DeeSpencer

Stretch - a natural outside runner, receives handballs running in to space and turns quickly to move the ball on. Clean by hand and foot. Not afraid of the contest. Weideman - leads hard and straight at the ball. Dropped a chest mark but followed up then hit the handball. Took a strong mark back with the flight and nailed the goal from 50. Took a couple more on the lead (both towards and away from goal), both up high and sliding out for a chest mark. Nailed some goals, led to space. It was a good performance. But came against a Casey defender and with nice supply. So it's early days. Trengove - ran hard and smartly in to space. Used his body well to mark in the goal square. Linked up and kicked well in to space. He's no slower than most of the Casey guys and has a much faster brain. Again, early days, being smarter than VFL 2nds players isn't definitive that he's up to AFL, but it was promising. Petracca - rushes kicks at times and handballs to move the ball on with maybe a little too much faith in his team mates. That's the negatives. I don't want to spoil the fun on the positives. Soon everyone will get to see him smiling and will smile with him. Lots of development to come in his game and probably in his body. Again, shrugging off Saty was probably his hardest opponent all day, but it was good to watch.

Most of it's been covered. But they were doing drills when I got there at 10:30, then did some working the ball out of the backline simulation that was very messy. A lot of work to do there. Trengove and Stretch the most composed, many others stuffing up. Then in to a bit of around the ground stuff before probably 2 halves of 15 a side match simulation maybe for 15 minutes each. Trengove, Petracca, Stretch and Weideman were the best of the group. More about them later. Lumumba is a class above as an athlete, and whilst he didn't make many mistakes he wasn't great. Brayshaw worked hard and was above average. Nailed Stretch in a tackle, moved the ball on. Don't think he's as far off as others do. Michie very solid doing what he does well. From the younger guys: Mitch King moves well, but the big ++ Casey young ruck might've had him covered. Like that Mitch tries to get involved around the ball. Max King took a nice mark on the lead, was on the lesser of the teams. Missed the goal then a bit later did his ankle in a marking contest. Stayed down a while then hobbled off Hulett a nice mark and goal, links up ok as well. ANB turned it over too much, going for aggressive kicks, just needs to find his range. Work rate stands out. Wagner and Mitch White similar players. Good kicks mixed with not so good. Win the ball easily enough. Contest well JKH is still one of our cleanest by hand and foot, but also still tries to do too much. Simplify his game and he'll be back. Tackled well. Hunt had moments where his run came in to the game. Needs to kick better.

They've got Corr, Marchbank, Davis and Buntine down back. As well as the 3 tall forwards and a ruck. Too tall is not an excuse especially given the mobility of Hogan and Frost (who may as well be 180cm with the way he moves). Hopefully Pedersen runs the game out strongly, I think he's fitter than he's ever been at this stage of the year. If not, I hope he gives it his physical best against Mumford, even if he has to cross the line. And if that doesn't work I hope we've got Watts and Frost well trained as 3rd man ups.

2 very fit players as emergencies in Grimes and Stretch who might not need the run. Dunn as emergency for tall cover but given the side named he'd probably only come in if a tall back pulled out. So all in all I'd say Dunn, Gus and Lumumba should take part. Save one of Grimes or Stretch as the emergency.

When did he last sign a contract? As for the last decade he'll perk up when he's in a contract year. I thought his player review said he'd dropped several kilo's? His 2014 was great, his 2015 left a lot to desire, he stopped attacking games and really it took him until mid year to impact as a senior player should. Maybe he decided leadership wasn't for him? Leading from full back isn't exactly easy. Anyway, they said the leaders would be picked when NAB challenge form was evident, which counted against him. I expect he'll be back in the team very soon. But I'm not unhappy that he's been made to earn it. We can't afford senior players getting games on reputation, we've said that time and time again.

I was pleased to here Roos talk about the room for development but also how Clarry has won over his team mates by playing the right way. That would make me feel pretty chuffed as a young fella. You can see why Roos is well known as a players coach, he's been frustrated over the last two years but think his care for his players in genuine.

I think Vince will. Which should mean Vince, Garland, Tom McDonald, Jetta as experienced players. Are they a great group with ball in hand or under pressure skill wise? Probably not. But they don't have an excuse to not be well set up and to help Oscar and Salem get in position.

