The Chazz

That should be put on the Demonland banner up the top of this page. A brilliantly worded comment, that ended a well worded post. Credit to you Norwood.

How do I know about Jnr? Hamstring injury that takes 7 weeks to get over instead of 3. Would have been 35(?) this year, and was already slowing down last year. Honestley, I'm happy that Jnr isn't out there this year. Don't get me wrong, I admired the guy, but his time was up, just like Bruce was correctly offered a 1 year contract (apart from that 1 goal yesterday, he was quite insipid). Hawthorn seemed to do well yesterday with Franklin and Roughead being their big forwards and not finding the middle of the sticks every time. I do agree about big Max. I went to the GC/Carl game Saturday night, they have no option but to play their big kids, and I tell you what, a couple of them are going to be rippers (number 2 and 23 I think). It was only their experience that stopped them from getting more goals than what they did (I'm talking about the 2 boys I mentioned).

OK, I apologise for requesting the delete, I couldn't believe that someone would have an issue with how the opposition celebrated. But I don't apologise for the rest of my post. He kicked a goal that started the momentum. Regardless of who I played for, current or previous, I would celebrate any goal in the same fashion. Grandstanding?

At what stage this year were any of the games certainties? Why SHOULDN'T West Coast win at home against ANYONE they play? Why SHOULDN'T any team beat the team they are playing? Next year there will still be some iffy games, the year after is when we SHOULD start winning certain games.

Blown away by this thread. Mods - please close it. How much more did Bruce celebrate his goal compared to when he kicked them for us? As much as I dislike him, I thought he was quite mellow compared to some of his celerations when in the red and blue. Did Dunn show him any respect after he kicked his goal? It's footy, harden up.

When was Bailey outcoached? I thought his match-ups were very, very good. If our team isn't good enough, I don't know if that means we were outcoached? The fact that we played the quality footy in the 2nd quarter showed me that we are well on track in terms of our goal. Add 40 games to most of those guys and that type of footy will be a regular event.

What happened to the popular belief that Frawley can play on the gorillas plus the LeCras types? Burgoyne should have been a great match-up, but Frawley will benefit from the gallop. Did Trengove go to Bruce or Bruce to Trengove? Let's not forget, Bruce is very handy, but shite disposal. He played on a 2nd year player. Bail played extrmely well on Mitchell. Again, a 2nd-ish year player on a star of the game - hold your head up high Bail. The winning quarters mentality was highlighted yesterday, but some on here are too stupid to see it. If I were Bailey, my message at 3/4 time would have been WIN THE QUARTER. Nothing he could have done would have won that game after half time, and I challenge anyone that thinks differently. He had them up and going in the 2nd quarter, and would have been very happy with how the game was being played. I'm sure he would have loved to call a time-out at the 10 minute mark of the third quarter and told his senior players to stand up, but sadly, he can't. They shut us down, they are a lot better side than us, and the pressure in the D50 in that quarter was too hot for us. They caused us to turn the ball over too much, and that has absolutely nothing to do with our structure or coach. If you can hit targets when not under pressure, but can't hit them when you're under the pump, it says nothing about our coach. Anyone that has played the game would understand that. Let's not forget, Hawthorn won a flag only 3 years ago, which was a couple of years before their time (popular belief), their window is well and truly open this year. Ours isn't.

I have no dount at all that we will win the next 2 games. I went to the GC game on the weekend, we will win that game. And I can't really see Brisbane worrying us. And don't worry, we will beat sides above us - I'm hoping Bulldogs, St Kilda and maybe even Geelong. But we will lose a couple of games to teams below us, so brace yourself! I don't care what anyone says, it's the joys of following a young side in development mode.

Brisbane - Yes GC - Yes West Coast - Voted NO, but we can play Subi alright Adelaide - Yes, I think we can win this game, especially at the MCG. North - Voted No, but I'm very interested in this game because it's one we SHOULD win, so I will get an idea of our improvement when we play this game. At worse, 3 1/3 wins from 6 games. I think we can beat St Kilda and Essendon. If we can get to Round 12 with 5 or 6 wins, I'll be over the moon.

