Nasher

Amazing how much people will read in to a simple comment from a player for whom public speaking clearly isn't a strength. Purely a case of a country lad mincing his words.

Most human beings have this thing called empathy. I know some don't - we all have our shortcomings. It doesn't mean any of us want to win any less, in case that's what you were wondering.

Interpretation is a funny thing. No idea how willmoy got from that sentence, to the sentence he wrote here. Thanks - that actually makes sense.

nutbean, you are completely and utterly wasting your time.

Genetics and the right home environment are one thing, but the drive and competitiveness are all Jack.

That rumour was surely just proof they just take the [censored] out of us with this stuff. As if the man born in a Melbourne jumper was ever going to go. Viney has gone up a level this year, seems to have developed the physical capability to match his manic brain. Been simply awesome this year.

Nice choice. For some reason these two belong as a pair in my head. Our new age attacking defenders. Love it.

To be fair, if it was a modern era Nokia, it's not that impressive a feat.

Merged old thread with Picket's thread

Of course. I reckon being challenged is more important though.

Not sure what to make of these beltings. Is the competition that lopsided? I can never help but wonder how this affects the development of our seconds players when they play against witches hats.

Fringe players for fringe players is a mugs game, especially after a huge win. Salem is the only viable in in that list of yours, along with Lumumba.

Wright is hopeless. I was amazed by the worry about him during the week. It's not to say he'll never be any good as we all know how dangerous it is to write off tall forwards on early form, but last night he played at about the level I thought he is at.

Definitely lost it at selection (oli). Two Meter Peter gave us an absolute bath as tall forwards always do (Clint). Gold Coast absolute bounced back - words were indeed marked (praha). Collectively, Demonland friends, we know bugger all. Just remember that!

Hunt is in his third season on the list (notwithstanding missing most of the first injured) and Wagner is nearly 22. I'd be surprised if these two were treated with the kid gloves that have been applied to the first year players in Oliver, Weideman and Hulett. Especially not on the back of both of them playing their best games.

Comment lacks GIF.

That's behind us with the upgrade a couple of weeks ago, hopefully.

When our defence was being torn apart, the answer from the box was to get Dunn out of there and throw Pedersen back. It's hard to know the full picture when you're not in the box, but being thrown out of defence and then the side tells me plenty.

I kind of understand the "btdt" attitude of those above, but he's been consistently in the Casey best all year, and apparently killed it this week playing on a HBF. Read the Plapp report, it was as glowing they come. And it just so happens, we have a HBF vacancy this weekend. The guy has well and truly earned another shot. How about getting on board and showing some support?

I've always thought that clangers is an interesting statistic. If you look at the top 3 clangerers(?) for some of the top teams, it's often their best players. Eg for North: Cunnington, Wells and Ziebell, for Geelong it's Duncan, Selwood and Dangerfield, for GWS it's Shiel, Griffen and Ward and so on. As you point out, for us it's Viney, Vince and Watts. You don't tend to think of these players as turnover merchants though. I suppose what it doesn't say is the impact of those turnovers - e.g. a Viney handball in traffic may go directly to an opponent, therefore be recorded as a clanger, but that player is then immediately tackled and a ball-up results. You'd think a McDonald clanger is usually more likely to be of high impact given where he plays and the manner in which he usually gets rid of the ball. That's a very hard statistic to analyse though.

New Balance are the only brand that make running shoes that fit my stupid square feet, so they're my preferred brand anyway. The partnership with the MFC and the awesome discount just seals the deal.

Of course, but "betters the side" is subjective and hard to measure. It would have to obviously better the side a lot in order to be worth the risk I think, but I doubt too many clubs are going to be lining up for a trade that involves giving us such a boost at their own expense.

McDonald has missed one game in three seasons, and the last time he played for Casey was in 2011(his first season) - I doubt he's going to suddenly be surplus to requirements at the end of this year. We've got one tall defender cooking at Casey in Oscar, but he isn't good enough yet and there's no certainty he ever will be - big brother Tom was a lot further advanced at the same age. He has his limitations, but I think the bottom line is he's our best tall defender. As DA pointed out, we wouldn't be able to bring in a better one, but I'd go one further - there's room for a better one and Tom in the side still; Dunn would be the defender that got pushed out. He'll be a 100 game player by the end of this season. I suppose I don't know what we would receive in this hypothetical trade, but it feels like a total waste of development if we gave up now. I'd be livid if we traded him for draft picks.

Or is it just because they are they 22 and 20 respectively? I reckon you only have to be 5% off the boil mentally to appear slow and lazy at AFL level, which renders you completely useless. I reckon it's just a function of inexperience, and the problem we have is that half our team is filled with players at this age and level of experience - if too many off them fall off the effort cliff at once, the results reflect accordingly. The question is, how do you address it? I doubt their lack of "putting in" is intentional (I definitely don't like the term "pick and choose"), just more a lack of recognising when the focus is off and lacking experience in breaking out of it. You could drop them, but in the case of Kent in particular, he's clearly best 22 - you risk hurting the team by doing this. I don't think dropping them is particularly productive, in the same sense that you wouldn't punish your kids for knocking over a glass of water - save the punishment type responses for the players who actively, consciously defy team rules. It needs to be responded to with education, and this is something that can happen while in the team still I think - until the player starts to become a real repeat offender then you're left with no choice. This is where Roos, Goodwin et al (should) earn their money IMO.

t_u, at risk of making a Satyriconhomesque "you all suck" post, this truly is the Demonland modus operandi. I've become quite convinced over the years that the majority of our posters can only remember the last thing they saw.