Ungarie boy

Trying to be realistic, If garland left as a free agent and we received a 2nd round comp pick then that would be close to getting Lynch. Packaging up Howe and a 2nd round pick should give us a first rounder which may be enough to get Prestia. Suckling could easily be a delisted free-agent or achieved through a swap (downgrade) of later round picks. Watts should land us at least a 2nd rounder which could be used on Bugg/Ploughman (GWS will be looking for picks to convert to their academy players) a third round for Horlin-Smith seems reasonable. In theory we move on Howe, Watts and Garland; 2nd round pick and 3rd round pick. If the first round pick is required for prestia as well then we would expect to get an early a late first round pick in return. Jamar may look for another year as well, and bring in a 3rd round pick. In theory we would get most of these players (or players of similar ilk) and still keep a first round pick and have a late round pick for Lovett,while we can use very late round picks to upgrade Vanders and Harmes. In what's meant to be a very weak draft after the first round we end up with a lot of talent and little risk.

* Bugg have seen his name bandied about and with GWS needing to make trades to get there GWS players (this year and next) would indicate that he is gettable - apply this same principal to Ploughman who would also suit this role * Suckling was gettable last year, the hawks reliance on his "boot" is no longer required and they have a query on his one-on-one defence (hence a possible wing role with the Dees) * Lynch only going on the speculation, but even that was half true - then he is gettable. * Prestia is a bit of a long bow, but if any top midfielder were to be in frame then he would be likely. contracts mean nothing, and the GC may be looking at a mini-rebuild particularly if Dixon leaves; decent run with injuries will mean they should have a strong midfield that the might come to the table with - their rucks also have not come on as expected. * Horlin-Smith is a good midfielder not getting a run behind Duncan and Selwood. He's a similar style to them (though he's a similar style to Jones, Viney). Geelong will need to offload to some player for Dangerfield (should it eventuates) * Motlop - He keeps being touted as the fallout of a Dangerfield-to-Cats deal. If he's available we should throw the kitchen sink at him (meets our speed and skill requirements in the midfield) The Academy may be a bit of a blessing to some clubs like us, as it means the Swans, Giants and Lions are going to have to trade to accommodate these 'bargain' picks. I would expect Z jones to be gettable. Obviously J Aish and M Leunberger. We should also look at someone like Williams from the GWS. Of course with all these scenario's "Players gettable" doesn't equate to "MFC players" there also another 17 clubs who have a say. Yarran at his best next year will equate to Lumumba at his worst this year - any thought of this trade should be discounted immediately (the passion has left his game, and he was always a lazy footballer to begin with)

Filling the blanks is where it gets interesting: Grimes Dunn [bugg] Salem Frost Jetta Vince Jones [suckling] Vanders [Lynch] Tyson T McDonald Hogan Garlett Gawn [Prestia] Viney Brayshaw Petrecca Kent [Horlin-Smith] emg: Stretch (small), Pederson (tall) If you added Motlop to the equation then this starts getting very exciting edit: forgot Tyson, Pederson

To me it felt like Roo's is using the last 3 games of the year as a trial for positions on the team list; and what I have observed is: Dunn is our Fullback Jetta and Salem are our two back flankers. Jones is our centre T McDonald is our Centre half Forward (but is just as likely a tall back) Hogan is our Full Forward Garlet is our Forward Pocket Gawn is our Ruck Viney and Vince are our starting midfielders (Rover, Ruck Rover) Brayshaw is a rotating midfielder (forward flank) Grimes has probably earned a spot on the bench and that's it! That is the core of what the MFC has going forward based on performance. Howe would be the next person I would include as the floating 3rd tall in the backs. Now obviously there are a lot of positions that will be filled by very capable players on the list, leaving a starting 22 of something like: Blank Dunn Blank Jetta Frost Salem Brayshaw Jones stretch Vanders T MacDonald Petrecca Garlett Hogan JKH/Kent Gawn Vince Viney Grimes/Michie Harmes/NealBullen Could Dawes play back where he only needs to get the ball to the ground and where running the straight lines would help with his persistent injury. Cross has shown over the last few weeks that the pace of the game is going past him (his disposals are now reminding me of C Bruce towards the end of his career) - that he is still Melbourne's best players says more about the list than his performance. Note for most players at this stage of there career, there form will drop off very quickly. Have not included Howe as anyone who has not resigned with a week to go of the season is obviously giving considerable thought to other options.