No, but on the ladder it will look like we are for a long part of the year. Nb I have also had this opinion well before the preseason started and still have it. I;m not going ot let a touch up from a top 4 side make me change my view. There'll be a couple more performance like that during this season, so be prepared!

Our forward line will be fine. Thought Watts was very good, especially in the first half, like many of his mates, got a bit ahead of himself after half time. Jurrah needs a rocket, as does Petterd (is he our next Robbo?), but I just want to see them play a few games together. Anyway, changes this week; In: MacDonald (has to play against his old club), Gysberts (sub) Out: Garland (injured), Jetta Maric starts on the ground. I would have a chat to him and tell him he has got 2 weeks to get his confidence back. we have Brisbane and GC, if he can't play well against either of these 2 teams, he's gone. I want to get Aussie in that forward line to create that forward pressure, and believe he is a better seniors player than reserves, but I'm giving Maric a fortnight. I don't think the FD will though. Jones made an excellent comment on his Twitter last week, something along the lines of just watched Hawthorn's game on tape, they have a lot of good players. Very true comment, and a fair number of those players are better than our best at this stage.

My only question is how nearly everyone is whinging that we don't have experienced players out there. Jones, while not a superstar, has played bloody near 100 games, while Gys has played 3. At this stage, we need Jones out there for more than 45 minutes. Plus, as the sub, I want run, run and more run, not grunt on it's own.

Disagree on almost every point you have made. * The top 2 points are correct. Having Bruce and Jnr week after week did give some stability from an experienced point of view. They were both going to leave at some stage in the very near future, it just happened to be this year. * The midfield didn't look slow at all in the 2nd quarter, or in the 3rd and 4th last week. * Jones is not a back pocket, if you are going to move him somewhere maybe a forward pocket? At least we know he can kick a goal. With all the opinions of his turnover count on this site, he would cost us 10 goals a game as a back pocket (I don't share that opinion however). * Tapscott was drafted as a half forward flanker, and I think that's where we will see him play his best footy. Grimes DOES need to get in the middle - hopefully it might improve his decision making ability becuase if he frigs around, he'll get smashed. * Jamar looks every bit of the player he was last year, if not better. His work last week was dominant against a guy that challenged him for his spot in the AA, yesterday the Hawks sharked his tap work far too easy (not Jamar's faulty entirely). * Essendon were already ahead of us, and Richmond wont be. St Kilda made them look better than what they are. We WILL beat Brisbane this weekend, and we WILL beat Gold Coast, so we WILL go in to the bye at 2 1/2 wins and 1 loss. Most predicted that (or close to it) when the fixture was released.

Martin can play that role, but it's pointless having one if the ball doesn't get down there more than it does! BTW - Junior wouldn't have lasted the year - why do it to him? His body was not where it needed to be to play at that level this year.

Personally, I think a running player is vital as the sub. That said, I think we played it to perfection last week using Petterd, but the question is did we enforce it too late? We can't forget that this is a new thing for any level of football and to expect our coach to nail it first time is unrealistic - every coach is in the same boat and are all unsure what works best. We used a smaller forward last week and it worked, we did it again with an even smaller forward and it didn't. Swans last week used it with a ruckman - it didn't work, Hawks used it for a runner this week, and it worked! See, a lot of experimenting. For mine, I think Gysberts in the immediate future is our best bet. I'd like to see him come on mid way through the 3rd quarter, giving him a solid 45 minutes to get in and provide extra run. If he can offer us that, then he gets a full time gig. Then I'd like to see Blease given the opportunity to be our sub. I think in his first couple of games, he'd run his ass off if he was given 45 minutes to get a hunger for senior footy. Poor Maric, comes on when the Hawks are near unstoppable, and is expected to play a role that could turn the match. Even if we had Judd as our sub we still wouldn't have beaten that team!

