Nasher

Thought Riley was just the tonic we needed - came on and added hardness at the contest. His tackling was at its ferocious best and got plenty of the ball. I've never seen a player who crash-tackles like he does. Definitely had a high impact as the sub. As Clint Bizkit alluded to, I'm not sure he'll deliver it on a consistent basis, but I'm more than happy to celebrate these small victories for the fringe players.

To put this in to context, Spencer's 8 kicks yesterday was a career high. His previous best was 6, and in the previous two rounds he had 1 and 2 respectively. In his 32 games, it was only the fourth occasion where his kicks outnumbered his handballs, and it was by far the highest kick:handball ratio of his career as well (2:1). I hope the message to him is, "nothing ventured, nothing gained". We all know he has a funny action and will probably fluff the odd one, but I hope he continues to take risks like he did yesterday. 2 out of 3 decent kicks forward is definitely more valuable to the team than his previous mode of operation.

Beveridge: "we didn't see that coming". Oh dear. Was it Fifty5 who posted at the time Neeld said this; rule #1 when managing a high performance team - "no unpleasant surprises"?

It's Nathan Jones. Nothing is unforgivable.

*than. Funny though, well done

I have to confess, I was half-expecting Fitzy to come in to the side and end up playing 2nd ruck despite not having played in that position for Casey at all this year. Just seemed like such an MFC thing to do. Defence is obviously a last-ditch effort to try and get some value from a player who clearly has AFL level attributes but hasn't been able to string it all together; I'm glad they're sticking with it though, and so far so good though. Very pleasing.

The thing most impressive about Spencer's game for mine was his willingness to get involved around the ground. He ran to make himself a link up option in the middle, and didn't shirk his responsibilities to keep the ball moving forward i.e. none of those stupid kicks across half back that go to the opposition, or a handball around the back to Jonesy from stationary. I've thought in recent weeks he was a player all too aware of his own limitations and was scared to kick it. I doubt he'll get the hitout figures he got when up against a more quality ruckman, but I don't see why he can't bring those other aspects to his game every week. It was truly like watching a different player.

Tom McDonald must have reveled in the opportunity to be just a boring defender, for once, rather than the gatekeeper between the MFC and complete oblivion.

Gosh winning feels good. Had my 3 boys all watching and barracking for the first time ever too (rather than fleeing the house in fear). My 7 year old son said he wanted to go to the MCG and watch Melbourne play because the crowd sounded awesome. Win games and the fans will come, MFC. So stoked.

They've had a truck load of low percentage shots on goal - flying shots from tight or from outside 50 etc. Our defence (starting from the middle) looks organised.

Spencer the most pleasant surprise so far. Where has this been?

Post #13 in this thread. No doubt where Barrett got the idea. Damian, if you're reading this: you're a germ. Cheers

I'd prefer Tyson to be out and recovering than in and half-going. Hopefully Michie or Newton can really stand up this week.

I remember Gawn rucking solo against Minson in a game where we were either overrun or came very close to it, and he was completely cactus and hardly competed in the last quarter. Looks as if it might have been in this game in 2013: http://afltables.com/afl/stats/games/2013/071120130629.html. It was a huge factor in the result. It has happened, but not recently that I can recall. That said, given his injury history, I'd be surprised if his engine was that much bigger now than it was then. Not withstanding Spencer's limitations, going in to to a game with Gawn as the solo ruck is a risk IMO. At the moment I feel we've got a choice between 3 ruckmen that all add nothing at their worst and are a long way off their best. Agree that Spencer has the lowest ceiling of the three, but I think he's the right choice for the time being.

Sorry for making a post that adds nothing, but I have to say I love this kind of topic, because I know absolutely nothing about the subject. Both Luke's post and bing181's response sound like they could be reasonable to me.

So why do you want Gawn again?

The most solid 7 possession game of all time? He goes in, he tackles, he seems to have a touch of class, he looks good, he kicked a goal with his first kick. He still ain't ready.

Yep. Nothing to bash Watts for this week, so we'll just make stuff up. And people wonder why other people reckon some are prejudiced. Edit to add: If anyone ever finds themselves wondering why people tend to "lay off" Watts, avoid being overly critical or even defend him when he's had a poor game, look no further than the accusation of dropping himself due to being scared of Hawthorn. He comes under attack for such ridiculous and often fictional things with such monotonous regularity, some of us don't think it would be fair, just or useful to criticise him any more than he already is. It does not mean we're any less disappointed with how he's going.

Bench: Bail, Riley, Newton, Toumpas for mine.

Essendon would have re-signed Keeffe and Thomas immediately upon hearing the news.

True, but notwithstanding his first touch, Stretch has been well off the pace. I'm not all that sure being in the senior side is doing him or us any good. Gus has fallen away in the last couple of weeks as well. Obviously ANB is not Stretch or Brayshaw and each case is different, but I would prefer to err on the side of not rushing these things.

I don't know, but surely it won't be as long as Kent's. I can't recall ever hearing of a 10 week diagnosis for a hammy straight up before. That is surely as severe as it gets?

Come on man, let it go. This is getting seriously old.

Last comment on this from me as we're clogging the thread (you of course have right of reply), but your excuse is laughable. You've created a whole fake personality so you can maintain anonymity on an internet forum. Sure thing mate. You'd save yourself a whole lot of hassle just by creating a fake email address like everyone else who wants to evade permanent bans has ever done. "Sometimes things are best left unsaid" - ironic you say this as it is my point exactly. Anyway, I'm doing nothing that is stopping you from posting here (had I thought you were blatantly just making stuff up I'd have banned first and asked questions later). People can make up their own mind, but you'll forgive me with taking what you say with a pinch of salt. Cheers.

*lol* I'm not going to delete your post, I'm quite happy for you to make yourself look like a goose. The email address you used to register with clearly belongs to a Hawthorn supporter. Unless you used someone else's email address, which is majorly suspicious in itself. There's nothing wrong with coming here as an opposition supporter, we've had a few over the years, but trying to look like a local isn't on. I didn't say you were lying, by the way, I just said you were big noting. I have no idea whether you know anything or not. You might - or at least, sincerely think you do. But since you're clearly not going to tell us what it is you know, I see no motivation for your coming here with your claims that you know the truth other than to make yourself look good. I've seen it all before, more times than I'd care to count.