Nasher

Bloody excited about Cook's form. Nothing will give me greater pleasure than bumping all those Darling posts if he continues on this trajectory. Lots of water to pass under that bridge yet though. Also very pleasing to see the SME kicking a small bag - there's hope yet...?

Old and RR have already nailed it, but I guess the difference between this and the White/Jolly situation that even at the time it was obvious Jolly was quality, whereas there's all sorts of doubt over Spencer, Martin and Gawn, all for differing reasons. Letting one of the comp's best ruckmen go in the hopes that one of the three NQR ruckmen might overcome their issues is dangerous to the point of recklessness. And for what it's worth I believe we could've kept both Jolly and White if Neale had been more flexible in the way he operated them when he had both at his disposal. Keeping Jamar doesn't have to mean robbing Spencer/Martin/Gawn of development opportunities - Jamar himself developed just fine under White. There's room there for them if they're good enough (or fit enough in Gawn's case).

This was never in doubt in my mind. I heard him say on air more than once that once the offer was on the table he'd sign it, and (at risk of earning Range Rover's wrath), I believed every word he said. Three years is surprising, but pleasantly. Another so called "disenfranchised" player showing a huge amount of faith in the club.

It's not even that, we get less from the AFL than some of the big clubs. From the 2010 AFL report (page 58): http://www.afl.com.a...inCorporate.pdf The base payment to all the clubs was the same, then there's an "other" payments thing and the total. The clubs that got more payments from the AFL than us in 2010 were: Carlton, Collingwood, North Melbourne, St. Kilda and Western Bulldogs. And the difference between the biggest (Western Bulldogs) and the smallest (Adelaide) was a touch under $3m so it's not a huge spread.

All the clubs get lots of money from the AFL and always will. Us being a "charity case" is one of the biggest misnomers in the wider community.

If their first behind had been a goal it'd be back to the middle and we'd be in a completely alternate universe. We might've won by more for all we know. It's why the "if this, if that" arguments are pointless, because we have no idea how alternate results early in the game would have affected the rest of the match.

I wouldn't make that swap.

It was probably before your time, but at one stage on the forums (during the Swans success), it was in vogue for every player to be a "Ryan O'Keefe type player" on this forum. It actually got embarrassing after a while.

On that bench, it's gotta be in: Frawley, out: Green.

Absolutely this. It was an appalling look, especially with how sensitive we are about players walking out the door with all the recent events. I think the worst Moloney is probably guilty of is hiring an idiot for a manager who apparently doesn't understand the dynamics of our sport. Anyway, I'm expecting him to sign soon, and if hopefully he can continue to turn his form around and we can all get off his back once and for all.

What the deuce? His career does not need redeeming! No doubt he's always been a FTB and he's had a poor year, but you make it sound like he's never played a good game ever. I've been disappointed in both his output on the ground and the words coming out of the mouth of his reckless manager, but let's give some credit where it is due.

Yikes, that's not good at all if it's true.

I can't shake the mental image of a grown man standing in his living room, full rage face on, fists pumping in the air, pants around his ankles, screaming obscenities at the TV. No wonder your fiance thought you were crazy! I'm laughing again

There's no doubt he didn't just toss the whole thing out holdus boldus, but I could be persuaded to believe that he modified it after assessing the result so far. It's not a weakness to be dynamic and flexible, and having hard and fast "non-negotiables" doesn't preclude fluid thinking. Edit: I say "could be persuaded to believe" because I don't watch live, so it's hard to form a concrete opinion of my own. I could just as easily be persuaded that it was all due to improved execution as well.

No doubt Bailey viewed him as a defender, and he's a very good defender. He had an excellent game as a forward, but it was just one game where we caught Hirdy and his merry men with their pants down. Buckley's not going to fall for the same trick; it'll be one possible scenario they look at as they prepare for this match and they'll have had time to devise a way to limit his impact if he plays forward. For me it still remains to be seen whether Garland forward is a viable option in the long term. At worst he's demonstrated he can offer something at least on occasion, and it's a great "plan B" for Neeld to have up his sleeve.

Not sure if it's additional, I found it hard enough getting the rules as it was! But to what end would we nominate Sheahan? As I understand it he's been playing for Casey as a defender, what would we get out of playing him that we couldn't get from playing Troy Davis who is already on the senior list and has been in form?

What he said.

McDonald is too inconspicuous to ever win a nomination for this. He doesn't have the flair of a mid or forward, and he doesn't have a "trick" like Rivers did in his winning year (play reading). He's just not the sort of player that gets people talking; he'll play 50 games before anyone outside the club even knows who he is. If he keeps playing the way he has been then that's fine with me.

Which long term injury? We've got three rookies "nominated" at the moment (Nicholson, Couch and Magner), one under the "every club can nominate one rookie at the start of the year" rule, one under the "every club can nominate one rookie per vacancies on the Vets list" rule (we only have one vet: Green), and one nominated under the LTI of Max Gawn.

Your reaction has got to be the funniest reaction I've ever heard of. I've started giggling each time I read it. What the hell, man?!

I'm pretty sure their automatic sensor does that when they type the real "f" word.

To be fair to B-H, I don't think quoting Freak is the best way to drill home... well, any valid or relevant point at all, really.

Sellar? Martin? Both proven to be largely ineffective as ruckman/forwards. It's what we recruited Sellar for and that dream seemed to have died but was revived against Essendon for mine. Agree that Rivers has been exposed against the resting ruckman.

Tank is still an issue obviously - saw him get it in the last quarter and he was willing the legs to go but they wouldn't and he got tackled. He was clearly absolutely spent. He got poleaxed a couple of times too - once by Fletcher where he went in to the fence (nasty) and once by Hurley while in the back half. Got straight up and on with it both times, and we know he can give it as good as he gets it. Love this guy, but think it'll be a couple of seasons before he starts making an impact consistently. Byron Pickett with a work ethic...?

Nicho could be Peter Walsh circa 2000 or he could be Daniel Ward or Luke Williams. Let's hope for the former - the signs were excellent on the weekend. It's a shame he was robbed of that goal, it would have been the perfect finish to an excellent game.