Simple answer ..... Yes! Complicated answer ......................... Yes! As a passionate demon I'm almost offended such a tread, discussion exists. Having Michael Voss at his best would not have made any difference. Remember you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink and as many demonlanders have stated, throughout numerous other threads, some dee's are already in the exit lounge and no amount of leadership will change their approach. Also note that it is a load of b#llsh!t that an introverted personality does not make a good captain. Often they make the best, as when they make a statement, everyone follows (listens). Sometimes an extroverted personality as a captain can be to outgoing and seen as not serious or responsible. If you want an insight at a club into captain material take a look at it's player player votes (over a few seasons) and you will quickly see where the respects lies.

I will be brining my young family to Melbourne for the weekend of 11/12 July, and wanted to treat them to the MCG experience with the mighty Dee’s; unfortunately this works out to be the Bombers game; and worse still it’s their home game. I now find myself in the loathsome situation where not only am I seen to be supporting this tainted cesspool of an organisation masquerading as a football club, but contributing towards their bottom dollar through the purchase of tickets. This on top of my vow to never ever be involved in a Melbourne game. Still my number one priority is to my kids so I am trying to justify this unholy course of action, by convincing myself that I will not let evil triumph over good or in this case the Essendon Saga impact on my family’s enjoyment of AFL (life). Towards this end can anyone advise me how I go about getting tickets? I have tried to get them through ticktetek but all they have available is level 4 or limited seating behind the goals; surely this game is not a sellout. We were hoping to be somewhere on the wing while the boys were hoping to get close to the fence (is this the best spot to watch a game for 8-12 year olds). Any advice would be most appreciated. Still, I feel so unclean.

Couple of interesting matchups. Hawkins is to strong for McDonald so Dunn becomes the obvious choice. McDonald could go to Walker/Kerston which should be a win and build his confidence. Also Hawkins tends not to apply a lot of defensive pressure, so this could be exploited. Liked the idea of McDonald having a crack at Blivacs. Jones would be my first choice for Selwood, the play a similar game; and he won't be exposed for speed, fitness, etc. This would also prevent a tag from being applied. Vince would the be free to be creative. Viney should be set for (intimidate) one of their younger mids; while I would put Rielly onto Johnson who will react poorly when he gets hid hard. Would love for someone to look into the stats of how many marks Pederson takes as opposed to Dawes. I beleive Pederson would have the edge in contested possesion, but Dawes would make up for this with his pressure acts and ground level work. I don't think we will lose a lot. Gawn should be able to ruck the game, f after the clearance; Watts, Howe or McDonald then tag team Blicavs (Hes has improved but is not world beater and still very average in the air). Gawn could also drift forward and become a target (they do not have the height to cover him - tell dawes to rove him) It's our smalls that are going to find it tough.

Its actually very easy - regarding the goal. Players come off after a goal is kicked almost religiously including the goa kicker (anyone of the oncoming players should have been informed the time and directed traffic accordingly, or at least as a minimum informed the onfield leaders) Also it is not hard for a player to run along the side of the boundary (stretching out) and to yell instruction to another player on the field (they will not all be on the other side out of earshot). Still some years ago Essendon runner (John Barnes) wore different coloured hats to signal how much time remained in a quarter.

It's not all doom and gloom. The injuries to Jetta, Viney, Frost, Kent, Hogan, JKH, Salem, equates to one third of our likely starting 18, If you throw Petrecca and Trengove into the mix and that's nearly half the side. Note that this injury list consist of players where most of the teams significant improvement is going to come from (it's not going to come from the N Jones, L Dunns and D Cross, etc). No side can compete at the same level with such significant losses to their best 18 - How many of the Hawks team were out when they got beaten up by GWS. The dockers rest half a side leading into the finals and get beaten by the bottom side, Sydney rested players going into the finals and get swamped by Richmond. Yes Hawks were without 4 of there staring 18, but that's not even a quarter of the side and realistically, come team performance, they are coming from a far higer base. It's not all doom and gloom. T MacDonald has been fantastic, L Dunn good (he should be used as the quarterback though, taking advantage of his long penertrating kicks which is far more effective breaking the lines than dinky 20 meter passes) C Garland servicable and provides great flexibility, I even saw J Grimes showed signs of returning confidence (midfield depth). Vanders has shown plenty of potential, Garlett adds spark and Brayshaw looks to be the real thing. That's another third of the starting 18 (grimes excluded) who gives you hope. It's not all doom and gloom. You can build a team around N Jones, D Tyson, B Vince. Lumumba, Howe brings the intangibles that that seperate the good sides from the successful sides. Cross provides the leadership for development, and onfield coaching the very best sides haves. Again a third of our starting 18. It's not all doom and gloom. It's not unreasonable to expect at least 3 of Stretch, ANB, Mitchie, Newton, Reilly, O MacDonald, Harmes, Toumpas, to develop nto strong AFL players. Histroy has also shown that at leat one of the likes of Fitzpatrick, Pedersen, Gawn, M Jones, J Watts, Dawes, etc will gain a new/second lease of life and fill roles in a team. Note: every premiership team consist of players who I refer to as 'stealing a premiership' which are at best depth players think Steve Armstrong - West Coast, Mitch Morton - Swans. Depth is a requirement - the entire squad will not be all A grade or even B grade players.

