The Chazz

Didn't read the article, got bored with every "expert" under the sun getting stuck in to Watts, but can I just say one thing on this topic; I won't have the luxury of going to the MCG tonight to watch the beautiful way in which our diggers will be remembered through the pregame ceremony, and I won't be able to see the Melbourne Football Club play as a team and demolish the Richmond Football Club, in a gentle reminder to the football community that we are relevant again. However, regardless of what you think of the bloke, Watts is a Melbourne player, he will be one of 22 running out there tonight, and he will be one of 22 that will hopefully get us over the line. Regardless of your thoughts of him, if he, or any of the other 22 players have a bad night, for Christ's sake, don't "boo" him. I couldn't give a toss if one of their supporters gets in to him, but our own "flesh and blood", it makes me cringe when I hear of such things. There's always going to be players that we love, that we hate, that we love to hate, and that we wished we didn't hate. Watts is definitely one of those players that cops more than most - I'm not going to get in to the argument if that's rightly or wrongly. We're asking for unity at our club, both on and off the field. How about we show unity ourselves by supporting all of our 22? Go Dees.

You gotta feel for the bloke. Lines up on Riewoldt tonight (unless Werridee thinks Dunn is a better match up ), then you look at the fixture where, for the next three weeks, we have got Freo (Pav or Taberner), Sydney (Franklin), and Hawthorn (Roughy). Oh well, I have faith in our best defender. FWIW - I spoke to a guy recently who plays a bit of footy at Edenhope, they are not surprised that Tommy is playing as well as he is, they are still surprised Oscar was drafted. Time will tell.

He was the previous year which was 2011. There was no more important player on that day down at Geelong (in 2011) than Green. He should never have allowed what went on, and he rightly was stripped of captaincy the next year. He clearly had either lost the senior players, or he just went along with what they were doing. Inexcusable.

I'd be surprised if we would be talking about him if it wasn't because of his brother. Or maybe that he has been noticed more by Demon supporters because of his surname.

Dunn wasn't in anywhere near the same form as he was last year. Jamar likewise. But again, you're making assumptions that you know what their leadership ability was like. I'm also glad no senior players from that Geelong game weren't made captain, because I would hate for any one of them to be leading the next generation (most of which have left anyway!). To say Grimes hardly sets the highest example is a bold statement. The example that our coach wanted to set was for our captain/s to have elite performance in training and preparation. He had come from a club that had a captain that was far from the best on their list and won a premiership. Grimes was a monty in my view, was a matter of either going alone, or who he was going to share with. If you look back through most of the threads on here, a massive amount of posters wanted Trengove to be it.

I'm led to believe that for the highlighted ones above, it wouldn't have mattered who was in charge. Believe it had something to do with them believing they didn't need to develop any more...

Did you taste sick in your mouth looking through that team list too?

Here's our list from 2012; 2 Nathan Jones 3 Clint Bartram 4 Jack Watts 5 Jordan Gysberts 6 Matthew Bate 7 Jamie Bennell 8 James Frawley 9 Jack Trengove (c) 10 Cale Morton 11 Mitch Clark 12 Colin Sylvia 13 Jordie McKenzie 14 Lynden Dunn 15 Ricky Petterd 16 Jack Grimes (c) 17 Sam Blease 18 Brad Green 19 James Strauss 20 Colin Garland 21 Lucas Cook 22 Brent Moloney 24 Liam Jurrah 25 Tom McDonald 30 James Sellar 34 Stefan Martin 35 Luke Tapscott 36 Aaron Davey 37 Max Gawn 38 Jeremy Howe 39 Neville Jetta 40 Mark Jamar 41 Troy Davis 42 Jake Spencer 43 Rory Taggert 44 Rohan Bail 46 Josh Tynan 48 Jack Fitzpatrick Now, can either of you tell me who should've been captain? The other question, if we made the "wrong" decision by appointing Trengove and Grimes, then what was the "right" decision? At least when Carlton appointed Murphy there were a couple of other genuine options available (so it seemed from the outside).

They were well recognised at the time as being the best of a bad bunch. I'm sure as hell glad that we didn't give it to the "senior" players in Moloney, Rivers, Jamar, etc. Green needed to step down as captain for his role in that day too. Ironically, looking back at some of the old threads on here, there was one (thread) calling for Frawley to be named captain, and many, many posters adamant that Jones shouldn't be captain, with one person saying "ever"!!! I also noticed an old post of mine that thought Trengove was a year too early, but he had obviously shown enough to the playing group and coaching staff to indicate that he was ready. I also think the Grimes selection was a given, providing the medico's were happy with his body. As I said earlier, and to try and get my input to this thread back on topic, Murphy being made captain was obviously the right decision, especially given he had Judd still playing at a high level, and their expectation that the likes of Walker and Gibbs would take their game to another level. Hindsight will show that Murphy's and Judd's injuries probably didn't help that, and has probably (to some) made it look like a mistake.

