Nasher

Redleg, I'm not sure we need to give Tapscott time in the middle to know whether or not he's got the tank to do it, and I think it would be an emphatic "no". The centre square is one thing, but there's a need to make it from contest to contest all over the ground, and I don't think he's up to it. Can you imagine him contesting in the centre square, then a few minutes later contesting in the forward 50, then a few minutes later contesting in the back 50? Additionally, his biggest strength is using his wrecking ball body in high-speed contests; I don't think he'd have the same impact as an inside mid. I think as his fitness improves there's merit in very short rotations through the middle, but I don't reckon Tapscott has a future as a midfielder. He's started to find his feet as a forward, so I'd stick with that.

All clubs supporters "eat their own" when the team is going badly. It's a function of the emotional investment people put in their footy teams. It's great that you have the emotional control not to get angry or upset or want to lash out, but don't carry on as if getting narky with each other or getting narky with the club when it is down is unique to Melbourne. It's not.

I don't think so Mark - Hawthorn play all their games in Launceston. Hobart is (obviously) the capital of Tasmania, and people from Hobart don't want to go to Launceston unless they're fanatical Hawthorn supporters. North play their games in Hobart and will get [and have been getting] plenty of support from the neutrals, and North has a decent following here anyway. I think it's a good growth strategy for them.

I also wouldn't be surprised if Magner wasn't promoted purely because the coach doesn't think he'll add much to the side. I really struggle with the Magner love around here.

I don't know if you've noticed, soxy, but Tasmania as an entire state is a *bit* more sparse than Geelong the city. Looking at the population of Hobart would be much more relevant.

As a Tasmanian footy fanatic, a Tasmanian footy team would get secondary support from me at best. MFC is the team that I barrack for and I can't imagine that changing; and most of the people I know who follow footy have their allegiances well and truly branded in. Hawthorn and North have brought footy back to the state. A few games here and there from these clubs is all the market here warrants, IMO.

I didn't comment on Viney, just quoted the stats. A quiet game is forgiveable, but the impact of it is heavily exaggerated when he's one of 10 people in the same boat. As for Strauss: agree that it's a long road back from where he came from, but I still stand by what I said.

Howe WOG for mine.

Haha. It's a contact sport, ump. Sometimes it is "rough". I thought it was a ripper bump, myself.

Only one player had over 20 disposals: Matt Jones. Ten players had less than 10 disposals: Byrnes, Bail, Viney, Spencer, Strauss, Trengove, Gawn, Howe, Grimes and Kent. Grimes is obviously excused, and I'll cut Kent some slack because he's clearly not quite up to spec yet, but the rest of those players were utterly sheet. I doubt Howe and Bail have played worse games since they came in to the side, Strauss just isn't any good, and what-oh-what the hell is wrong with Jack Trengove? Just way too many passengers today.

6. Garland - thought he was a class above all our other players today. 5. M.Jones - really starting to look at home. The most important thing for me is that he always seemed to be present in the contest. It's hard to see on TV how hard players work to be in a contest, but the sheer fact was he was on the screen a lot. Best game to date. 4. N.Jones - the ever reliable. Reverted back to some old "just bombing it" habits today - probably through lack of options. 3. Evans - really like how this guy is coming along. Adds vital run. 2. Frawley - Looked like the Frawley of old. Created out of defense and used his body to good effect against Hampson. 1. Sylvia - As said above, lots of gloss taken off the performance because he screwed up with the ball far too many times, but he is consistently getting involved which is an improvement on the past. Also considered Lynden the Tagger (anyone feel like we're going around in circles here??) and Tapscott.

So what about the rest, PSD? I've lost count of the number of soft efforts at attacking the ball, or giving options to use this year. I'm not talking about players who are so soft that it's embarrassing (JW, CM, LD et al.), I'm talking about players who simply aren't running hard enough. And I can't think of a player that I haven't seen cost us a contest at some stage this year. I include players like Grimes and N.Jones in that; players who I know will do better when their head is in the right place.

I agree deanox. Abridged version is that Jackson will be there to report the state of play to the board, prepare the job for the next CEO, and possibly play a big part in hiring his replacement. I'll be surprised if he makes any major decisions or changes. I also think his lengthy tenure suggests that it will be quite a while before we see any change. That probably includes the position of senior coach.

Stuffing up first round draft picks isn't the reason why our players don't work hard enough on the field.

Emma Q said he had nothing to worry about, so we put the torches and pitchforks away.

It isn't boring on here when we're winning, the over the top hyperbole just goes in the other direction.Actually, it's been so long since we haven't been carp that I've forgotten what it's like here when we're winning.

Heart agrees, and does so every week. Brain thinks we should stop letting those bloody chest muscles do the thinking.

Billy Stretch.

It's a nice trip down memory lane if yours goes back that far, but has zero relevance to today. I'll be honest, I struggle to maintain interest in things that happened 20-30 years before I was born.

After some of the efforts I saw last week I'm convinced that there's a psychological barrier that needs breaking through. Our blokes just don't run like the other teams do. I just can't accept that the coaching staff don't remind them of this; the cast of thousand coaches can't possibly all be that inept (can they?). Be farked if I know what to do about it though.

Maybe I'm thick or just really poor at reading between the lines, but with all this to and froing between a few men I have immense respect for, I still haven't managed to pinpoint exactly who is accusing who of what.

Why would Jones be such a better captain than Grimes?

It must be because Neeld is an idiot. Or the dozens of other reasons that have been discussed to death on here, like waving the white flag last year, sulking, only being any good against rubbish sides (how shocking that he killed us), being a poor cultural influence etc. Nah, must be that first thing. By the way, I don't reckon forgoing Pedersen, Gilles and Rodan would have been quite sufficient to land Mayes or Wines.

In addition to rpfc's and Ralph's posts; because he did not show enough last year to indicate that he was a "must have". Think between the three of us it's about summed it up.

Not a hope in the world. He runs in a team that won't, so it would be to the overall detriment of the team. Happy for him to get a kick in the ring gear for torching his team mates in front of goals, but you're kidding yourself if you reckon he will be dropped.