timD

That's bloody obvious. No one has posted that Miller is our CHF solution. He showed a lot in one season and has never reproduced that form. As for toughness (and it aint perceived), I'd think that it is worth a lot and other than paul johnson, no-one else in the team shows any. Flying the flag not important any more? Bate does not play CHF alone. Dunn doesn't either. If you look at Dunn, he is yet to really show that he is any good on the lead, and certainly does not present himself that way. Contested marking, well, again what has he shown? Argueable Miller has shown plenty more (which is very disappointing) and he is not that good. As for Bate, well, the days of the power forward are over UNLESs you are just superb. Bater will play midfield/CHF, like sylvia. Interestingly, there was talk in the beginning that he had little upside and might only FF or FB. Me, I think he lacks the intesity to play midfield and his hands are not quick enough. I'd have him as part of that FF/CHF/HFF rotation group with sylvia.

THanks Barry, much appreciated.

Tony, I agree. Between the pathetic coodabeens, morphett and lonergan they are almost impossible to listen to. I remember morphett celebtraing a blues win two years ago against melbourne, and he just rolled out all the usual crap. Muppet.

Between Jarka and mo64 we have a pair. BUT OF WHAT? Drop the 'voice of reason' act boys. You do not have the style or content to carry it. Miller was serviceable. What people like is his effort and application and character as it can be perceived. Funny, neither Jarka nor m064 rate that. Says oh so much.

It is not just skills but DECISION MAKING! FFS! FFS! Jones, meters in the clear, kicking long to WHAT??!? Wheatley, is the dying seconds, chipping into the middle? PJ excellent. Miller Good. Aussie, not bad sunshine, not bad at all. Morton, all he needs is time, confidence and two summers in the gym. Sylvia should be traded for whatever we can get - christ I'd take a chicko roll at this point. He does stupid things often and good things rarely. Bad ratio.

I'm sceptical about mclean off halfback, but is could teach him how to man up and run-off without being tagged (if he ever is - he surely couldn't deal with this least year).

While I do not think were close to getting a flag, I also think the rehab issue has worth. ONe being wrong doesn't rule out the other. With Melbourne, every little thing needed to go our way all the damn time. It is hard to quantify the difference better facilities would ahve made...would we have beaten Carlton once during the season and made top 4?

Are the moderators reading this thread...surely some sort of punishment or apology is warranted! What a opportunity!

It's not the pathetic abuse that you spout, it is the weakness of the argument that is offensive, Jarka. Christ man, show some bloody rigour to your thinking! You raised recruiters and that they were the ones you listened to the most. Other opinons were less valued BY YOU. It means what I summarised it it mean. And what I wrote was all about 'opinions' - yet you criticise me for making something up while using my conclusion as your own? You tell me how to grade the calibre of reasoning you display. The 'ladies' crack is amusing: every chick I know could take you (including my 15 month old niece or my 85 year old grandmother, and I'm talking physically - I'd spare you the display of my neice outpointing you intellectually, but it would make great youtube vids). Finally, I set you one challenge and you could not respond. NAME one run-with player we have, given the abundance of them we supposedly have. As for Frawley, I wonder if we have really returned to the most limp of states: we'll have to wait and see. But I guess that is what recruiting is all about, hey Jarka?

Let me get this straight: Jarka is basing the guts of his point of view on a point of view expressed by others. Fantastic: ignoring that recruiters vaue people differently - for example, the Freo blokes values ricky p in the top tem I think, or something and were gutted that we pcked him up just before them at 30-something. So were we wrong to wait? In effect Jarka is arguing that he likes another recruiter's point of view over CAC's. He then phrases an argument (cheap shizen but what ever) as if it makes the opinion a !!fact!! that we took frawley too high. Funniest thing happened on my way to the draft...Jarka bitched that CAC doesn't pick KPP's, and then bitched when he picks one that might need development. Where are all those instant footy heroes just waiting to be picked up? As for the bartrum argument, Jarka can you name ONE! other run-with player that we have. You imply that we have heaps, but 'cause this is absolute rot I'll keep the game simple - name one run-with player (no defenders now, that is cheating!). What a self-pleasuring morass this bloody thread became.

