Binmans PA

Agree on Gawn, Terlich and McKenzie. Josh Hunt is soft too, but if you can kick it, there are things you can get away with at AFL level. Mackie's another one who gets away with it. Strauss's problem is he doesn't get enough of it. I'd persevere with him though. New coach with some solid defensive structures and a plan for utilising our better disposers of the ball may well prove to be an important ingredient. Tapscott's on thin ice, but I'd agree. He's shown a couple of signs this year. I can't see him being truly comfortable at this level until next year, but if he can string together some games at the back end of this season, it will do his confidence the world of good. Agree on Bail. Horrible, horrible decision maker too. He looks alright when we're going forward too, but seems to lack the defensive work-rate. I disagree on Evans. I probably would have gone with a two year deal on this one, but I see something promise in him. His disposal and decision making is streets ahead of Bail, with half Rohan's game time. The three year deal is a show of faith though, along with our persistence despite his injuries. I think if he improves to become a solid B grader, he will repay the faith the club has shown him. That's the beauty of a three year deal in my eyes. Investment in someone. It wouldn't be a big contract anyway. Blease will probably always be a downhill skier for mine. He will look very dangerous in a functioning forwardline, with good midfield supply though. Agree on Pedersen, Sylvia, Davey, Fitzpatrick, Jamar and Dunn. I can see Watts playing the Gunston role too. As soon as Dawes went off last week he looked half the player he was in the first half. He will never work as a true KPF for mine. He could be a very good third tall, with an ability to play on the wing and high half forward too. Totally agree on the future, though I haven't seen enough of Kent yet to judge him. However, he appears to have quite a left peg.

I suspect his contract will probably be enough to get him over the line for another season.

I wanted Don gone. I'm pleased he's stepped down, but I appreciate all he's given to this club over the last few years. He stepped in to help the club in a dire period and provided us with much needed stability. Seems like a passionate guy and I thank him greatly for his services to the club. I hope he can relax now and enjoy the football, without the burden of being President.

Yeah, Couch is gone. Depending who we pick up, Magner may also make way.

It was a mongrel that went all over the place. It effectively had topspin on it.

Round Six? Is that just an arbitrary number you've pulled out AD? As HH says, there's no way he'll be coach in 2014. He'll be gone before the end of the season.

The problem is, albeit having two key defenders down, we had absolutely no structures defensive or offensive. There's no doubt once we get some talent and experience into our midfield the rest of the ground is looking very promising. It's structures and game plans we lack. Really looking forward to seeing what an experienced coach can do with our list.

I guess it felt like nearly every time he touched it he turned it over. I suppose it goes to show all his in and under that you don't necessarily see.

Interesting. Very surprising. He seemed to miss handball targets consistently and miss targets by foot too. 70% is decent though.

Positives for me: * Watt's ability to fend off players and take them on without being out muscled. He still needs to lay some tackles though, but is getting there. * Toumpas with ball in hand and laying a tackle or two. * Garland's effort on Cloke. Absolutely terrific. Very unheralded. * Was pretty happy with Rodan's stoppage work too. That's about it. Nathan Jones had an absolute shocker. I'd hate to see his disposal efficiency.

Fanciful. I'd be ecstatic for merely Jamar for Adams.

Well then it comes down to the gameplan and structures.

It's weird. For the amount of times I've said we should take midfielders, midfielders and more midfielders, I now believe we should take the best available. If Boyd is the best available, we'd be crazy not to take him. The next best sounds like they'll be a mid. I'd look at trading a PP (if we do get one) for an established A grader. I'd then go hard at an experienced, solid B-grader free agent. Throw cash at the FA. We don't want to give someone like Freo, the Blues or the Hawks a player like Boyd (if he is indeed believed to be the best bet) if that will help complete their premiership puzzle. Our midfield needs a shot in the arm, but our list needs further class across it too. If Boyd represents that then I'd be going with him at one. Naturally, this is based on the assumption that we get pick 1. It seems like Boyd may not be there at two and perhaps it says something about him if he is.