I was going to make a similar thread to this, so I'm glad deemonkey beat me to it! Most are correct, it's pretty hard to call a 28 game player a liability, but with every game he plays, he's getting closer to becomming one! We can all use the stats about how many inside 50's our opponents have, and how that puts pressure on our defenders, but my gripe with Grimes is his inability to hit a target when he is under no pressure. He takes a lot of marks in the D50, so I can't see how this puts him under pressure. A lot of his turnovers come from kicks after he has taken a mark. The arguement to this is that the players aren't moving for him up the field. While this may be correct at times, it's absolute crap on most occasions. I admit, I watch the game on TV as I'm interstate, but when he does kick to a lead (which is often), the Melbourne player is in the clear by a couple of metres. I understand it is hard for some on here to realise that if Grimes misses a target by 5 metres, chances are an opposition player is standing right there. It may look like our player is standing still, but missing targets by such a long way is inexcusable. I'm waiting with anticpation from E25 about the issues with Jack's skills. I gave Grimes a spray last week on the N Jones thread, so will be interesting to see what E has to say after ANOTHER incompetent performance by Grimes.

Jack Trengove is our Hodge, it's written all over him. Someone who can play midfield, shift forward and play right in the guts, and doesn't take a backward step.

Here we go, 1 player kicks 5 in the reserves, and he is to be rushed in? If he was a star returning from injury, I'd agree. But the fact is, it's Juice, and it's only 1 game. If he does it again next week, then I'd think about an emergency place for him.

God, I resisted getting on last night because I knew there would be some silly comments, and bugger me, this is the first one I've opened this morning and sure enough, some silly comments! Flash showed great leadership by taking the kick-ins. We played amazing for the first 25 minutes of that quarter, but in the last 5 minutes, the momentum was swinging Hawthorn's way. I was wrapped with the fact that we tried this against a side like Hawthorn, becuase when we are a challenger, we will need to be able to do this. For the 5 minutes yesterday when we went defensive, we managed to slow their run right down, and ensured we went in to half time with a reasonable lead. The idiotic comment about how it created a negative attitide - have a look at the replay and watch our boys walking in at half time. If you think the defensive play had a negative impact on them, just look at each of their faces. I thin kthe 2nd quarter had the opposite impact, we went in far too cocky.

I am a big fan of Martin, but guys, please, it's Round 1 of a 24 round season. He's had 1 performance that warrants another couple of games, he needs to do this on a regular basis. Until then, even Bate and Newton are a chance to play should their form be worthy of selection. A former topline Rugby coach told me that tackling is mostly in the head. IF you WANT to tackle someone bloody hard, then technique is easy, and can be taught in a very short amount of time (ie 1 or 2 sessions). If such player DOES NOT want to tackle someone hard, you can't teach them to do it.

Thanks Chopper. I did reply to the post with an apology, but the more I read it, the more I am actually pretty pi$$ed at that post. Anyway, I did set myself up for some criticism, been reading E25's comments for far too long! (Just kidding E).

Dees, I have apologised for my little spin. It is in no way meant to be an accusation, and if my comment is a scandal, well I apologise for that too. Whilst my comments have obviously upset a few of you, you are taking them far too seriously. I for one do not want to lose Tom, and will have tears if he does leave, but at the end of the day, regardless of what comments are made on this side, idiotic or realistic, we as members have absolutely no power to ensure he stays. Because of this, I am writing to ask people not to take things so seriously and worry about the things we can control.

This was the quote in the Herald Sun; "Demons doctor Andrew Daff confirmed the young gun was suffering from "bone stress" in the kneecap. "The best course of action is for Tom to undergo a period of rehabilitation while resting from football loads," Daff said. In my expertise as a google-medico, there is a difference between stress fractures and stress on the bones.

My post was tounge-in-cheek and I apologise for the silly remark (it's Friday arvo and I'm hanging for the weekend!). However, I, like many, am reading in to the Tom Scully a bit too much. But one thing I did notice (or to the point, didn't notice) was the words "Stress Fracture" in any article. I remember the word "Stress" being used, but no mention of fracture. That's why I made my silly comment! I'm happy to be shown the article if it does say fracture in it, I just don't remember seeing it. But you're spot on, stress fractures do show up on xrays, been through that myself a few times.

I think it's been a strength of ours for many years.