The Chazz

So disinterested in the posts that call for a young player to be captain after showing some ability both on and off the field. Just let the kid play, grow up, and be a dominant key defender. When we are challenging for a flag, I just want him concentrating on the job at hand, which is as important as any role on the ground.

I disagree on your first point. I think having a number of senior players, all from different backgrounds and interests, would have a much better impact on a player than one "bully" leader. His ability is there for everyone to see and make their own judgement on, I think he's an excellent player. Is he inconsistent? At times. Would he be more consistent in our program? Who knows. In regards to your second point, what's the goss? Is he a thief? Rapist? Murderer? Or just a cocky little plick that thinks he's better than what he is? If it's the latter, then I couldn't really care - as long as he's playing good footy for the club, that's all I care about. His standing actually went up a few notches with me when I heard Slobbo say that Bennell was trying to pick a fight with him at the Brownlow. He could've graduated to god status had he snotted the sloth, but alas...

It's interesting, Dee. As soon as I saw the team, especially those named on the bench, I immediately thought that if Billy wasn't sub, then Newton would be the vest wearer. He can come on, play 45 minutes of footy, run his guts out, and is capable of kicking a couple of goals. With that though, there's no condition that the sub has to come from the 4 named on the interchange come team selection time.

Sorry, Rjay, but how the hell did you come up with that theory based on that article? I would presume that he rates him - he did afterall have a say in his recruitment, but how you come to that conclusion from “Alex had played a couple of development games and played well on the weekend, so that was really encouraging,” has got me stuffed!

Two things; 1. In answer to your question/s, no and no. I could expand on this by saying I couldn't really care what he is like, as long as he doesn't instigate a culture change (clearly our offield culture is miles better than the Gold Coast's). If he comes in and averages 20-odd possessions a game, that's what I'm interested in. That said, I don't know what you are implying, which brings me to my next point... 2. Have you? If so, what's he like? TIA.

Given that we are entering Round 6, the thought of anyone needing a "rest" sickens me. Not sure how anyone (posters) could come up with that idea in the first place.

Interesting, now all that's down there are a heap of slags...

Can clearly see which factory Petracca was produced in...

Not sure if this has been posted elsewhere, but probably deserves its own thread... http://www.afl.com.au/video/2015-05-06/the-melbourne-mummy-boys We whinge about the things that the club "gets wrong", but the Breast Cancer Network initiative is certainly one thing that we should all be proud of our club for getting behind. I know a number of females who have gone to the "pink" game and have thoroughly enjoyed the experience, and they aren't Melbourne supporters! This clip just highlights the importance of ensuring the awareness of breast cancer remains at the forefront of our minds. Especially for those that are fortunate enough to still have the most important female in their lives around - our mums.

I have serious concerns for the people who are saying they wouldn't want Harley Bennell at the Dees.

Pity the club didn't listen to my advice back in 2011... http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/28249-delisted-suns/?hl=%2Bcharlie+%2Bdixon#entry480856 If only he'd cost us a 4th round pick now!

Won't happen Clint, you know why? His timing was perfect. Wasn't late, wasn't a fist to the head, just a hard, "don't come back in to my space" contest. Other than Hogan, we don't' have anyone that hits a contest legally with no intent on marking, but plenty of desire to hurt someone. Think it was Dunn that cleaned Walters up, wouldn't be surprised if he goes (front, head-high contact). Pav got knocked out off his own doing. You go in to half time and they are two players down, you make sure they go in to 3/4 with at least another player/rotation down, if not no interchange at all.