WYL, sorry, but that's as W(eak) A(s) P(iss). Name the players that we had on our list that were over 25 that, from the outside, looked capable of leading us. Not forgetting that they year before Trengove and Grimes were appointed, that it was the year down at Cat Park...

Saty, is it true that Richmond had their spies watching training? Can only explain why Michie was training with the Casey guys and Bail training with the main group. Cheers.

WYL, who should've been in control? Who was your pick at the time? Grimes was a clear front-runner, and I've made my view on Trengove's suitability in an earlier post. It's exactly the same reason as why Murphy would've been made captain of Carlton. I would loved for Trengove to be captain, stay injury free and have a player like Junior there to provide support. We didn't have enough older leaders to support Jack, that doesn't mean that the decision was wrong.

Actually, you're arguing for the sake of it. It's a topic that you are calling black and white, and I'm saying it's anything but. You believe Carlton made a mistake by making Murphy captain - what's this based on? Why would making Simpson captain be the right decision? You have NFI, which is/was my original point. Trengove in particular, could've been a bloody good captain. He was at a stage in his career where he could take that step up and be a very good player, and by all reports, had training standards that were at the highest at the club, which was a big thing we were looking for at the time. I actually think he captained very well in the short time he was playing - Neeld had a huge emphasis on defence, and Trengove led by example, to some degree sacrificing his own game, to show his teammates what was expected. Obviously his injury didn't help. When the time comes for a team to select a captain, there are many variables that we don't know about, and many qualities the players have that we are not privy to. We are in no position to judge if a club made a wrong decision, and taking easy pot shots at the past, like what you are doing, is disappointing. Just for my entertainment, tell me who you think should've been captain when J&J were appointed. I can assure you, on here there weren't too many that wanted Jones, and there were a heck of a lot more that wanted Moloney.

How do you know we got it "badly" wrong? I'm presuming you are talking about the Trengove and Grimes appointment? Who else should've been made captain? And let's not forget that the players got a say in who they wanted captain back when that decision was made. Would you prefer the club to run a vote with the members to see who they want, then reward it based on those results? Of course in hindsight, Jones should've been selected instead of Trengove, but gee, there's equally as many people on here that were against Jones being named captain. I think where a lot of people are mistaken is that they think that the best player should be captain. Often they are, but there are a number of examples of premiership winning teams, especially in recent years, where that wasn't the case. Geelong/Harley, Geelong/Ling, Collingwood/Maxwell, Hawthorn/Mitchell. I do agree, I think Carlton got it wrong with Murphy, I thought Carrazzo was the best candidate, but how the hell would I know? I definitely won't be making definitive statements about it though. It's just my opinion, but the people inside the club would know the true answer (not that you would hear about it if it was a wrong decision!).

I think there were other players that could've achieved the same desired outcome as what they wanted from Judd. Problem with Judd in your team is that he is a freak, and can win a game on his own. Meant that when the game was there to be won, the other players knew Judd could rise, and often he did, so they didn't have to rise as much. It's probably a bit like Ablett and the GC kids.

And Tex was an obvious choice at Adelaide? And Jones wasn't an obvious choice because he surfed too much. Why, why, why do people think they know who should and shouldn't be captain of a club? In regards to Murphy, I think he was a victim of Carlton getting Judd. I'm not sure how, but I'll come up with something. I just continually tell my Carlton-supporting associates that getting Judd was a big mistake. Has set them back massively, and I love every bloody second of it. That said, it's amazing how those supporters still expect Carlton to win every game, right up until their last game of the season. I have never heard any of them "hope" they get within "x" amount of points to a team, regardless of how shite they are going.

I'll still throw may hat in the ring to try and tempt Coniglio, despite the thoughts above of our ol' mate "Werridee". Just reckon he might be our best, realistic chance of getting one of their better players.

There's a plick playing out the west of Sydney that used to be on our list that would be handy because of the above (especially now the inside of our midfield has been bolstered). That said, if the said plick was still on our list, we'd have no young bloke to kick it to up forward.

I coach a bit of basketball in my spare time TPF39. At practice, I work the players on doing opposite hand lay-ups, dribbling, etc. because it's a fundamental of the game. In a real match, I don't care what hand they do a lay-up with. When it's a real game, I want them doing what they are most comfortable with, UNTIL they have shown they can master the "right" way at training first. Hogan may have been instructed to do the same.

Yes, let's do what the "others" are trying to do... I'd rather do something different and possibly fail as opposed to follow and always chase.

Stop it-he's "not our best defender". FMD. Seriously though, I reckon the banner should be a rotation banner of our "demonland player of the year top 10".

I rarely agree with your "3 word analysis", and today is no different.

Out - Dawes (with great passion-[censored] off). Lacked leadership severely In-zero care from here, but Dawes needs to learn the RIGHT way