Akum

Who was the last Melbourne player - let alone midfielder - to kick 6 in a game?

Do they really believe that all this whingeing and bleating and underhandedness is making them attractive to the western Sydney public? Are they giving their public the impression of a team with a strong character or a weak character? Imagine if the NRL carried on like this if they wanted to put a 2nd rugby league team in Melbourne - would it make you feel more or less inclined to support them?

I'm really liking the current level of experimentation that seems to be happening. Not the "pseudo-experimentation" that went on in 2009 & 2010, but the genu-wine lateral-thinking type of experimentation that has guys like Bate & Garland running with the midfield, and being prepared accordingly. Gotch did us some big favours last year by giving games in the midfield at Casey to Petterd, Joel Macdonald & Bate, who all starred in the role, admittedly at a lower level. And to me it's the midfield mix that's important, how the midfield functions as a unit, rather than their individual abilities. Bate, for example, will never be an A-grade mid, but may well become a key contributor to an A-grade midfield. I suppose the same applies to Moloney. Under Neeld, it doesn't seem to be as much "where is this guy going to play his best footy?" as "where is this guy going to hurt the opposition the most?" He's trying to find the best overall team structure.

In 2012 there may not be a "best 22" at all. It may depend to a large extent on who we're playing. Against a tall forward line, our "best 22" could include Sellar, with he and Martin in defence. To avoid being outmuscled in the midfield again, we'll load up with muscle, and our "best 22" could include Bate, Tapscott, even MacDonald or Bartram in the midfield. If we need speed, we load up with speed - Blease, Bennell, Jetta. And whatever games Gys & Bennell manage to get, I bet they won't play against Hawks or Pies for the next 2 or 3 years. I bet we'll be much more strategic. More players will have specific roles, we'll put a lot more effort into countering opponents' strengths & exploiting their weaknesses and select accordingly.

A very well-orchestrated article, at a no-footy-news time (so it will be eagerly gobbled up by both Melb dailies) aimed squarely at Dee supporters who are not members. The message is: "You know we've got the talent. Now We Mean Business!!" The club would have checked out with the players mentioned in the article first that it's OK to name them in such a way - these happen to be the three that non-member supporters would be looking for a lot from in 2012. Jack & Cale & Flash would be loving all this stuff and are probably the three most likely to respond to it. All he's said to Jack is that you can play at your current level - a potentially elite player, perhaps - your whole career if that's what you want, but if you want to be elite, this is what it involves. Of course Jack wants to be elite - he wants to be Nick Riewoldt or better, not Jack Anthony! - and will do what it takes to get there. Nobody should have any doubt here that he's prepared to work for it. Not a kick at all - just "if this is what you want, this is what is required". The subtext (for the players) is that from now on we're comparing ourselves to the top teams, not to the mid-tables (Essendon, Norf). It's no longer good enough to look like world-beaters against teams below us and get smashed by any team that applies a bit of pressure. Where we got smashed in 2011 was in contested ball (especially clearances) against top teams. But it won't happen unless we work for it, individually and collectively, at least as hard as the top teams do. There are no short cuts.

Did she approve?

I'm not so sure. It's the AFL who have forced GWS to include Lucky Phil's salary under their salary cap. They don't seem at all happy with GWS. You get a feeling that this has a sort of stench that even Vlad is uncomfortable about. Yeh OK, that probably makes him more likely to want to brush it under the carpet. But you don't get the sense that the AFL are going to come out and back GWS to the hilt like they did with the original $cully deal. And GWS seem to have ducked for cover too - the AFL seems to want them to keep their mouth shut. Put it this way - when the $cully deal was announced, both the AFL and GWS felt confident enough to eyeball us and dare us to take them on - "that's business, so suck it up!" But there's not the same sort of arrogant crowing about Lucky Phil - there's more a feeling of furtiveness about it, like they can't look us straight in the eye.

Great OP. My only quibble is that I doubt that the compo picks will do it to get us an A+ mid, whichever of the 4 options we use. As others have said, we turned down picks 8 & 9 in a reasonably good draft for Trengove at 2, and other clubs aren't likely to do the same. IMO the only way we'll get to the pointy end of the draft, or stand any chance of getting a marquee mid, or get an A-grade homesick Victorian, is to trade someone like Jamar to a club who needs him even more than we do.

Remember too that in 2012 there are 18 clubs & 10 non-finalists.

Agree. Add someone of the ilk of Cotchin or Dal Santo or even Griffin to that list in the OP and it gets interesting.

Didn't he get 5 goals from 5 kicks? Mainly from rapid breaks, because most of the play that day was in our defensive half. And he's missed some shockers since. That was a one-off, a bit like Morton's 3 goals in a half from CHF against Cats in 2009 or 2010. Repeat - Jamar's one of the best stoppage rucks in the business, which is why he's so good, but not much else & never has been. Averaged 32 hitouts, but only 4 kicks, 2 marks & 7 handballs per game in 2011. He's not the "complete" ruckman, but he excels at the most important part of the job.

You missed the point a bit. I'm not saying Port have an A-grade mid to trade with us (unless Boak improves out of sight). I'm using Port as an example of one of many clubs who will make a massive play for Jamar this time next year. Other clubs with elite mids who might be prepared to have a long hard look at trading for an elite ruck at the end of next year include Hawks & Saints, even Tigers & Dogs. And GC & GWS? They (esp GC) have some great young midfielders, but if they're getting absolutely smashed in the ruck game after game after game ... then yeh, they'll have all the top 3 picks between them in the next 3 drafts, they may well be prepared to give up one of them for the right price. And Spencer would get us a third-round pick, if we're lucky, which we don't need. Not when we can trade another tall (admittedly far better) and get something we really need to take us to that top level. Viney will be great, but as others have said, our compo picks will be more like 15 & 17 than 10 & 12. Big diff between pick 15 & pick 3 next year, if we can get it. My point is that Jamar is the only player on our list who has the currency to get us what we really need - an A-grade mid.