Out of his depth in NAB 1. Took the week off and really wasn't that bad against the Saints was he? Outmarked by Bruce at one stage but Bruce is one of the best marking forwards in the league so that's not a surprise. It's a difficult one because there's no way he spoils, marks or even kicks as well as Dunn at his best. But he might cover the ground much better, run in attack better and make a couple of spoils or grabs that Dunn never would due to extra height. Plus he can probably player a higher % TOG as well. Sounds like a cop out and a bit of trying to talk myself in to it but I think his benefit to the team will be more in little things that are hard for us to spot. Or he could just play a blinder!

GWS have 3 talls, one each, doesn't really matter. But I expect Garland to sit deepest and control the backline and Tom McDonald to be up the ground. I don't think Bugg will tag Shaw, I reckon we trust a half forward in Harmes or Kent or even Matt Jones with that job. But for the sake of ball movement I think Jones will be on one wing and Bugg will be running along the other as well as taking a turn at half back.

FB: Jetta Garland Oscar Mc HB: Vince Tom Mc Salem C: M Jones Jones Bugg HF: Vanders Watts Kent FF: Pedersen Hogan Garlett Foll: Gawn Viney Tyson Int: Oliver Harmes Kennedy Frost I think that's a truer representation of how the team will line up. Vince and Jones will swap back and on the ball. Bugg will rotate to half back, Harmes will come to wing or forward. Kent will have a few minutes on the wing. Frost might ruck and/or will come on forward for Pedersen to ruck or to spell Hogan. Kennedy will come on forward. Vanders will go up to the middle or a wing. Oliver will play forward and in the middle. There's a lot of speed and run, pretty much everyone besides Pedersen who will play forward of centre has speed and we have increased endurance in the backline group, which means run to cover off defensively and run the other way to get some quick rebound. I'd love a class user on the outside and a bit more experience in each zone of the ground but we can't be negative about this team. Carlton are showing tonight what you can do playing as a side and I like that this is pretty much the side that took on the Saints - Grimes replaced Matt Jones at 1/4 time and Wagner is out for Vanders. We ran that game out strongly playing the style of footy we wanted to play. Time to back it up.

They played on each other in Rd 23 last year. What happened then?

I like bold calls. But they do make me nervous. Oscar v Dunn: I can approve. I like the focus on zone defending and the role Oscar can have it that. And the need for regeneration in our backline. I do wonder how close Garland was to missing out as well though. No Lumumba: Matt Jones and Harmes instead to provide wing cover. Bugg plays back. I can understand it. Pedersen: Need the big body against Mumford. I get it. And the marking forward is a positive. Brayshaw out I understand. Oliver, Harmes and Vanders have the match fitness advantage. Frost in I get as well, although he needs to step up. If there was one change I'd make it would probably be putting Vanders forward and chucking Stretch in on a wing to give us the extra run.

I like bold calls. But they do make me nervous. Oscar v Dunn: I can approve. I like the focus on zone defending and the role Oscar can have it that. And the need for regeneration in our backline. I do wonder how close Garland was to missing out as well though. No Lumumba: Matt Jones and Harmes instead to provide wing cover. Bugg plays back. I can understand it. Pedersen: Need the big body against Mumford. I get it. And the marking forward is a positive. Brayshaw out I understand. Oliver, Harmes and Vanders have the match fitness advantage. Frost in I get as well, although he needs to step up. If there was one change I'd make it would probably be putting Vanders forward and chucking Stretch in on a wing to give us the extra run.

On Stevie J: I'ts time for zone defending people. Garland, Jetta, Dunn deep. Salem, Vince, McDonald and either Bugg or Lumumba, plus maybe a few minutes of Nath Jones at half back. Let Stevie J chase them around as we win the ball back. He'll need close checking at stoppages where he can still be dangerous, and smart on field communicating for when he goes in to the midfield then ducks out the back. Otherwise, we'll have to hurt him the other way just as much as worrying about stopping him. Dev Smith's my greater concern because he's quick and fit. Along with Palmer niggling away at either Salem or Vince they get a lot of work rate out of those 2 smalls. Hopefully we've got the run in the legs to counter.

Clarry is good to go. Can't wait to see him play.

Turned 30 in the off season. About to enter the 3rd year of his 3 year deal with us, although I thought it had 4th year option maybe? Signing him up for 2017 is important and he's probably good enough to go to 2018 if we get a team friendly deal. I think how he translates his play to half back will determine his value in the future. If he can settle there he can probably play for quite a while longer. I hope so anyway. Glad someone wants to earn the Melksham money!