6 - T McDonald 5 - L Dunn 4 - A Brayshaw 3 - M Jamar 2 - C Salem 1 - C Garland We got smashed in the midfield so it's hard to justify giving any of them votes. Garlett could be unlucky not get votes but I not sure his defensive pressure warrants it (and if your a forward not providing defensive pressure then you had better be applying a LOT of scoring pressure) - we also got smashed with the ball coming out of defence.

WE need another tall to cover their rucks, particularly as they tend to float forward quite a bit. JKH is a must to start on the ground, Melbourne have scored heaviest this year with 3 smalls in the forward line. We all know how strong and deep Fremantle’s midfield is, and that they have quality tall’s – but there is a chance these tall’s could also be exposed for mobility – Pavlich doesn’t cover as much ground as he used to, Dawson and McPharlin tend not to go up the ground and Sandilands is not known for speed. I would look at bringing in Fitzpatrick to assist in the backline with their resting ruck (who else has the height to do it), play McDonald on Pavlich (who he can also run off), Dunn on the young tall forward (and provide a bit of niggle to try and put a kid of his game – Hogan should expect the same from Freo) while Grimes is an obvious choice for Jetta; but consideration needs to be given to Freo’s small forwards and an injection of pace may be needed. Mitchie should come in for Kent and I like the idea of Riley (particularly if Tyson is injured) – but Terlich may be needed as cover for Freo small forwards. So - B: Fitzpatrick (on the resting ruck) Dunn Salem HB: Garland Tom Mc Grimes C: Lumumba Jones Vince HF Vandenberg Dawes JKH F: Garlett Hoges Howe Ru: Jamar Tyson Cross Int: Brayshaw, Mitchie, Newton Watts (Sub) Terlich and Riley (emergencies) Cross should go to Barlow who is not quick (and for his size not renowned for marking), Jamar to tag Sandilands (Vince/Dangerfield style) – not sure why we don’t see rucks copping a hard tag but Sandilands would be the ideal candidate (someone that size and stage of their career will not like continually getting of their bum or being belted) – In fact I would tell Jamar and Fitzpatrick to follow their players all over the ground, to the bench, and if they go to the toilet follow them there as well – and then lock the door and guard the window. If Freo goes tall in their forwards then Howe can be swung back to defence, with Newton playing HFF. I would explain to Watts that his sub role is not about form but team dynamics. A glaring weakness though is how do we cover Freo’s tough tall marking midfielders (Fyfe and Mundy) – maybe Howe or Lumumba in a run with role, or dare I say it Jordie (does he have the height). In theory though this team should allow for Grimes to run through the midfield if needed (with coverage provided by Howe or Lumumba), whilst Brayshaw, Mitchie and Newton can all run through the midfield and paly forward. Okay I wouldn’t have Watts as sub, but acknowledge he is going to be in the team and can’t think of a suitable replacement regarding team structure (a third tall size, with endurance to cover all the ground – Garland could play this role, so could Howe, but they already have positions)

Actually Dawes "concrete hands" could be easily rectified with a little practice of approaching a mark with his hands already above his head, not reaching up at the same time as impact. Have seen this work on a lot of players struggling to mark overhead, whilst on a strong fast lead. Note - to maintain a break/separation on the defender these players often raise the hands at the last moment resulting in forward movement of the hands approaching the forward movement of the ball coming from the opposite direction, making marking just that little bit more difficult - of course raising the hands slightly earlier results in loss of speed (try sprinting with your hands above your heads). Most players with ‘soft hands’, already have them in place before the ball arrives.

a mates email - What the? So poor Lachie Keefe and the other bloke have one lousy steak and they are done. Essendon players inject bottles marked with Arnie’s bicept and they are not responsible. My response If it looks like a duck, quack likes a duck and sh#ts like a duck, then it’s probably a duck, unless someone draws a picture of it and call’s it a cow! Unfortunately for Lachie Keefe and friend, they ate said cow!

