to the bench he was in as bad a way as I can remember him being. Tough. My hope is that there's little or no structural damage, and perhaps it was just a tendon/sprain thing. Honestly though, I'm preparing for the worst. As for reports, Davey smacked Baker in the head and apologised afterwards. Umpire siad it was a free and nothing else, so that's some hope, and he did do it more or less with his forearm. Whelan may get something ONLY because there was damage to the head of Ball. It was totally fair, and an accident, but that's never stopped the panel from rubbing guys out. Apparently it was whiplash that had Whelan off the ground. Montagna was being hassled by Trav in the last and turned with a clenched fist and thumped Trav as hard as he could in the chest. Could be worth a look. But who knows?

That's what I thought. I could've sworn I saw the number 45 running around after the clash. If that's what happened to Brock, then that's up there as the most disastrous start imaginable...

Hmmm. Tim, if you're out there in cyberland, I reckon Brock may have done the right thing by you and stitched me up. The crux of my arguement was that he don't get badyly injured, or injured regularly, and that he play well this year. Looks like I've got nowhere to go now eh?

Now that's a post (#33). I don't agree with a whole lot of it, but it's well considered and composed. There's no confusion. I won't come on here and hurl sniping little insults at you, or critique your lack of understanding just because I disagree. BB, that's because there's nothing in your post that warranted a response. At least the one-liners didn't come on and pick every little fault with what you wrote. Those posters aren't going to come on and make a fool out of you because you did it all by yourself. Mate, many of us were there, and no, no-one played as well as Brock at the final siren. Have whatever opinion you like. And everyone else will have theirs. See above. One liners are sometimes used to highlight a point, not repeat the obvious. And on your later posts, you make some good points. It's one thing to consider the future, another altogether to have a slanging match over who would make the better captain in 12 months time. Neita is the man. As for the future, it's a fanciful subject, most have treated it as such. Those who chuck on a one-liner about who they prefer know that what we say matters not a jot. The footy department will make the final call, and honestly, I'll always prefer Neita, but behind that, I'll take Bruce, Green, Brock and I'd even consider Davey. With the youth coming through like Bate, Jones etc etc I think the captaincy debate could be the kind of thing that'll get everyone on these boards talking for the next 5-10 years!! God forbid we all fail to live up to your idea of "understanding." As far as I can tell, apart from BB, this has all been mostly one opinion vs another. If it's such a trial to come on here are listen to all this "misunderstanding" why bother at all?

I think this will be the telling factor. Not Ward, obviously, the run. We go in with almost no-one underdone in any way. Our fitness and legspeed will be what gets us over the line in the end, and should we find ourselves down by 5 goals mid-way through the match, fans should stick around. This could be similar to the Saints finals in that respect, though there are obvious differences. Since last we met... Them: In - Maguire, Blake, M.Clarke, Hayes, Attard, Fiora, McQualter Out - Reiwoldt, Powell, Peckett, Voss, Hamill, R.Clarke Us: In - Bartram, C.Johnson, Moloney Out - Pickett, Sylvia, Rivers So what does that tell you? Very little considering all those players who had compromised effect on the game last year, like Whelan, Hamill, Clarkex2, Gehrig, Robertson and Green. The biggest ins there in Maguire and Hayes are coming in underdone, and the outs cancel one-another out. Rivers = Reiwoldt. I'm picking us, though not by more than 20 points in the coming weather.

A little surprised at that... I reckon Miller will play back, at least to begin with. We only have 2 full-time KP defenders in there who have to take Gehrig (Carroll) and Kosi (Holland). If anything goes wrong with one of those, Miller will HAVE to go back. There's no-one else. Excellent to see Moloney in there... And the biggest shock... BARTRAM!!!!! He's back already! Absolutely all for it having watched him the last 2 weeks.

Yes, yes, yes. If you're going to be serious about it then you could argue that the Blues could possibly win the flag. But, as I said, was it good for a laugh? Was for me. Most of it was. Personally I agree Hawthorn were high too, but I rate them much higher than the Blues. IMO they have good reason to at least be a little excited about this year. Though admittedly not all of it was comical to me. He has to have done his homework to know that Jones is still eligible for the Ron Evans award. Many still have to be told he's up for it despite having been nominated last year.

I thought Brock was right to go? sauce?

Are you serious? Carlton? 8th?

New name for the Rising Star...

Whoa.

It's such a laugh, up until you look at his pick for the Ron Evans medal and 2 of the All Australians. http://www.afl.com.au/Default.aspx?tabid=2...mp;newsId=40109

I absolutely applaud the gist of this thread, but I'm not sure about this phrase here. I'm not so certain we "need" him. can see us being hugely successful with him out of the team as well as in. But that's beside the point. MFC celebrated Jim breaking this record some years ago, and on the very match he broke it the commentators said it's a rule that would never be broken. As he said this a young floppy haired Yze was running right behind the man who set this record. If it's going to be broken I don't want ANYONE to say that he did it because he shirked contests, or was soft, or whatever. Whether or not it's true is up to the individual, of course, but what I want is for the record not to be a farce. What's the worst that could happen Ooze? Maybe you go in hard the match before you break or equal the record and are knocked unconscious because of a selfless and admirable act. What happens then? You're remembered even more fondly because you sacrificed an almost certain place in footy history for your team/teammate's/club's benefit. You'd be more of a legend then than you would be if you broke it. In that sense it would be the same as Rohan Smith announcing his retirement before his 299th game, which was a knockout final. If the dogs lost that game he'd be remembered for self-sacrifice, not a number.

Great thread topic in the light of who visits this forum. There are exceptions to this rule. For example there are people that KNOW they won't be able to attend games, so they buy a $200 raffle ticket and decline getting a membership. In this case I don't think you can say they're any more or less involved than a member who gets a standard membership and only attends a few matches a year, or none. To take this further, if you're a fan who buys up a few hundred dollars of merchandise, say a footy, gurnsey, keychain, and a couple of DVDs, and you buy them from MFC's store, then you're doing the club a favour there too. I don't know if there's a dollar amount you can put on whether a fan becomes a supporter, but you can always tell a person who doesn't bleed when their club loses. I always find within about 5 minutes they say something that no die-hard fan would say... like "How good is BRETT Moloney" or "I hope Nicholson has a good year." I never have a go at pretenders for not knowing anything about the dees, but my eyes glaze over when I realise they don't really know anything about MFC. I was talking to someone the other day, and I said they should buy a membership because the club was in trouble financially and needed the help, despite recent successes. He said "meh, there'll always be a Melbourne demons. There has to be a club for Victoria's capital city. they'll be fine." I could have slapped him.

CJ - classy left foot Trav - best MFC footballer Green - superboot is back Bell - 200 game player

You betcha!!! Unfortunately for you Old it'll only go to my specific email list, which is small, but growing by the minute. Funny you should mention the number 30,000. At the completeion of the season last year I emailed my brother who missed the whole season while being a ski-instructor in Canada (and no, he didn't drive a Range Rover while he was there). Having pretty much missed EVERYTHING that went on, I went into a great amount of detail, as only I can. In two days I wrote him 30,000 words on the season's achievements, and how each player went... and yes.... that's 30,000 (thirty-thousand). That's a thesis in some universaity masters degrees. If only someone would pay me for this...

Condolences, Tony.