My irrelevant points from the game, for anyone that can be bothered reading them; - Roos definitely outcoached. McKenzie isn't a sub - he should've been sent to a player for the entire game and told to totally shut them down. That's his strength, possibly his one and only. You need a sub that can come on and make an impact in a short amount of time. JKH should've been this. Regardless of Roos' view on the sub rule, fact is it's a rule that you have to follow. Get over it. - When they realised Dawes was going to be out, Spencer needed to come in, not Pedo. I would've had Spencer playing ruck, and Jamar full forward, then rotating through. Nothing against Pedo - he did some good things. - Nathan Jones is clearly injured, as is Tyson. Sadly, we can't afford either to sit out, especially over the coming weeks, so they have to play. Some weeks they will play well, some it will hinder them. - Howe looks totally disinterested, almost Frawley-like. - I thought the small snippets where we took the game on and played our better footy (for the day), we weren't out of the contest. Even at 3/4 time I felt that we were in with a chance - had missed a couple of sitters, we had two posters as well, they were gifted a couple, we needed to make a slick start to the quarter, which we did, but couldn't execute. Personally, I would've gone with Vanders at full forward in the last quarter, not Howe. - The 50m penalty that gifted Freo a goal was there. First look I was ropable, but when you look at the replay, Garlett clearly took steps toward the player with the ball. He had a chance to get out of the protected area, he didn't. If the role was reversed and we didn't get the 50, I would've been livid. That's not to excuse the moronic decisions that went against us throughout the day. Thankfully, the ones that Freo got close to goal, they missed most of them. A brief point on the Jack Watts situation. I like Jack, he's not the star that we wanted him to be, it's an unknown if that's his fault or not. However...after the past couple of weeks, and watching the game on TV yesterday, I have come to the conclusion that the best thing for Jack and the Club would be to part company at the end of the season. I don't know of any player, past or present, to have been scrutinised over every piece of their play like Watts is. Everyone has an opinion, which is generally negative. The club can't have this hanging over its head, and the kid can't either to be honest. He is a distraction and I think it is unfair on he, the club, and the other players. We won't get much for Watts in a trade, but that's something we have to deal with. Bring on Saturday night.

Pick him, or not pick him?

It wouldn't surprise if McKenzie is selected. From a tagging point of view there aren't many better on our list. Jordie's biggest issue is that he doesn't hurt the opposition going the other way. From all reports he has been made an effort over the preseason to right this wrong, so, given Freo's dominant midfield, and that we don't want to use all our ball winners (ie Jones, Tyson, Vince) on trying to shut all their opponents down, having a "negative" player in to play a pure shutdown role might be a tactic used for this week. We need to take this team on as much as possible. Having Jones do what he does best, and Tyson too, then at least we've still got an attacking mindset. Playing Vince on Fyfe, where Vince can try and play off him, will give us a bit more balance. Giving Jordie instructions to run with Barlow and make sure he doesn't touch it, even if it means Jordie doesn't get a possession himself, we can afford to do this. I won't be fussed who is in or out, but while some are making a case not to pick Jordie, I'm just throwing one out there to pick him.

Was always going to happen at some stage (both Clark's injury and you getting one right)...

I don't play euchre with the joker BBO. What's the version you play? The joker makes his appearance in 500 for mine, not that I have witnessed him in my hands very often.

Ah, that's right, he just had a minor strain that took 10-12 weeks to get over. But he still had good footy left in him.

Haven't seen a 10-12 week hamstring injury at Melbourne since Junior McDonald's last year. Kenty will be back, I look forward to the day of his return. He's a beauty.

WYL - you and I have been around these threads long enough to know that I was making a tounge-in-cheek comment I hope. Apologies if I offended.

The way that you turn on your own, they sure as hell wouldn't have wanted you in the trenches with them WYL!

Point to me the dozens that we can select from. Then while you're going through your highlights tapes, make sure you watch all our players. In previous years we have had the worst score against from a turnover. Very few were from a Watts error. I'm feeling that you would be one of the "boo-ers", B59?

Bulltish, Saty. The thought was if we went tall, it would be Pedo, and if we went for a mid, it'd be Michie.

Wasting your time, Saty, Werridee hasn't been around since school holidays finished.

What about when his non-aggressive play results in us getting a goal? That goal assist of his against Adelaide, it was because of Watts' lack of smashing a pack that resulted in us getting a goal. Picking a moment that "cost a team" is too black and white, when there are more than 50 shades of grey around individual plays. Very. very rarely can you say an "incident" cost a team, be it a goal or a game. The article was an opinion piece about a Melbourne player, which is why Hardtack posted it. My initial response was directed at "those" Melbourne supporters, who, if Jack doesn't have a decent game, will no doubt carrying on like two-bob watches.