Does WADA have that power to ban a club - yes there is the 2 players found guilty thing but, it is one of many options the controlling sporting body (AFL, I think not WADA) can implement. Is there black and white (minimum/maximum) penalties for clubs, like there are for players? Also Essendon is not only playing for time to turn their list over, but every season a player plays reduces the potential 'loss of earnings' claim that they can make. Some players will lose out because there contract wasn't renewed (meaning no loss of earnings), some will have retired (no loss of earnings), and some will be close to the end of contracts where the payout (e.g. 6mths would be managed)

Perhaps they would pursue the line that there is enough evidence to support illegal player use of drugs, but not enough evidence to find an individual player guilty. It could be argued that some players were injected with a banned substance, but some were not and the 'innocent' player cannot be expected to be punished for another players crime - which then leads to the question of who were the 'innocent' player(s). Of course this would then provide a loophole to systemic drug abuse at clubs everywhere - where they take the "firing squad approach" of 4 in 5 players getting the drug injection and one a placebo, without detailing who!

It's actually quite simple - Players contracts should expire in October. No new contracts can be signed before then and the AFL can make it be known that they will not recognise any contract executed outside of this period. The AFL could also implement severe penalties for any clubs engineering commitment (of player/club) through letters of intent, etc. Although speculation on players intent may still be rampant (suits the media), players and clubs would no longer be mercenary. All a player needs to do is regurgitate a standard line of "I am committed to [said club] and really enjoy my time here, unfortunately like everyone else I can't comment on the future until the contract periods opens, which I hope will be fruitful to both me and [said club]. This would still work with Wrecker45 suggestion regarding contract renewals/extensions (providing peace of mind for players, who are worried about the future). Alternatively, you could allow the first 2 weeks of October to be for contract renewals/extension, and then it becomes an open market for out of contract players. A simple solution that keeps all parties (players, clubs, media, and fans) happy.

This could actually be a clever end game by EFC. First having delayed the process through courts, allowing for some turnover of the list (minimising there exposure to potential player suspensions) players to continue playing out their contract (minimising there exposure to potential loss of income claims) Ensure that the players have not technically been party to any of this delaying process, which they haven't, allowing for the basis for an argument of cooperation If a guilty finding - pressure the AFL into a 6 month backdated suspension that will see them miss a couple of games (much media publicity is already doing this) Accept that this will be appealed but in all likelihood not heard until after the footy season (Ideally October) Lose the appeal and restart the suspension in the offseason equating to close to 18 months of a 2 year suspension being served outside of football season (Nov - April) (October - March) ) (March - September) (September - March). Any players with a long term injury could be individually pursue a voluntary provisional suspension Of course another year of list management will reduce the impact even further come season 2016 The AFL could easy be a party to this as it keeps them full strength for most of this year (TV rights), they could even make a lot of noise about the inadequate penality but claim independence from the tribunal and the need to abide by it's decision. Regardless they could wear the bad publicity which would quickly blow over (as has been pointed out many times, outside of Australia rgw AFL means very little so the publicity on the world stage would fade quickly) Still to show the world they are serious they would then heavily penalise the club (after all appeals have gone through) but this would likely be in a format of record fines which they could afford (paid over years) and a few draft penalties that free-agency would help alleviate. The waiver consent forms may also make it harder for players and workplace safety to build a case, as the players 'agreed' to all this. It could even be argued they 'volunteered" to the programme (particularily as some did not) It would be highly unlikely that this whole process has not been managed from both the AFL and EFC, following a careful predetermined script, that includes them playing taking potshots at each other; while behind the scenes they have been working cohesively towards a common goal.

