mauriesy

You said "winning is all that matters". I disagree. It is an overriding need, but with half the team playing less than 30 games, development is still critical. Hence the need to put time into players that the club deems to be a vital part of the future. I have heard on a number of occasions that the club believes in the long run that Oscar will be better than Tom. The only way he is going to get there is by the right mix of physical development, sufficient exposure to senior football and learning the basics, most likely through Casey. Tom made his debut in his first year when he was relatively underdeveloped. You run just as much risk of losing talent if good players pushing for selection are mired in the seconds for long periods. As for all the "attracting" players guff, anyone with half a brain can see the potential and future of our list, and how it's starting to come to fruition..

Learn to tackle lower, or learn to grab the arm a la Viney on Weller.

That's probably because the 'midgets' weigh more than Oscar McDonald. At the start of the season, Oscar was listed at 82kg, some considerable kilos less than players like Rich, Bastinac and Pearce and Bewick. Freeman, for example, had 14kg on Oscar yesterday, plus a couple of centimetres. Tom Bell had 16kg. I heard a player from another club on the radio yesterday saying that in order to comfortably play as a key defender, he had added 16kg to his frame over the 5 years since he had been drafted. Tom McD is about 12kg heavier than Oscar with the extra 4 years experience. Oscar therefore is a rangy, tall defender who needs some time to build an AFL-ready body. At the same time, some AFL level experience, combined with consolidation for periods at Casey, will benefit his development. Yesterday was a perfect match to give him some time. I don't think we've reached that stage yet. Winning is great, but our window based on the age of our list opens in 2-3 years, and in the meantime development is still as important as winning. Look at some of our team before yesterday and the number of games they've played: Hogan 28 Petracca 3 Oliver 6 Stretch 14 Newton 15 Michie 20 Oscar Mc 3 Hunt 5 Neal-Bullen 11 Wagner 6 Harmes 16 That's half the team that has played less than 30 games. All 11 combined have a tally the same as Jack Watts, and about 25% of Brent Harvey's! I thought yesterday was a good result given the age dimension. My thinking is not only 'in the now' but two years down the track when all these players have added 30-40 games to their experience. I don't know what everyone expects from players so young, but I expect them to make some mistakes. I'm not making excuses, because our season so far has been terrific, but let's be realistic.

Forecast for Alice Springs next Saturday. Maximum 23C, overnight minimum 9C.

Playing the victim again. A common problem here. So the MRP is going to make a decision based on who we are and whether we lost, are they?

I mean now, not in the fuiture.

Who's the 2nd tall though?

I thought Tom was good yesterday. He was the least of our worries, even when he kicked it.

Wouldn't matter how tall your backline is if your backline organisation leaves opposition players unattended 25 metres out directly in front of goal when the ball is coming in, or your defenders can't run back when your opposition wins contested ball and gets through a forward press time and time again. We probably need another tall, mobile defender, but I think we need a tall forward to help out Hogan even more.

Watts: dead eye dick

Meat and three vegs? He's a 10-course gourmet tasting menu!

At the end of 2017, Jupiter wil be on the other side of the solar system to earth, and Neptune will be at 90 degrees. Saturn is close and the influence will be strong. That means he's staying ... or maybe he's going. Of course you could be talking out of Uranus.

I want to congratulate Spencer on re-signing. He is prepared to stick with the club despite the fact that he is now behind Gawn as the main ruck, and he will most likely only get an opportunity due to any injury Gawn will (hopefully not) sustain. His loyalty is unquestioned and he is great back up insurance. We need to keep players like that and show some faith .

Nah, he's just gone over there for 'a look around'.

I'll believe that when I see it.

Allow can mean 'permit' or 'authorise'. But it can also mean 'give the opportunity for'. Emma is using the latter. Words can have multiple meanings, you know.

I think with SWYL it's less about rocket science and more about schadenfreude.

I thought Emma Quayle's summation was pretty good. It was in the context of an article about trading future draft picks. I think we traded next year's first round draft pick for these reasons: It helped us to get the pick that we used on Oliver (ahead of Essendon) It helped us to get another top-10 pick that we used on Weideman If we rise up the ladder, two top 10 picks in 2015 are better than one top-10 pick in 2016 If we do, the 2016 first round pick wouldn't be worth much more than the extra 2015 first-round pick we received (#9). Make the 8 and our 2016 first-round pick is #10, at best. It's better to have a good pick 'in the hand' and developing rather than another new recruit for 2017, especially with a tall like Weideman.

I like the fact that Gawn has taken 8 years to become an overnight success.

Looking back through this thread, about 95% here were "clueless". Peope make mistakes. You recognise it, learn from it, and move on.

No matter how good your team is, there'll always be the 38th best player on the list. How you react to them, and regard them, is a measure of your knowledge and maturity as a supporter. Constant denigration hardly ever looks good.

I thought Garland did alright too. But one bad handball is equal to the other 14 OK possessions, apparently.

Agree with this. Judd was very good and showed the knowledge he has as an ex-player. Three people on the Footy Classified panel (Wilson, Hutchinson, Barrett) who are more interested in the politics, rumour and personalities of football, rather than analysing the game, is one too many. Plus I actually find Barrett's diction hard to understand. So Judd provided a much better balance, is articulate and knows his stuff. I'm not too worried that Melbourne doesn't get a mention in the this media. I'd much prefer the focus to be on Richmond and Collingwood. I would, of course, like to get a mention next weekend when we beat the Bulldogs.

In the clear from the MRP. Not even reviewed.

And the reasons may well be that we were first to the ball, and tackled better. Same as the Bulldogs. Also, I believe a free kick goes down in the stats as a contested possession. So the more free kicks you win, the better your CP count. Sort of like a self-fulfilling prophecy if you think that the more contested possessions you win, the more likely you are to get a free kick. I'd like to see where Pannell did the majority of his umpiring. If it was, say, in the centre where the Bulldogs were first at the ball, it might explain some of the discrepancy. Or maybe the Bulldogs forward line, where defenders can often infringe in marking or ruck contests. I don't think it's just as simple as 17-1 = bias.