The Chazz

Don't get me wrong, we wouldn't be resting on our laurels, and would always welcome top end talent, especially established players that want to come to us. That said, I'm certain the club is very happy with the players they have picked up toward the top end of the draft in the past 3 years. They would be backing themselves in to turning Hogan, Viney, Tyson, Salem, Brayshaw, Pettracca, Oliver and The Weed in to true A graders. If we manage to develop the odd 2nd or 3rd rounder (or rookie draft) in to an A grader too (i.e. like what has happened to Gawn and Tom Mc, potentially Stretch and ANB), then they are an added bonus. Solid foot soldiers like Bugg, Ben Ken, Harmes, Kent, Jeffy, Nev, Newton, these types of blokes are the ones that need to ensure they play consistent footy. They will get us to the finals, it's the names listed in the paragraph above that will win us finals. If we are going to chase a guy, I think it has to be Hurley. If Prestia wants to come to us, then we go and get him, but if we have to convince anyone, Hurley would be my man.

Great to see so many positive responses to this, mine is one too. Well done MFC. The sad part is that if we stop "selling" our games to the NT, then communities/groups like the above would be starved of these opportunities. I'm sure RGRS would echo how much this means to the kids/teens/young adults when AFL "stars" have time for them, especially being so remote and often isolated. Disclaimer; I fully support the idea of playing a home game or two in the NT, providing common sense controls the scheduling of them.

Not as quick as Hurley could be.

I said to a Richmond supporting associate of mine that the best thing they could do would be to trade Martin. He is an amazing talent, is a match winner, but is really not going to get Richmond to a Top 4 finish (wouldn't happened by now if he was going to). I'm sure if they were to trade him to a West Coast/Adelaide type outfit - one that needs just one more top level midfielder to lock themselves in the Top 4 for the next few years, they will pay top dollar for him. If Richmond were to get 2 first rounders, which I would argue would be a fair price, then they can look at getting some top young talent, similar to how we have played the draft/trade period over the past couple of seasons. Richmond will not win a premiership with its current list, and Martin is one that can help them rebuild in a shorter amount of time. That said, I don't care about Richmond, and I look forward to them continuing being our [censored].

32 up there on Thursday, Gorg. Looking at the forecast. we should be appreciative that we are playing this game on Saturday.

Will the ground be too hard because of the hot weather they are experiencing at the moment?

Loved how Clarry got up Merrett at one stage. Was really looking forward to seeing what he would do if he kicked the goal. Sadly, he missed, so I was really looking forward to seeing what Merrett did - not sure what big Sauce said but he certainly let Clarry know that he missed. Bit of Old Bull v Young Bull, but was great to watch a kid with such confidence.

Reckon the Freo and Port jumper are playing off for gold, we definitely get bronze.

So, are you saying we shouldn't be playing an "out of depth" OMac, but instead should be playing Dunn and Garland, the ones with an "inability to play defensive roles consistently"? You're arguing against yourself, STMJ.

Jesus, last time we did this sort of "list management", it cost us $500k. Might as well bring Spencer in to play on Wingard and be done with it.

Play OMac on Westhoff this weekend.

Out; Oliver, Wagner, Hunt, Michie In; Tyson, Jetta, Pederson, Grimes/Trengove * I could see the Gawn out for Spencer situation occuring * Oliver only comes out if needs recovery from cork. A spell this week should have him cherry ripe for the run up to the bye (a very important run that could decide our finals aspirations this year) * Would be very surprised if we dropped ANB or Newton * If we are making 3/4/5 changes this week, we MUST pick blokes that are AFL hardened (hence why I think Tyson, Jetta and Pedo are locks). They are rock hard fit at the top level, and coming off a week off will only be of benefit to them. Throwing in too many "VFL fit" players could see those guys running out of legs at the top level, and actually work against us. I wouldn't want to see all of Grimes, Trengove and Dawes coming straight in to this side.