Couldn't help myself. :D

It's a lot easier to have a surplus when you're not spending it at all. If you take it out of places like the education system and the health system, it's very easy. We then end up with a mind-numblingly stupid, conservative populous and a third world health 'infrastructure'. There's more to life than simple economics. This is the fundamental problem with the Liberals. It's their only card. They also claimed we'd never have profits under Swan, but what do you know. Still 21 years straight of economic rise in this country. Granted it takes plundering the earth, but it'll be the same when that fundamentalist Christian gets into power too. RE: the OP. The more I think about it, the more I believe Kennett isn't the right man to fill the next incumbency. We need stability first. That will hopefully be Peter Jackson and his organisational structures. We then need a President that can sell/echo his CEO's messages, without conflicting ego. I don't think Kennett can do this. I wouldn't write him off in the future though.

Kennett is a typical money-grabbing Liberal. As long as the private sector is seen to be booming, who gives a toss about the rest. He closed down copious public schools and hospitals. Opened up Crown, what irony, given his later position at Beyond Blue and brought the mind-numbingly dull Grand Prix with its environmental and noise pollution to our door steps. Seemingly a [censored] of a guy. But if you can look past all his moral breaches and money grabbing, he's an extremely successful business person. Not only this, he's also overseen a football club who has prospered amazingly and won a flag in his time at the helm. Right now I couldn't give a toss who takes over our presidency. If Kennett's heart is in it, get him. I will however flag I do hold some trepidation, given his past stance on the MFC and mergers.

It's about sending a message though. I'd much prefer Jones showing our mids the work-rate required to become a competitive, rounded footballer than having Moloney still there. That is one short term pain, long term gain I'm willing to cop into the future.

Unless they're waiting for a couple of easier fixtures (St Kilda and the Bulldogs) to hand over the interim reigns. I agree with quite a bit of that. The major issue Neeld has is his ability to communicate, for if he had the ability, our players would understand what's expected of them on game day. They have absolutely no idea. And let's be honest, we will be in more debt that prior to Bailey if Neeld is given another year and we dish up what we've dished up in his first two years. 6,000 Melbourne supporters to a home game. I was there and I reckon the 6,000 count is generous. We'll have crowds lower or as low as GWS against Freo and the Swans.

So Neeld didn't know improvement was required of him? The players don't know the fate of their coach at all. They know he'll be coaching this week. After that, who knows?

I completely agree. You've mentioned numerous times that you believe we're in bed with the AFL. Right there with you and thank goodness for that.

I'd hazard to say that is our reward from the AFL.

You mean the guy that helped sack him from Essendon?

Misson was already on his way to Melbourne before Neeld was. You cannot credit Neeld for that. I'd say Misson was under the illusion that Lyon was coming to Melbourne. Particularly as the day before Neeld was announced as coach, Lyon was announced as coach to the Melbourne players.

Yeah, I'd be playing Watts in the forward fifty for the rest of the year, even with the return of Clark. He's shown a glimmer of attack on the ball over the last two weeks. We've said it before. If he can impact contests physically, he'll become a very dominant player with increased possession. That said, going forward I see him as a player that rotates between deep forward, half forward, high half forward and the wing. It's a good thread this though. I agree. Dawes is more of a physical player than Clark. It's great seeing a Melbourne key forward banging and crashing opponents. There was a moment there today that reminded me of Neitz's hip and shoulder on Luke McCabe over a decade ago. He has a presence. I think he will be helped by Hogan's bash and crash too just quietly. Clark, Dawes, Hogan, Watts and Howe. Get two B grade crumbers and we're looking incredibly dangerous down there. If Blease can lift his work rate and fitness, he might become one of those crumbers too.

I'm not "continually bagging the club". I am continually saying Neeld should be gone for (what I perceive) the good of the club. Ultimately, on-field performance is what football is about. There's no doubt there is a rotten culture off-field at the MFC, but there's absolutely no evidence Neeld has improved this by any measure. Incidentally, the cultural problems at the MFC have about as much validity as Neeld loosing the players. None of us can really know for sure, but we make assumptions based on this acquired information. If we have such "inherent problems" within our club, what are you basing this on? Heresy, unless you've been amongst the players yourself. This seems to be a monumental hypocrisy in many of the arguments defending Neeld and his position.