DeeSpencer

Eyes off the ball is a cue for the umpires, its not in any way illegal. Stupid commentators repeat it like it's a law and then fans pick up on it. It does my head in. For what? If the Melbourne player hadn't marked then all Hibberd did was use his body to take front position at the drop of the ball. Perfectly legal, he didn't hold, didn't shepherd his opponent out of the contest by taking him out. It wasn't "an unreasonable block that prevents an opposition player from contesting the football". What the umpires should look for when it comes to blocking is whether the player would've contested the ball if not for his team mate. And Hibberd had every right and the perfect position to contest the mark if his team mate didn't take the ball in front of him. Anyway, to get back on topic, Hibberd failing or not failing to execute a good team play isn't comparable to Lewis giving away a really stupid and selfish 50m penalty out of frustration.

You mean where he positioned himself between the ball and his man in a perfectly legal spot with legal body contact but was called for blocking because the umpire is an idiot and/or the rules have lost the plot? Punishing teams for having more players at the drop of the ball has to be one of the dumber rule interpretations of recent times.

What mongrel? A cheap shot 50 that didn't hurt and cost a goal is not mongrel. Neither is looking to hack the ball off the ground or punch it wildly because you won't put your body on the line. We need mongrel for sure. But it comes from the players who are willing to go when it's their turn. I'd like to see Vanders in the team for just that reason, but otherwise Lewis isn't provide any form of intimidation when he's the one who's running scared

Fantastic post.

The missed punch of the ball that went for a deliberate when it was 3 on 1 was one of softest things I've seen on a footy field this year. Of course Derm and the rest of the crew covered for him but any Demon fan who has been watching closely knows he was afraid to gather that ball and to get tackled.

Joel Smith - thought he was ok down back but looked to be hobbling and was sent forward, where he did some good and some bad (getting in the way, what's new). Can't carry injured guys coming back from Darwin Lewis - Same old, same older ANB - needs a run in the 2's for his own sake, just no confidence right now Melksham - another game without a tackle, just drifting around, needs a rocket put up him to get back to the form he was in a month ago In: Vince - in Lewis' role Hannan - in for Melksham, playing up the ground using his run, his intensity at Casey today was excellent, a cut above with speed JKH - in for ANB, couldn't be any worse Baker - in playing wing/forward, move Harmes to half back as they did tonight Not sure how may of the 4 should happen, and the safe option is probably just Vince for Smith, but there were 4 guys tonight and really for 3 of them over the last month who haven't been up to it.

Happy for Stretch to be trialled again. I don't see ANB as a wing at all even with his fitness. If we are to play a guy purely for fitness on a wing it should be Bugg. Did the job there under Roos. Fritsch is quick enough, lovely skills. Fitness is good but not great, should improve in future years. A lot of our problems come from just not having the experience in our midfield group. They all have to get fitter.

Petracca, Oliver, Brayshaw clearly have a way to go with their fitness. As it lifts that will help our midfield transition. God knows the forwards and backs should improve as well. As far as the wings go though - I think we need to just pick who we will play there and back them in. Fritsch was looking really good. Now suddenly he's a forward again? He's a very good forward but moving him around robs peter to pay paul. Gus and Harmes have been tried. Both like to hunt the ball too much IMO. Gus too slow as well. Lacks sustained speed. Maybe now Viney is back we commit to Jones playing wing and train him as much as possible to be the outside player. The inside mids were obliterated against Port, so we put Tyson on a wing to boost the stoppage play and provide a hard worker with a fit, capable body. But with no pace he doesn't help. So we all know that is only a stop gap. From here I'd go: Jones and Fritsch on the wings, maybe Harmes rotating wing/mid/forward. Add Spargo, T Smith and maybe even Baker or Bugg to the forward mix.

Enjoyed his farewell goal when he finally found himself in a decent position. Otherwise it was 120 minutes of turnovers, being pushed around, refusing to bend down to gather the ball, trailing his opponent to contests and doing little if anything at all to set up the backline.