Also take in to consideration that H has struggled to get on the park, Garland has been a liability most of the time, and we've also blooded 2 new blokes off the HBF too. Salem's time in the middle will come, and he will be a very good player. It says a lot about the kid that Roos had elected him to be the "general" of our backline. Yes, he has been dropped this week, and will likely spend a couple of weeks at Casey, but I'm sure Roos/Goodwin are looking forward to the day that he hits 60+ games. His current situation (i.e. being dropped) is all good from my end, and will be a very important part of his development. In no way did we lose in this trade. Not saying we won, but we definitely didn't lose. Tyson's worth to us is far greater than what many outsiders would appreciate (and some of our own supporters, too). I'm constantly amazed at the calls that he was out of form last year. It wasn't form, it was injury. Don't think there was any game where he was 100%.

I'm sure when we are a chance of finishing Top 4 it won't matter where we play these games. There's greater risk of soft tissue injuries playing back to back games at Etihad, which would be a possibility if we scrap our "home" NT games.

Playing Trengove this week would probably see an extra 5000 through the gates. If our break-even figure is approx 20,000, playing JT this week should see us get to half our breakeven target.

If there's a perfect game to have Trengove to return, this is it. Wouldn't be surprised if this was dangled in front of him during his meeting with Roos. It's hard to know how the likes of Wagner and Hunt are travelling, and it's also hard to know how H has recovered. With no knowledge, I could see; In - ANB, Trengove, Dunn, H Out - Jetta, Garland, Michie, Wagner/Hunt Could be any number of combinations of the above.

Was just about to say that he should challenge it, but then looked and we have Port the following week (i.e. if he gets 2 weeks, he'll miss the match up on Wingard). Would still seriously consider challenging.

I don't buy in to this "horses for courses" stuff. North had a far taller team than the Dogs last Friday night, and they won the game. This is the Dogs team that probably plays more games than any team at Etihad, especially to start this year in particular, so would know a bit about team selections. Effort, attitude and ability will win more games than it will lose, regardless of where we play. Finals teams generally bring all three each week. We are in a situation where if we don't bring all three, we will get shown up (as we saw against Essendon and St Kilda).

To win that game with 7 new players, as well as carrying Howe and Toumpas, with the Gold Coast expected to make finals, was a gutsy effort.

AW, I have seen 2 games this year - my first games in over 3 years. I still can't remember when I last saw us win live, especially when said games this year that I've been to have been Essendon and St Kilda. Needless to say, it is highly unlikely that I will be going to many more games this year, and I can assure you the Dogs game will be one I won't attend. Also, I can't stand sitting up the top at Etihad, and much prefer to be on the ground level. You didn't need to be sitting up above to see that our backline was in all sorts on Saturday. I was quite vocal about it within the first 90 seconds of the game, and continued until 3/4 time when we finally made changes.

Red, both Roos and Rawlings would've heard me as they were walking off at half time... Didn't realise I had to "win" my own opinion, whether others agree or not. Was Dunn not rushed back in to the side on the back of a restricted preseason, after the Essendon debacle?

What are you implying saying "apparently" I was there? I'll tell you where I sat Stuie, Melbourne cheersquad end, between point post and our race. Yobbo and Daisy did their "run on the spot" promo, and gave a bloke sitting in the front row a voucher for a new pair of New Balance shoes. I was about 6 rows behind him, and in the next bay around, although was quite close to him. The lady in front of me got a scratch ticket from the 4'n'20 bloke - she won a pie, providing a goal was kicked between the 20-25 minute mark of the 1st and 2nd quarter, although he came down at half time handing out more scratch cards. So, now that we have cleared up any confusion, yes, I was fcuking there, and I thought Dunn played a reasonable game. My original post was to question those on this thread that wanted him dropped as I would've had him easily in my top 10 better players, and the fact he played mostly on Bruce, and kept him to 1 goal and a handful of possessions in 3 quarters confirms my view.

I was there too, Barney. Given the way our backline functioned, Dunn played a more than reasonable game. For what it's worth, I'm not a fan of Dunn and would duly criticise him if I felt he deserved it.

So on one hand you're saying that Dunn was unaccountable, then in the next breath you are saying he is part of the backline that got caught out often trying to cover multiple players? I was actually happy that Dunn was moved up forward. We needed to attack to win that game, and needed more than Hogan to do it. Pedo wasn't going to do it, Frost wasn't, Watts may have, so Roos had to try something "different". Was it just coincidence that as soon as Dunn was moved forward, that Bruce kicked 2 goals and basically doubled his game possessions?