Dr. Gonzo

Prestia just re-signed with GC last year for 3 or 4 years.

I agree but after losing Hale & McIntosh surely the Roos wouldn't let him go.

Of course it's a defensible argument you just choose to ignore it. Player has history of foot injuries. Player has pain in foot. Scan fails to identify injury. Player continues playing despite pain. Subsequent scan finds significant injury to player which was likely exacerbated through the poor management by the club. It's a fairly logical sequence of events that most reasonable people would accept but we're just supposed to dismiss the possibility because it's not a defensible argument on the say so of who? You? Please, some of us still have the capacity for critical thought.

I am comfortable with the direction of the club and have faith the guys in charge know what needs to be done. My only concern is how long they are sticking around for. The performance of the team has been light years ahead of last season with the exception of round 2. However I'm a rusted on tragic who renews each October so I'm not one of the target audience.

Unquestioning faith in "experts" doesn't always end well. You give credence to their opinions but they are not the fount of all knowledge.

Don't be stupid - it's Kelly vs Salem AND Tyson.

Along with the management of Trengove - both of them were injuries that were not caused but exacerbated by the poor management of the club.

Because it's [censored]. The club uses the prospect of players returning from injury as "good PR" because they think/know if they come out before the season and say Hogan and Clark are likely to miss a chunk/all of the year it will have an adverse impact on memberships/crowds.

It's why I said "most" not "all".

Didn't do too well with Luke Ball.

Disgraceful though I understand his falling out was more in relation to Misson being given greater say than the club doctors.

Surely we don't need to go round in circles with this again? Most people are not complaining that our players get injured, only that the club sets false expectations on when they will return.

Can we bring back Andrew Daff? Or has that relationship gone down the drain even with the change in management at the club?

I agree but not to our own detriment. There's no point being a martyr but we should be on the front foot getting it out there that we are willing to give up the yearly game if the AFL is willing to institute a fair draw, either rolling draw, 17 game season or draw based on pervious years ladder (1st, 4th, 7th, 10th, 13th, 16th playing return game etc). This won't happen though so until it does we would be stupid to give it up. It will just mean we probably play all 8 non-Vic sides at home instead of just the 7 we get this year.

We did, it lasted 1 year I think and then was moved to just being ANZAC round rather than ANZAC Day (night). It disappeared altogether for a couple of years and is back this year but again on ANZAC round rather than the day itself. With the New Zealand game now following the Pies/Bombers game it's unlikely it will happen again.

The comparison is more that they are both highly talented players who haven't got the best out of themselves due to their mindset. But I agree, TJ could rip a game apart and did several times, Watts has never done that.

Realistically I think both should be done away with if we are to get a fair draw implemented.

I agree the monopolisation of ANZAC Day by Pies/Bombers is a joke - a lot of kids these days don't even know that games were played on the day before 1995 or that clubs other than these two were involved. Melbourne played the Bombers in 1992 and the Pies in 1991 on ANZAC Day from memory. People make the argument that these clubs "deserve" it because of "all they have done for the day" which is such utter nonsense. In reality it was a perfect storm that came together in 1995 that resulted in a sellout MCG crowd (first time this had happened for a looong time) and a drawn game. The article is spot on on a number of fronts but I don't like the way it equates volume of deaths in war to a clubs rights to the day. It's not a point scoring contest and to do so diminishes the real message of ANZAC Day, that war is futile. Not that the more lives you sacrifice the more honorable you are. In light of the arguments about footy on Good Friday I find it amazing that no one bats an eyelid at footy on ANZAC Day. ANZAC Day has a much greater argument to be footy free and full of solemnity than Good Friday does even if I hate the way it has been co-opted by the ultra-nationalists into a day to glorify war and a reason to revel in blind patriotism. I am opposed to the military as anything other than a "defense" force, I hate patriotism and ultra-nationalism and jingoism and chest-thumping makes me cringe. But if we were to respect ANZAC Day as the day of rememberance it should be and not a day to celebrate war and nationalism I would be all for it.

I don't know maybe it's just me but I have never seriously considered not renewing my membership since I was first signed up as a 7yo in 1989. I have questioned my commitment to the club at times and why I should really care, but at the end of the day I keep signing up and turning up because I know that if the club ever were to relocate, merge or die I couldn't stand knowing that it was because people like me had abandoned it. People need to realise you support your team through thick and thin and if the club is going crap and is being battered by all and sundry that is even more reason to consolidate your support for them. At the end of the day the success or otherwise of this club will come down to its supporters. Just because some incompetents/idiots have mishandled the clubs operations is no excuse to abandon the club. Again, look at Richmond. Say what you will about them but their supporters would have 1000x as many reasons to feel aggrieved compared to us however their supporters have stuck fat and their membership is now over 60k probably heading to 70k. Even when they're going dismally which is often they still pull decent crowds.

Colin Sylvia mk II.

I agree with Saty on Salem - short term we would all like to see him come into the seniors but for his long-term development I'd like to see him string at least half a season of very good performances together in the VFL before coming in to the seniors. This will not only build his confidence, get him used to competing against bigger/harder bodies and build his match fitness but will hopefully allow him to have the non-negotiables ingrained into him before stepping up. Just having pace and skill isn't enough he needs to learn what is required by him off the ball as well as all the 1%ers, tackles, contested ball situations etc Our development has been deplorable for far too long because 1) we have brought kids in too early without teaching them the fundamentals and 2) we have relied on these kids to be the match-winners/difference makers instead of just letting them find their feet and cement a senior spot. Hopefully this is changing. For those who refer to JKH I can agree to an extent however 1) they are playing different roles and 2) JKH could probably benefit from some time in the VFL as well.

1) It's not about tackles, it's about effort to win the contest 2) I assume Roos has the same standards for everyone, regardless of their role in the team or where they were drafted Gee who would've thought that on a discussion forum devoted to the MFC we would be discussing the MFC and it's players! A pretty outlandish concept I know but analysis and opinions on the players and club makes for more interesting reading than "jolly good game" and everyone queuing up to pat each other on the back. Or he is being given another chance after being told what is expected of him. To be honest I had no intention of debating Watts' game this much, watching the game I thought he was poor but overall I thought the team did OK and really we should've won the game. We dominated the second half but couldn't convert that into goals. Part of my thoughts on the game were that Watts was poor and that level of effort should not be tolerated and he should be made to work his way back through the two's. I am frankly amazed at the amount of people on here willing to make excuses and that have two sets of standards which for me is the only reason these threads exist. This isn't about Watts-bashing, it's about being unwilling to accept those kinds of efforts regardless of who commits them. As Roos said last week or the week before, you can forgive skill errors, you can forgive if someone doesn't have all the talent in the world but you can't accept a lack of effort. That goes for every single player at the club, not just some. Otherwise our culture is worth less than nothing, we will continue playing bruise free footy and churning out guys like Travis Johnstone, Morton, Watts etc who will get by their whole careers on skill alone without being willing to put in the effort to make them and the club champions.

Exactly RM. This how you set standards to build a strong culture.

I'd drop Watts for Kent if he's right to come back in - in a heartbeat.