Damned if you do and Damned if you don't. For everyone who is lambasting the second half just consider "what if we went for the kill, players maintained/lifted their intensity" we the fans cheer home a 100 point flogging, but witness Jones carried off with a knee, Garlett out with a hamstring and Hogan limping. Then the chorus would have been 'it was only a practice match, why didn't we ease off"!!! Also note that though they had a "VFL side" so could ours have been with little likely impact on our performance for if we included suposed VFL players (Brayshaw, Stretch, Pederson, Riley, etc) for (Watts, McKenzie, Dawes, Newton, etc) would the result been much difference. Bulldogs inexperience is a reflection of losing Griffin, Liberatore, Cooney, Higgins - rested players Murphy (old) Crameri (over rated) Boyd (not proven) would not have made a huge differnce.

I don't believe the players signed waivers for TB4, rather they signed it for Thymosin. This could then be argued that they looked into this and discovered that there was a legal version, which they were informed was what they were receiving, and can then lead to the conclusion ‘that they were duped’. The doctor could argue that he was only asked to verify the legality of Thymosin, not TB4, which allows him to keep his integrity. Players and doctor could all therefore reasonably state they had no idea that TB4 was even in play because it was being referred to as Thymosin (medically) and "the good stuff" (slang). Guilty would still have to be the verdict, as clubs, coaches, organisations, teams, anyone would use this example of ‘innocence by misinformation’ as the blueprint for future systematic drug programs. Still the players may get some respite due to the "duping" argument, but the consequence of this would then have to flow on to Essendon - penalties for the drugs will have to be enforced on someone (note Dank was an employee, therefore representative of Essendon). I would love to see Essendon booted out for this: 1) for just attempting drugs in sport which goes so far against the Australian ethics of fair play, that it is sickening (mention Chinese or East German swimmers to see the residual animosity that still radiates in most Aussie sporting fans - even Lance Armstrong is viewed in distain) 2) for how they have treated the whole process, in such a contemptuous way that it actually belittles the sporting public. Their position - You know we are guilty, we know we are guilty; but we are going to serve up a fairy story that is so unbelievable that you couldn't sugar-coat it to Kindergarten kids; and then throw enough money at it until it all becomes forgotten news; and what are you the sporting public going to do about it, Nothing. For all those saying it's bad for AFL to lose so many bomber supporters, this is simply not true. Most are AFL supporters who will end up supporting another team (even if they persist in a token protest for a couple of years), some may just support VFL sides (but this is still good) and the remaining that are lost to the game were not worth keeping in the first place. P.S. As a member of the general public, I may not be able to influence this much, but I will also not do "Nothing". I will never attend another game involving Essendon (may buy tickets for Melbourne home games, just not attend) and encourage all my friends to do the same; will even organise events to compete against potential compelling Bomber games.

yes there is; all the Crows have to do is match Geelong’s offer, then he has to stay, and with Geelong on record stating that they will not pay overs (or even market price) to the detriment of their list, then the crows should easily be able to accomplish this. Progressing this logic further, Adelaide would then say to Patrick, your options are • play with us, or • play with someone we can't match i.e. Melbourne, or • we organise a trade to get you to Geelong. I would much rather be in Adelaide’s position than Geelong’s when it comes to P Dangerfield. Though Melbourne could as easily be in a stronger position than both. In reality Adelaide could probably match nearly all other club offers except for something outrageous from starless/marquee (player) free teams such as Melbourne, St Kilda, Kangaroos and perhaps West Coast. Even Bulldogs, GWS and Gold Coast have players soaking up large portions of salary cup space; the crows only have Tex. This is based on my understanding that Dangerfield will only be a RFA next year.

To help build on the Casey relationship (and increase membership) I would take the following approach to recruitment, where you make it MFC policy to rookie list each year one player from Casey. This will: • Encourage many young footballers to pursue a career with Casey knowing that if they perform they could earn a spot on an AFL list • Provide for older players looking for one last shot at the AFL with a plausible Casey option • Cater for recycled AFL players who may also look to be furthering their career through Casey • Help create a very strong team (reserves) where Melbourne players must truly earn a spot • Likely develop a winning culture through strength and depth of the team • Encourage greater support in Casey due to the strength of the team (and possible success) which then creates greater exposure of the Melbourne brand through listed players playing for Casey • Increase MFC support as Casey players progress into MFC squads • Stronger Casey also means they have a greater capability to successfully replicate Melbourne’s game style, which would make it easier for players to transit to the AFL • An influx of more skilled/professional players dedicated to one last shot at the AFL will likely provide a development environment enmeshed in stronger work ethic It could be argued that this approach potentially weakens our team list, but in reality not many rookies make it (50 games) - particularly the last spot. Conversely as the practice is implemented it will likely create a more skilled pool to choose from, as more AFL hopefuls sees this as a possible avenue to the AFL. Of course if all AFL clubs adopt this approach then the effect is minimised, so like everything you need to be first (established practice) to reap the greatest benefits.