In 2011 in his 3rd year as a 20 year old he played every game averaged 16 disposals, 5.5 marks and a goal a game. He played as the floating taller flanker with good skills and was looking promising. We all know what happened next and it took 5 years for his mind, body and talent to get it together in 2016

Sylvia and Watts both had pretty good seasons as young players. They became Sylvia and Watts because the club had no standards and didn't develop them to reach their potential. If Petracca is giving his all at training and off field to be the best he can be then he will get better. And his first quarter on the weekend was indicative of a guy who knew he had more to give. If he's not quite getting it done at training and/or the coaches think an easy kill at Casey would get him some more touch then he should be dropped. In the stats that matter for a guy playing half forward this year compared to (last year) Disposals: 20.3 (18.8) Goals: 0.8 (1.2) Tackles: 2.7 (2.5) Score Involvements: 6.2 (5.7) Clangers: 3.8 (2.9) Disposal efficiency: 66.5 (66.8) Those numbers - and the eye test especially when he goes in to the midfield - tell me that he hasn't improved his work rate and he hasn't improved his skill execution.

Two step plan for Mrs Tracc then: 1. Stop feeding the kid so much 2. Shoot his stupid dog The clubs handling of his finger injury was almost certainly a classic Melbourne medical mistake, but I care little for any players parents especially once the player has been in the system for a few years.

Your 1 example of me being wrong was when I said I was done with Tom McDonald, who is now playing a completely different role. I wasn't going to delist the guy on the spot, I would've sat down with him, worked out what's wrong in his game and quite possible played him ruck or forward years ago. Instead he played back with diminishing returns week after week until Gawn got injured and they bit the bullet to put him forward/ruck. Like most people on here I have varying opinion on a number of players and have been wrong on lots of them over the years. But I don't believe I've started a thread or maintained a constant position against any players besides Tom McDonald (as a defender) and Lewis. The only players worse than Lewis last night: Hogan (rough couple of weeks), Petracca (but a big first term), maybe Vince and Joel Smith who both spent a lot of time chasing after Lewis' opponent for him. As well as Oscar's poorly timed lapses that undid a lot of good work on Dixon.

Did a good job on Dixon. Although looking at Dixon's stats for the year I wonder how that actually is. Unfortunately let his guard down against Westhoff a couple of times. Didn't adjust to the more mobile opponent. He also has to watch the ball and not let it go over his head like the Thomas ( I think) goal. The first 50 was a joke. The player marks after Oscar has left the ground to spoil and it was a reasonable spoil. The 2nd 50 was there. Oscar too fascinated by the ball and his ungainly attempt to spoil and was there way too late. Of course the number of missed 50's our way and the face it was a 70m penalty are for another discussion.

I don't see them as a pairing. Vince does anywhere between 3 to 30 ridiculous things a game but otherwise he's just Bernie but a little slower with less penetration on the kicking. The guy will still go most of the time when it's his turn to go and he often takes a taller opponent given we aren't playing a designated 3rd tall (or even a designated 2nd to be more correct). With Lever and Hunt injured the replacement for Bernie is either Wagner - who doesn't inspire confidence or a first year kid in Petty. I understand why the coaches are reluctant to chuck a kid in, even if I think it's time. Lewis is completely different to me. He's playing as the loosest defender - a prime position to get a lot of the ball and impact games. And yeah he's solid enough with the ball in the uncontested kicking game, and that's important, but I'd love to see Salem or Fritsch in that role, both guys with more kicking penetration and the speed to take it on. When it gets close in tight Lewis won't turn left. He can't even handball on his right hand, so he's always looking to go in one direction. Can't break a tackle so we throw it away before it comes to that. His kicks often end up wild up an unders. And the defending. The awful awful defending. If he's not in the perfect position he just can't offer anything.

Another awful performance from Plugga Lewis. To all the people who said mean things about me in this thread, don't worry, I'm not angry. Will gladly accept any and all apologies.

I can't imagine a max exodus from the MCC bars to pack in to a modern version of a social clubs, those days are long gone, but I can see the club offering post game drink invites to certain select members, most of whom have reserved seats in Northern Stand or are MCC members and it's the perfect location for that. I've often thought extending over the Richmond rail corridor near the tennis centre when the Southern Stand was redeveloped was our best chance to build an MCG adjacent facility. Jolimont is just as good and surely a simple proposition building over 2 rail lines instead of the 12 or so that run to Richmond!

Bit silly to have Fritsch ahead of Cerra, Rayner, Naughton and Brayshaw. They should be 4-7 on this list. Fritsch a good candidate to be number 8 though.

