Choko

I have to say, I am just surprised how surprised everyone is. That was the single worst side we have put out in the past 5 years. Yes, part of that is how horrible Morton and Moloney have been, and part of it is terrible injury. But we have a REALLY BAD LIST!

Agree with others that this side is one of our very worst I can recall in the past 10 years, both on paper and on form. Part of that is the injury list, of course. I honestly think that the only side we could beat with this team in at the moment is GWS, and even then, only a certainty at home!

Agree that he is being judged extremely unfairly by some this year. It seems there is no understanding of the seriousness of his injury, and the impact that has on fitness, physical ability and confidence. Colin is starting to become a super player and I will back him all the way. Massive fan here.

Not ready and doesn't yet have the attitude. I read on another thread that we shouldn't b giving away games..... this would be exactly that. Sends the wrong message IMO.

I actually think our decision making is reasonably good. Under Bailey, we quite often took the right options. This year, most players seem to have the footy IQ to make reasonable decisions. What lets us down time and again is our skills in execution. The backwards handballs are because of pressure. There are two sports of handballs - offensive (refer Hawthorn) and defensive. It's not so much decision making as pressure linked to poor execution of skills.

It's the midfield. There is nothing else to talk about! The rest is not a massive issue. Adelaide has one. We don't. Ours is by far and away the worst in the league. We don't have one consistent elite midfielder. We don't have guys that are up to rotating through. Yes, we need more fitness, some blokes aren't up to it, etc... But it's all about the midfield

This is the biggest snooze fest of all time. Let me summarise the last 3 pages: - I am a more special poster. No, I am. - Can we blame Neeld? Should we blame Neeld? Yeh, bugger it, blame everyone.

I preferred Moloney's first half today.

The have we improved question can be answered either way. Do I believe that we are building a way of playing and a level of accountability and discipline that is going to make us better in the long term? Yes Do I believe that we were further advanced with our old game plan than we are with our new game plan - meaning we played better last year? Yes Do I believe we were ever going anywhere with Bailey and his game style? No Do I believe we will with Neeld? Yes, absolutely. Is whether that is improvement, I don't know, but I can see more non-negotiables, more physicality and more accountability than before. I just think we are in the early stages of changing our way of playing, thinking, defending and moving the ball.

And I think you should get on the dees at $5.

Yes, and Vickery. And the distraction this causes. And coming back from interstate.

Geez, the whole year for Martin when they are still in contention for finals.... must have been naughty boys if this is the punishment. I know it's speculation at this stage. We are a massive chance on the weekend.

You shouldn't forget just how big a spud Jamar was before he became good. Sandilands was a big awkward giraffe until mid to late 20s. Way too soon on Spencer. WAY too soon. Nicho you agree. Magner is a grunt player. Put a good midfield around him and let's see. In the meantime, he is still learning.

This post is silly. Magner is a first year footballer at AFL level. Nicholson is a rookie. Spencer is a kid.

We also lack quality kicks of the half back line.

This is on its way to ugly. I am sick of Moloney and his one way running.

I think our defence will be ok and looks well balanced, even without Tom McD. However, our forward line looks totally impotent. IMO we need Petterd in the side, but in any event, I just don't think we have enough pressure at ground level. I am excited to see Blease playing again - IMO he shouldn't have been dropped in the first place. I think he can offer some pace in the forward half. Hopefully defensively too.

So you're saying that the number of ordinary players would change....

I guarantee you Martin will play for MFC this week.

This forum is hilarious. When we lose, they are all useless. When we win, we have finally bedded down the defensive game plan, Sylvia is the best there is in the AFL, Bate and Dunn are the new Selwood/Bartel combination, only more dependable. It was great to win. BUT.... what a good side would have done to us is not funny. Are if anyone seriously thinks Rivers is the answer up forward against a reasonable side, they are seriously dreaming. We got a lot of easy ball of a bunch of kids yesterday, don't kid yourselves. For me the big test is this week, in particular the first half. If the players drink their own bathwater like they did after Essendon, we will get smashed. If they buckle down and beat the Lions, I think we could say progress has been made.

What a friggin legend. With Chip and Jones, my favourite players. Just love his ruthlessness, loyalty and professionalism.

A bit unfair on the kid IMO. I agree that he could have given off, but I get the distinct impression he has been told to take the game on at all costs, and break lines. When you are told to do that and you're just a kid, it can be hard to then lower your eyes when the adrenaline gets going and it is sanctioned by the team. So I think development is absolutely necessary, but selfish a bit harsh.

Hahaha. So harsh. Awesome! Only one thing.... who here doesn't half think he's right...

I actually remember your question. I have a hazy memory that you didn't get an answer, but I do remember the howling and Mr Ridley having trouble hearing.

Well, I haven't read Ridley's book, but if what Vanlo says is correct and Ridley claims in his book that only non-members were locked out, then Ridley is simply lying. Like No Merger, I saw when the line got cut off, and I remember people waving their memberships and shouting out anti-merger slogans. It was a disgraceful act towards members, in whose name the board was acting. And Jarka, your statement that the room was shut because it was full due to legal concerns is a half-statement. It should be no less a legal issue that the place that was chosen by necessity shut out members, and that no other provision was made for members to vote, once they had been shut out. If the club knew that the tennis centre was the correct size, it beggars belief that they would end up at Dallas Brooks Hall. Had Hawthorn not "saved us", to me Ridley would be the greatest villain in the history of what would be the now-defunct Melbourne Football Club. That may be unfair, but hey, it's my opinion.