The thing about trading Jamar is that he is the one player we have who could land us either an established A-grade mid via trade, or a top 3 draft pick from GWS or GC from their plethora of early draft picks over the next year or three. Nobody else on our list has that much currency (the closest would be Chip), so if we ever want to trade for top-line mids, the only option is Jamar. Other clubs would also pay him top dollar in the latter part of his career. It is absolutely certain that Port, for example, will make a massive play for him when he next is out of contract, but they won't be the only ones. On the other hand, we now have a log-jam of promising young talls who as yet don't have anywhere near Jamar's currency. Martin might get us an early 2nd round if we're lucky, Gawn less. If one of them rips it up next year and massively increases their currency, then it's still Jamar we should trade. And the quality of our young talls will offset at least some of what we miss by losing Jamar, while we gain massively by nabbing a top-class mid.

Saw Bobby Bright perform in Williamstown just a few years back - still a great entertainer, had the crowd in the palm of his hand. Top bloke too.

Steve, am I right in saying that you see the deficiencies in Jamar's game as being less of a problem than Martin's deficiencies? Jamar is by no means the "ideal" all-round ruckmen, he's just one of the best in the business at stoppages. But he gives us little around the ground, and nothing forward or back. Or do you think that what he gives us at stoppages outweighs his shortcomings? And which is more likely to improve - Martin's work at stoppages, or Jamar's work around the ground?

Agree totally. Admit I've changed the last sentence of this quote by missing the bit about Bate as a forward. I wanted to make the point that I don't see Neeld as just working out who are our 8 best mids and scattering them around the midfield slots. I expect him to develop a midfield TEAM, where players will have roles and will combine in the most effective way, so that "the whole is more than the sum of the parts". It's this that brings guys like Bate, and maybe Tapscott & Jetta, into the frame, not because they're one of our 8 (or whatever number) "best mids", but because they might be seen to add essential qualities to the mix which would otherwise be missing, such as physical presence & grit & tackling pressure.

After 186 the Board had to let go of somebody, and that "somebody" had to be either the coach or the CEO, especially after the Board had only just become aware of the state of the relationship between the two. At the time it wouldn't have been at all obvious to the Board whether it should be CS or DB. But they had to make a decision, and it went against Bailey, though there were clearly reservations about it, and they put Cam on notice according to these reservations. That was as good as they could have done at the time, and only time would tell whether their decision was right or not. I'm confident that time will show that they did make the right decision, if it hasn't already, and that their reservations about Cam are much less now than they would have been then. And I'd expect Cam to be much more comfortable with the current coaching ethos than the previous one.

Totally agree. Tho' we have the compo picks next year to attract another top-shelf mid, either by draft or by trade. But we still need 2 A-graders. There are however two other factors that may see our midfield improve rapidly this year: (1) They never played as a team under Bailey; they were playing as individuals. Against midfields who did play as a team, they were lambs to the slaughter. I'm certain that Neeld won't allow the same mistake to be made. (2) Our premier young mids - Trengove, McKenzie, Gysberts, Grimes & Bail - have played very few games where they're all in the team together, because the latter three in particular have been so much injured. The best midfields have spent years together, improving individually & collectively, getting used to each other, to develop a team culture. We've got to get these 5 plus others on the park together much more often than we have done - come on down, Dave Misson!!

The word is FLEXIBILITY. We now have the big men & KPPs to exploit weaknesses and counter strengths. And Clark and Martin are both capable of holding down key positions without having to ruck (and differ in this respect from Jamar & Spencer). A smallish defence will struggle against Clark FF & Martin CHF. Tall defenders lacking mobility will struggle against Watts & Clark. And we have hopefully seen the last of this "all-forwards-in-defence" farce - although any of them one-out under a high bomb, with the other forwards streaming back towards them, would terrorise all defences. On the other hand, our main defenders are all 192-193cm & will struggle against 200cm gorilla forwards like Buddy or Petrie or perhaps Kreuzer & NikNat & Zac Smith in future (and I would have said Mitch Clark if we didn't have him!) But Martin can hold his own against these guys, as well as hurt them on the rebound. Clark could ruck at stoppages forward of centre, Martin in defence. Jamar's value is at stoppages, he gives us very little around the ground or up forward, and could not hold down a key position. But his injuries may mean that he's most useful in future as a "pinch-hitter" for when we need extra drive, rather than a workhorse. Before trade week, every commentator bar none said we needed a big strong power KPF. They approved of us going for Dawes, and last year for Hale, while expecting us not to get them. Now we've got what everybody said was our biggest need, one or two nuffies are saying that we didn't need it after all.

I'd go with your avatar - Suggsie & Madness! At least my kids know their songs from ads & reality TV.

The thing I like about Jones is that for each of the past 3 years I reckon he's improved maybe 20% on the season before. That's a tribute to his capacity to continue to work hard on his game. Yes, he has deficiencies, but with a work ethic like his, you'd expect that he'll continue to improve in the future too.

You'd expect that Neeld will have some influence on: How the assistants line up - who stays, who goes, who comes in; Which players are put up for trade, given his aim to coach "the hardest team to play against in the AFL". Will be interesting to watch.

But "here" at the time he made the statement could only have meant Adelaide Oval!! So ... he's going to Port??

Demons & Saints merge??? Nah, wouldn't stack up theologically.

If it means that he's now going to start to play like he's our best player, it'll be worth it.