Nasher

The problem with only having 3 words to play with is that you can't tell anywhere near the full story. Jones -- yeah he was great but his game wasn't perfect. His kicking at times is not great, and if he's going to take so many shots on goal from 50 he needs to drill more of them. A weak criticism I know, but it's warrented and something you can't hope to say in 3 words. Ditto with Brock. Showed his importance, sure. But he also showed why you usually bring players back through the VFL when you have that luxury. He showed glimpses of his best at times, but also at times looked to be horribly out of touch with the pace of the game. It was definitely a "blow off the cobwebs" game for him IMO.

It really depends on how much crapola, outstanding and average respectively "weigh", but now I'm getting a little anal.

I didn't think we were outstanding today. We were utterly crapola for two quarters, average for one and outstanding for one. That averages out to roughly "okay" by my dodgy maths.

PJ did all the right things today. His mark in the goal square was great -- right place, right time. He got a head full of steam and fluffed the goal chance though. I hope he learns. By the way, who knew Jeff White had the league's highest possession count for any ruckmen in the league this year?

Absolutely agree. Even if he peaks early he'll be an A grade midfielder. If he starts kicking those goals that he missed today he'll be the complete package.

Nice save. I don't agree with the selection of Bizzell, however I have my doubts about CJ as well. I wonder if he's out of the side because of his failure to go in hard enough. His banishment to Sandy may be to teach him a lesson. Just a thought.

So is CJ up to it or is he unknown? He can't be both; you've contradicted yourself. At this point I'm thinking CJ i'm beginning to think he's neither anyway. BTW David Gallagher also dominates regularly at VFL level, and wasn't his AFL career a sterling one.

I very much like the sound of that back 6.

it's in the other thread http://demonland.nozzs.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=5806

I dunno why but I feel embarrassed for you sometimes Y_M. I'm as disappointed as you that he's out when he really started to build up some momentum but let's try and avoid needlessly pointing fingers before we have any facts at all at hand shall we?

What are you guys on about? We haven't even seen the extended bench yet. Who's to say Miller will be playing?

The biggest benefit of the Sandy relationship is that it saves us a bucket load of cash. We can't afford to run our own reserves team and that's really the only reason why the Sandy relationship was necessary as far as I could see. If the AFL are proposing to foot the bill for the resources required for fielding our own second team, I can't see a single reason not to end the relationship.

Thanks Clint. That article puts a whole different spin on the story doesn't it?

Any posts in this thread that are not respectful to Peter Hayes or his family will be deleted. Thanks.

RIP Peter. A generous creditor to the club in our time of need. I hope he is remembered by MFC supporters for his good deeds for this club.

If Newton is the weapon-in-the-making forward with x-factor oozing out his bum everyone claims, then playing him in the defense would surely be a waste.

It was sloppy and careless, and the AFL have shown no mercy for this kind of thing before. He'll get at least a week, I imagine; not intentional but definitely reckless. He immediately knew he'd cocked up after he did it, which is why he made sure Bruce was okay afterwards.

I think the key difference in our opinions here is that you believe that by not sacking the coach, we're "tolerating" the crapola performance to date. I completely disagree, I think sacking the coach immediately is a rash and erratic decision that has naught benefit.

Agree with all your post bar this line. The board will not touch the playing list at all, regardless of whether someone's sitting in the senior coach's chair or not.

Dunn, Bate, Jones and Petterd are all under 20, as is Bartram who is a certainty in the 22 when fit. You mention the need to balance youth with experience -- I think we already have it right. By the way Paul Wheatley is only 25. I wouldn't be lumping him in the same group as the old farts you've mentioned above.

That's fine if they're retiring by their own choice. The initial suggestion implied them being retired, rather than them retiring...

Absolutely. This kind of thing would be a very public "hey everybody, look, we're sacking these blokes". I'm not quite sure why Gouga seems to be such a fan of the public humiliation route when it's so unnecessary.

Personally I'm against permanent unselection of any player. I'm not a fan of Richmond's treatment of Gaspar.

Agree 100%. I'm glad the club is treating Neale with the dignity and respect he deserves. Sacking the coach at this stage provides absolutely no benefit whatsoever.

Yes the commentary was biased, but I just ignored it. I was too busy being annoyed at the way the game was turning out to waste any emotion on that pack of clowns.