Nasher

I think I may have missed a pertinent point here DD but are you saying that of the plethora of young forwards we've got, not a single one of them are suitable to play the "stay at home" FF role in the future?

Our options are Miller, Dunn, Newton, Garland, Bate, P.Johnson. Of those, we can rule out the following:

- Miller. His biggest strength is his leading and running up the ground. It need not be as far up the ground as it currently is, but either way you'd be wasting his best asset if you plonked him in front of goal. He's also not "goal aware" enough, doesn't like taking set shots and (now I'm just guessing) probably wouldn't kick anywhere near as many goals as Neitz does in general play, just because he hasn't shown any propensity to doing it before.

- P.Johnson. He's the only one of our "ruckman" who looks like he might actually be able to get the ball in general play. His attributes mean his best use would be in the ruck (if he can somehow learn how to tap), or as a stop-gap in the backline. Personally I don't believe he has all that much of a future at the club at all, let alone as our #1 forward.

What are Neitz's attributes that makes him such a good forward?

1. He is built like a brick outhouse, and in general play knows how to use his body to his advantage by clearing the deck of all opposition midgets

2. When on song he can outmark any backman in the competition

3. When on song his set shots score a goal the majority of the time

4. His defensive side is sound in that he always chases and applies defensive pressure without exception

5. He can get the ball off the ground in general play and score

Of our remaining options (Dunn, Newton, Garland, Bate), none meet criterion 3 at this point, but all appear to be good enough set shots at this point in their career that improving to Neitz' level should not be beyond them.

Criterion 1 is the biggest worry I have about Dunn. He is as skinny and weedy as they come. He's still young and has plenty of time to fill out, but I doubt he'll be able to become rock solid like Neita. I've not seen enough of Garland or Newton to comment on their body shape (can someone fill in the gaps here?). Bate in this regard definitely has the right body shape. He's quite tall but already he's got that type of strong, heavy body that Neitz has. He's still under 21, as he reaches his peak he is only going to get stronger. In years to come he could well develop in to being the strongest bloke we have in the team. How many teams play their strongest player on the HFF?

Criterion 2 is strongly related to Criterion 1 and I think last week Bate demonstrated that he's got hands like vices, which will only get better. At the moment he would have to be leading the stakes in this regard. Again I think Dunn is a worry here due to his build.

Criterion 4 can be taught.

In short I personally believe that Bate could well be the answer for FF in the future. I believe he's got all the attributes and as his body develops, he'll prove that he's got everything it takes. I also believe that you've labelled Garland as a tall flanker a tad early. He's still a kid, his body has a royal crapload of developing left to do. As I said earlier, I've not seen a great deal of him, but he didn't appear to me to be a weed like Dunn. Who's to say he won't fill out as necessary?

scrap that comment he is an emergency...

No he isn't! He's injured. Strike two for you, would you like a third crack at getting it right?? :D

Out: Petterd (hamstring)

FFS. There goes my favourite part of the season so far.

It's Celebrating 'Whealen the Wrecker' and the little hardness still left in our game, you must be more of a Cameron Bruce person.

Err. Whelan fell on his leg, there's nothing hard or tough about that, it was just a sheer accident. Anyone from Rodney Grinter to Ryan Houlihan could've done that.

You're a dog? :D

Taller than I imagined.

Any chance of having some (screen) names to the faces?

Maybe everyone that abused the umpires after the game (from home and from the ground) should send $1 TJ's way, as a thanks for speaking on behalf of all of us. There'd be $2 coming from this house.

He'd come out with a pretty tidy profit I reckon.

My viewing companion for the game did cry. I just sat in stunned disbelief.

Even if you do believe that Armstrong and Jolly shouldn't have been removed from the club (which I don't), you can't possibly argue that their careers were ruined. They're still playing, and rather successfully, aren't they?

The only reason Godfrey is on the list is because of Craig Camerons inability to draft a better midfielder to replace him, quite a concern i would think. Will play 100 games this year.....unbelievable.

Clint Bartram is Godders' heir apparent, and is undoubtedly a much better player. He's injured though.

If the seasons' delistings were going to happen now Godfrey would be safe, and I suspect it will remain the case at the end of the year. You can't delist too many players at seasons end, at risk of tipping the youth/experience balance the wrong way. If we delisted 4 + Godfrey then that essentially means he'd net us a 5th round pick. I think he'd be more useful to us than a kid taken in the 5th round.

Anyway, my point being we've got too much dead wood who will go before Godfrey does.

See this is what sh1ts me with this forum.

One poster makes a point about what Robbo said (Didn't see Robbo say it myself, was switching between TFS and playing 360) and then says we should kick it long to our forwards, and what do you know, half the forum jumps on him saying he is wrong and an idiot.

I don't care who is up forward, it is a pretty simple plan if we want to win games would be to put a big guy in the square who can at least give a contest and give Flash and co. a chance at ground level. Nothing puts more pressure on a defense than a long kick, but wait, lets handball around the half back line and lose games due to it (Rounds 1 and 2).

And if anyone brings up the Sydney game and say our delivery was poor because we kicked long, no it wasn't due to long kicking, it was due to poor decisions by the players, there is a time for long kicking when the forward is one out, you don't just hack it in blindly.

Hey dm, did you watch the Carlton vs St. Kilda game last night?

If so, do you still think "kick it long to the forward line" is the be all and end all to winning a footy game?

I must be having a blonde day, I didn't pick that one up either.

Love your work champ

I'm blonde every day. I was born that way.

Who would have thought? So foot skills are a high priority at Melbourne.

What?

You realise CAC was talking about Joe Anderson, a person we didn't draft, right?

s-t-i-n-g-a already has it as his avatar.

So that's

in: Neitz, Buckley, Holland, Warnock, Jones

out: Garland, Jamar

Sylvia lucky also needs to improve or he is a chance not to be there next year.

The only possible way Sylvia will not be on the list next year is if he's involved in a trade for Judd. The club has invested far too much in him to discard him when he's finally fully fit and ready to fire.

Agree Biff, that has YM's fingerprints all over it.

Rhino, old55 and anyone else who has previously thrown their support behind Daniher.

Do you think that he should be signed on again as coach of the Melbourne Football club?

So far I'm in the "inconclusive evidence either way" camp. It's the closest I've gotten so far to wanting Daniher out.

Ow, the splinters...

I still think that even with Neitz back, a 49 point margin is unrealistic.

Y_M posts this kind of thing every week Ash, as I'm sure you've noticed. Sometimes he's right, usually he is wrong. I'd just take his posts for what they are, an overly optimistic bunch of toss that not even the man himself believes. They're somewhat refreshing though, amongst all the doom and gloom posts.

Brock is too good to not come straight back in.

Agree. I'll be very surprised if he does not walk straight in to the side when he is fit.

Jarka, I agree 100% with your "if Green and Neitz are okay" team. I certainly like it much better than the seven change teams people have proposed above.

In: Newton, Buckley

Out: Garland, Bate (if inj), Brown (if Bate not inj).

Anyone due to come back from injury this week? If Neitz is back I'd drop Jamar but suspect PJ is more likely to be in the firing line.

Unlike most I'm not just throwing Buckley in the side for the sake of it. I just don't see who else there is to replace Bate, and I really can't see what worth Brown adds to the side at this point that Buckley couldn't cover.

Garland has had his tastes, now it's time for him to hit some good form for Sandy.