With a minimal amount of landscaping those pathways should all be protected, certainly the long stretch from Richmond Station to the G won't be even close to impacted and the walk down from Jolimont should also be untouched. The area is already used as the AFL Live site/ Grand Final parade finishing spot. It's not nearly as steep as people thing.

The Pullman and other buildings opposite the station are 10+ stories, and the RACGP building directly opposite the proposed site is 6 stories. If the Government gives the approval to build above the train tracks I don't see a reasonable argument against a 6 story building. Covering over the train lines should mean increased pedestrian access. I don't think this piece of land slopes nearly as much as some of Yarra Park but it would be a challenge. It's a matter of selling the oval as a part of the park and as a community facility. I know East Melbourne residents are a certain type but there's Fitzroy Gardens, Treasury Gardens and the rest of Yarra Park to be enjoyed as purely park spaces. With apartments going up all over the city of Yarra and population booming the strong argument should be made that they need ovals. Council's can create parks from acquiring properties or re purposing car parks. Unless they have a huge vacant area they can't do that for an oval.

A professional quality oval for community use would be a huge win for the council. Especially with the rise of Women's footy. They'd have no problems finding clubs to allocate it to. The development over the train tracks comes down to whether it will be approved for apartments next to our site. You put a few apartment buildings and you've got a council rates bonanza. That's the income councils love. Shutting down the trains for a select period of time to build over the eye saw that is exposed tracks and create useful community space and housing. That's a win win. Then Melbourne build next door with a community oval, medical facilities, maybe even make the gym public use outside of certain hours, some form of Indigenous cultural centre - pretty much you are doing the council a favour!

You can run it across that corner of land and pretty much fit it in without losing many trees. The trees that would be lost could be replaced with native varieties. It would stop an area being used as a car park (a dying trend anyway) and replace it with an oval that can be used for a functional purpose whilst still maintaining a park feel. Pretty much all you are doing is levelling an area of grass, fencing it and painting a few lines. With the right approach it should be allowed to happen. Getting the funding, planning and design of the building over the train line should be the harder part of the project!

Restricted free agent, I can't see how we wouldn't have to trade for him. Eagles would match the deal, or do what Adelaide did with Danger and threaten to match whilst they worked on a trade. The only exception to the Eagles matching - It's the perfect situation to rort the system. They take the first round pick compo. We trade them a bunch of stuff at cents on the dollar to make up the rest of what's needed - ie. a couple of 2nd round picks they can package up to move up the draft and a nice depth player (Tyson, Kent, both?) for a guy they are about to delist and a 4th rounder. We just have to sing the praises of how much we love unwanted Eagle (ie. back up ruck Fraser McInness) and get the AFL Integrity department to tick it off.

I don't care about 1-3 and 5-6 Saty but on point 4 Gaff has been an ultra consistent and very solid wingman for years. His increase in form this year I'd put down to: 1. The return of Nic Nat meaning he can play inside mid and get spoon fed the ball from clearances. Nic's hit outs and ground level pressure makes the job of his midfielders so much easier. Gawn would provide the hit outs, if not the follow up. 2. Confidence - the increase in West Coast's form in general - confidence is infectious 3. Maturity - he's just turned 26, we expect too much from AFL players too early, a player should keep improving on weaknesses through their mid 20's. 4. West Coast's general skill level improving meaning Gaff's unrewarded running becomes rewarded running I've really liked Gaff since his draft year but his Grand Final in 2015 stood out to me, not because of the result or how well he played, but the style in which he played. I was superbly impressed that under the weight of massive Hawthorn pressure he kept going contest to contest and willing his side on. If he came to us his work rate - either on the wing, on ball or maybe one day even at half back as he ages - would make the team better and make the other mids better. He'd run hard to provide an option which makes ball movement so much easier and he'd work back hard to block off options or help the backline. At this stage I actually think the contract and trade will both be too much for us to get Gaff, but I certainly hope we are trying.

Watching Wallis this year I don't think he would. Struggling big time to get contest to contest as a half forward, and for all his faults ANB is constantly moving. Obviously the Dogs aren't moving the ball at all well but I'm not impressed. Remember how nasty his leg injury was. If we were to get Wallis I'd play him as a tagger and make the other mids rotate more forward or outside. I think that's his best role. Given other teams like Essendon are interested I'm not sure how much money I'd commit towards a tagger. Might not be too may other Tim Kelly's out there but there's surely some state league or delisted players who could do a tagging role.