Coniglio isn't light. And the last time he tagged Nath Jones he smashed him. We aren't physically smashing them in the middle, too many big boys on either side. What we need to do is pressure them all over the ground in to mistakes and then cut them apart going the other way. I love that we have some big bodies all over the ground but it's modern footy and time to be a modern team. I want to see Melbourne players intercept marking and running through in waves and then GWS players going backwards due to forward pressure. That will excite me.

Who gives a [censored]? Way way way past time to move on people.

Dawes and Spencer doing boxing and crunches. Otherwise as far as I could tell it was a full squad for a pretty standard session. The ball was moving nicely in the shorter drills that they were doing. The 10 v 8 full ground match simulations were a bit scrappy but not too bad. I thought Clarry looked a bit weary in the legs early on but when the match sim started he was bobbing up regularly. Hard to know whether our forward pressure was really good or if our backline was making mistakes but I think moving the ball out under pressure will still be our biggest weakness. Switches, quick ball movement and 'changing the angle' remain the focus to get out of the backline. Lumumba came sprinting out from half back to a high kick to the wing, timed his intercept perfectly, stuck the mark and ran off forward, dishing off to Kent who nailed the goal. It certainly reminded me of his athletic ability and talent, so hopefully he shows more of it this year.

No idea what is and isn't available to purchase but: Level 2 Olympic stand closest to the wing for optimal viewing pleasure. A little height makes it easier to follow play and not too far back as to be missing the atmosphere and action. Level 1 Olympic stand right down the front if you want to get the kids (presuming they are part of the family) right up close to AFL footballers, especially near the Melbourne bench. The viewing isn't as good down there (hard to see what's happening on the far wing and not as easy to track ball movement) but the atmosphere might be slightly better. Not usually too much sun around in the middle of winter but yeah definitely more Melbourne fans and more comfortable if there is sun on the Northern side than Southern side. The Ponsford stand is definitely the Collingwood stand. Sitting with our cheersquad can be fun but for a one off first time at the G you'd be selling yourself short to watch the game from behind the goals. Similarly the front few rows of the top deck aren't too bad but it's not great having kids up there (just seems a long way from the game for them and a lot of stairs/take the lifts, same for oldies) and if you're willing to spend a little more then first or 2nd level will likely be worth it.

Viney, Jones, Tyson. They need to be getting 80+ disposals between them, using them well, covering the ground in attack and defending and stopping the 3 best midfielders from the other side. They'll have help from a heap of players in the rotation but if we are to afford the luxury of Vince back, Vanders forward and not overdoing young mids it will probably be these 3 doing it. Click the box in the top left of the quote and then hit delete. Will get rid of it. Bug with the new site.

Shhhh don't tell anyone!

Not sure that's right. We have the full compliment of 40 senior players so don't get a rookie upgrade at the start of the year. Just the Melksham one. And the mid year upgrade. Either way, why would we upgrade anyone until they are in the best 22? For now we sit back and wait. If any of the 4 are due to be picked in the team then we upgrade them.

3 sides with win totals that we are after this year, last year: GWS - 11 wins - lost to West Coast by 87 points (and beat Hawthorn the next week) Coll - 10 wins - lost to Richmond by 91 points Port - 12 wins - lost to the Dogs by 64 points Every chance we have at least one if not more really bad games. It could come as early as this week against a red hot GWS whilst we just don't adapt to the increased pressure of the regular season. We've been poor in the first half against Port, the first quarter v Saints and the entire game against the Dogs. Holding our nerve in the first quarter when pressure is highest will be vital. I'd settle for a 1 point QT lead right now if you offered it to me because it means we are in the game against the Giants and we can build from there. I think we've got enough skill and experience to be in the game every week and if we are being out classed and the margin blows out late I can understand that. I'd be really annoyed if we just aren't in the contest though. Which means both in terms of physicality at the contest and the mental and physical strength to apply our game style. Time will tell with other sides but based on last year Hawthorn and West Coast were the only sides with scoring power, ball movement and enough grunt to legitimately blow sides away. More than 1 very bad day against any other side would be very sad.

Definitely. Although I'm worried about Matt Jones coming off a concussion when he's seemingly found some composure for the first time in about 24 months and then hasn't had another hit out to settle himself. Also Lumumba gives us the half back option, to let Bugg or Vince tag. Although the counter to that is Matt Jones played well as a defensive forward last year. I guess my answer is yes, but it depends how they want to use them. I think we pick our best players and look at GWS' best players and work out what fringe players we need to fill roles to complement the best group.