2 - character is everything

BB59, I remember going to see Sandy take on box hill last year I think. Saw Mitch thorp and buddy. Both were crap - milked easy possessions, did not follow their man, beaten in one -on- one contests and were clearly physically overpowered. What should I have made of that? Frawley is young and as good physical attributes. Suppossedly has good mental attributes for footy. Hid kicking is ugly but effective. He was also injured a lot last year and has some sort of limit this year. I'd be suspending judgement for a little while.

Nice point. I just have to make sure that I'll remember that rather than wanting to drown my sorrows or forget teh club exists.

There were a number of times that Buckley was part of a contest and tehn stopped. What was stark was that Chance Bateman would just run off and often be in the nexty contest. Buckley makes lots of mistakes but he gets that ball and applies himself. I don't think he'll make it, but if he learns to keep running rather than doing a job and stopping, who knows?

Clint, this drove me mad yesterday. THey did not run on after a contest, they did not man up, they did not tackle and they lost their feet. I reckon that if we got half a team from this board together, got onto the turps and then played us yesteday, we would have been harder at it and kept our feet more. Hell we would have been half a chance to win!

I was pleased with PJ yesterday. Tim e for Jeff to go to Sandy and become an on-field mentor to meeson

Talk about someone showing pride in the jumper and I struggle to name anyone better than junior that I've seen. Week after week he pulls himself up from the base of packs, always goes when it is his turn. Did he also have CFS in his teenage years? I don't reckon there's an ounce of footy talent that he's left undeveloped. Few can say that. I'll be there.

I've actually found that people look at us as ineffective, soft (at times), inconsistent, flakey, but not with the loathing or hatred reserved for lots of other clubs. It would not take much to turn that around - look at geelong and the handbag phenomena of but a few years ago.

mo64, if you read demonology, only rono really resists, and he's not even reading what I wrote. Chook and George address aspects of the argument, and both are responded to directly - and on the point they raise. So, 'all-and-sundry' is just wrong. What is it with you and facts - you like alluding to them them but find them slippery in practice. What are you actually struggling with - my tone or content or both? And, back onto the real issue, what else would you like to know about AFL/MFC finances?

Mo64, you NEVER know all the facts. You are infomed by what you know (or thing you know). And that is the best that you ever get. What matters is the usefulness of the facts you have. Rhino's post addressed falsehood, but not all the facts pertaining to the MFC's finances. I'll make the point another way - do you know all the facts about your partner/kids/job/business/footy club? ALL of them? Does that stop you talking about them or knowing useful things?

mo64, I'm going to enjoy this. 1) the title is not misleading. The thread does concern funding and home truth, just not all of them. Your criticism is akin to saying that a book entitled "the Great War' that concentrates on australians in france and not gallipoli is not really about 'the great war' at all. 2) Just because you know part of the 'fact set' does not mean that an argument is or is not emotive. It may be both factual and emotive. Clearly this one is factually informed AND emotive. Not fully informed does not mean fully or only emotive. That is a illogical and unsupported point. 3) Your last point is relevant to this thread in what way? At which point does the thread author propose different, or address this issue? And factually you are again struggling. We contribute to the AFL because of 150 years of history, enmity and game-playing. It is because teams play teams that the game exists at all. Viewing the relative amount each team brings to the AFL forgets that it is irrelevant if there is no interaction with other teams. Interaction creates the value - the individual weighting then becomes an interesting accounting fact only. What is actuallyrelevant is what we bring to ourselves thorugh MFC-only funding streams. Next time you accuse me of being 'only emotive' just make sure that you know what you're talking about.

Deanox, PG did come out last year with most of this info, and it has been shown on this board at least once before. We are not interested enough to notice or smart enough to understand. As a community, we would rather live in fanasy land or [censored] and whinge. I'm proud.

Be interesting...if we can choke the midfield (not that we've shown that much to this point), then buddy become less and less effective. He is a good player on the lead - not a pack marker yet. Wouold not be surprised if whoever plays onhim pushes off a lot - maybe even Bruce. Before people report me to the mental health services, remember that bruce has played marker roles before and done well, particularly on players like johnson (dogs) and Burton (adeliade).

Maurie, are we the same basket case that is goingto finish 5th in CAro's estimation?

Dappa Dan reveals he is indeed yze magic