RalphiusMaximus

We have plenty of pace and footskills. Watts, Blease, Strauss, Davey. All quick players with good kicking and questionable application.

There's a small bit of footage of him here.

So what I'm getting here is that Garlett has great foot skills, great pace and is suspect in his application and effort and is prone to switching off for periods oft he game and letting his opponent have a free run away from him. Honestly, it sounds like he'd fit in perfectly at the Dees.

I think it would only be viable for Craig, and since I don't want him to coach next year, I say no.

Indeed. And here I thought it was down to the umps not paying 2-3 holding the ball/incorrect disposal frees our way and then blowing the whistle on a hair-trigger the second a hint of one came the other. I lost count of the number of times they got a free immediately after there should have been one paid to us (although probably less than 25).

I can see a whole campaign built around "The only way is up"

25 - 11 to the home side. Nothing wrong there, surely.

Liking the pressure we're putting on here. Wish we could do that every week.

How has Fitz not qualified? He played for them for the first half of the season didn't he? I've been assuming he was easily over the required number of games.

Yes, I do. Also, I am more than happy to give you a break, when do you need one?

I am becoming more and more convinced that Craig is not the man for the job. His lacks tactical awareness during games and his selections are mind-boggling at times. Davis, after a year of great form at Casey has been given two games playing out of position and then dropped again. Magner gets 51 touches and isn't played. Taggert gets five goals and can't get a shot. Meanwhile he's still wasting everyone's time with Pedersen. Surely if he's at all serious about getting the job he should be rewarding the players who produce and seeing if they can do it at the top level?

Great news for the club and for Fitzy. I recall someone posting earlier in the year that Fitz was feeling on shaky ground and didn't know if he was going to get another contract offer. Great for him that he was able to force his way into the side and hold that spot with some good solid performances. Now he needs to carry on improving and really cement that spot in the side for next year.

Terlich for mine, simply because he's been in the team the whole year and been pretty solid. Matt Jones has been consistent and performed pretty well, but just hasn't been noticed as much (is that a good thing?) Viney has shown more ability than any of them but has not been in the side all that much. Kent has shown flashes and I think he'll be very good, but there is a lot of work to do to get there.

I know he has a huge amount of work to do to get his game right and perhaps to prove that the club can trust him, but I think it could be worthwhile to give him a rookie spot and have him play next year at Casey. At least then we'd have a chance to set him goals regarding his fitness and defensive work and see if he has the discipline to make himself a modern AFL player. It would cost us a rookie pick and give us first dibs on a huge talent should he prove able to do it.

I would be most unhappy if Craig were given the job next year. He's popular with the players, but he's show terrible tactical awareness and he certainly isn't getting winning efforts out of the team. He really seems to be coaching to minimise the losses rather than to win. That isn't acceptable no matter who we play against. We need a coach who doesn't accept losses and will make the moves necessary to give us a shot at winning.

It could be a good thing, although we do have a glut of forwards at the moment. I could see us with Jurrah on one wing and Watts on the other though. Could be interesting. I wonder if the club will keep Aaron Davey on in a coaching/player welfare role.

That's bad news, but not horrible for Casey. They'd love to have him, but they'll have Fitz, Gawn and Spencer out there, so their forward line still looks pretty scary.

Not sure on outs aside from three injured, but it's time for Taggert to come in. THey are saying that Dawes ad Frawley are ready as well, so both of them. I'll wait until I've seen the game to say more than that.

Funny thing. A while back there was a thread trying to predict what our results would be for the remainder of the year. I said the Freo game would be a thrashing because they would see this as a chance to boost their percentage against a really bad side, and some muppet had a go at me for being negative when the team was improving under Craig. I find this funny. All there is left to say now is, are any of you still claiming that we're better off with Craig instead of Neeld?

Well, the guys who have been mentioned as possilbe assistants are all the sort who won't run from a challenge, so it's entirely plausible that they are considering joining the fun. It's shaping up to be a very interesting few months around Demonland.

Forget the results. I want the scans up there so we can make our own diagnoses and debate who has the better credentials to assess the damage and come up with an entirely unrealistic timeframe for his rehabilitation.

Also, we can always move Jack onto the wing Richardson-style. He could do some massive damage there.

What were the other four?

Disagree entirely. His coaching cost us a winnable game. We stuck with an overly defensive setup when we had them on the ropes and failed to overhaul them in the final quarter. Yes, our kicking for goal was terrible, but at the end of that game we let them have an extra defender and that reduced our ability to get shots on goal when we needed them. He was unable to adjust to the situation and let the game slip away when we could have pinched it with a more attacking mindset.

It was a hell of a contrast between Neitz and Watts on the footy show. It just reminded us all of what the club was like 10-15 years ago. Amazing that they managed to stuff it up so badly in such a short time.