Actually I beleive "most important" would be players whose role and impact is the hardest to replace while ensuring the same quality (high) performance. Therefore players who cannot command a starting position, are obviously not hard to replace regardless of their role/impact in the team (like most quoted). For the better teams the vast majority of thier side would comprise numerous players who command a starting positon regardless of the depth players behind them (unlike Melbourne where a lot of our players commanded a starting postion, due to their being no quality pushing a case in the reserves); Consquently Melbournes better player's tend to also be our most important. These quoted names are probably more important to Melbournes improvement and development; rather than importance to the team - on this measure, I would then choose Hogan, Gawn, Salem, Viney and Garlett.

I think to juge the most important players to the team in 2015, it should really be judged on what impact their absence from the team would likely have on the result of a game. Considering this: N Jones - We currently don't have a strong body, experienced high possession winning midfielder that comes close to covering him (Hopefully Tyson and Viney can mprove this year to be of a similar standard) L Dunn - Can shut out opposition talls defensively, capable of 3rd man up, but most importantly sets up play down field with his long accurate passes (brain fades aside). McDonald, Garland and even Frost could all cover for him defensively but are not as damaging by foot. N Jetta - Very good at shutting down his opponent, has the pace not to be exposed, and the foot skills / composure with the ball. Not sure we have anyone else that can step up and fulfill all these attributes if he went down, particularily on small opponents. B Vince - A goal kicking midfielder with the skills to set up play downfield. Not a lot of them currently running around on exposed form (hopes for Salem, Toumpas, etc) D Tyson - Our next best midfielder behind N Jones, and with anticpated natural improvement/progression, expect he will be just as irreplacable. Also if you take him out of the in close action (quick hands, hard ball gets, etc) then N Jones will be easily tagged out of a game as oppostions run two players on him. Would love to have included C Dawes as I beleive a strong full forward is crucial to Melbourne's potency, and noting Hogan is a first year player not the messiah (not yet) - we should not be expecting Hogan to deliver much more than what Daniher provided for the Bombers last year. Unfortunately, based on exposed form (scoreboard impact) Dawes could be replaced by [Pedersen], Fitzpatrik or even Watts (defensive pressure aside). My expectation though is that M Gawn will elevate himself to top 5 importance, as he takes control of the ruck and starts clunking marks in the forward line; while my smokey is Fitzpatrick, who with full fitness, should exploits his significant pace (for his size) to become an extremely hard matchup - put endurance into him and he can play an A Goodes style of game (poorer version). Lumumba will be also be very hard to replace, if he fulfils his running role potential.

If they were suspended for the first half of the season, and then we play them at full strength and lose against a team that has little to no match fitness, cohesive training, etc - then we don't deserve the 'free' 4 points. Actually I feel for St Kilda who don't get the opportunity to knock the comeuppance out the drug cheating #### like we do. I also still strongly beleive that no football supporter (non essendon) should attend an Essendon home game, so that we can send a strong message as that we don't support what they have done(doing)and it will hurt them in the hip pocket - attendance figures, marketing (empty stadiums) and sponsorship (company will avoid them like the plague if the public shows such distastes). All my friends have adopted this philosophy and are spreading the word: "the greatest evil is when good people do nothing" - drugs in sport is evil and we can do something 'don't support Essendon home games'

Howe would be a huge success on the wing, pretty much unbeatable in the air, has the ground skills, and last year showed he can provide the delivery; then there's the flexibility of him drifting back as 'third man up role' when required, or floating forward (like Bail) but with far more potential to be dangerous - If I was an oppossition coach I would hate this match up. From the training reports I believe he has the athleticism and fitness to provide this outside role. Put Vince on the other wing then you will have potentially two very dangerous players who cannot be given any space particularily around the 50-60m arc. Coupled with Lambumba run from half back and Dunn and Jetta's delivery, transition from the back half to the forward half should improve significantly. Also Howe on the wing will be as much a forward threat as in the forwards