DeeSpencer

FB: Dunn Frawley Garland HB: Strauss McDonald Terlich C: Toumpas Jones M. Jones HF: Tynan Dawes Tapscott FF: Howe Fitzy Byrnes Foll: Gawn Viney Sylvia Int: Trengove, Grimes Watts Clisby OUT: Blease, Davey, Pedersen, Kent IN:Tynan, Strauss, Garland, Terlich I'm that sick of Blease, Davey and Kent. They don't tackle, they don't chase and they don't find the footy. They are complete passengers. Kent's spent a lot of time as sub and he's young so he needs a rest back in the VFL but there is no excuse for the other 2. It's time to give Josh Tynan a go as a guy who is a natural defender and maybe limited as a footballer but he leads Casey in tackles most week and will have a crack. He can also find the footy which is more that can be said for Blease. I'm hoping Frawley is ok and Garland and Terlich can come back in. We missed their ability to actually back themselves and rebound the ball today. Pedersen is complete garbage and Clisby needs a freshen up which I'd give him through the sub vest. I see no reason he can't come on and play half back or wing and give us something. Strauss has more than earnt his spot compared to half the guys who get gifted games each week. Craig made the right call to keep the side settled whilst we had some improved performances but todays effort was abysmal and we have to make some changes. I think 4 and not including Magner is conservative.

Yep Darwin is a disaster and we must request a bye after our games there as our first priority of the future every year. Besides that we need to rotate the team between the games. Why demonland gets it but the mfc footy department doesn't is beyond me. Here's the best thing.... It's not just a one week effect. See 2011

Dunn or Pedersen in the team regardless of who they are playing on is the problem! Unfortunately Garland can only take one of their spots! Like Luke Hodge getting towelled up by Essendon ruckman it's the midfield match up that is the biggest battle and the one we probably wont win.

I know you don't like him but his ability to straighten up and attack with the ball instead of slowing down play and going wide would've been very useful at Etihad. Much more useful than Nicholson's turnovers.

Dual all-australian - yes that's fine. He was a very good defender and a very good full forward. 306 games - yes he had great longevity and durability. Led our goal kicking doesn't mean much he played full forward in an era where you had a designated full forward and played to a structure around it, he should've led our goal kicking. I'm not saying Neitz was bad. He was a club legend and if not a champion player then at least a very good one across the league but he wasn't a superstar by any means as a forward. He wasn't overly tall for a key forward, got most of his ball on a lead, liked to crash and bash but didn't regularly take big pack marks and you could back him to impact most games but not change games against the best of the best. Hurley as a forward plays like Neitz and I'll stick to that point. He has 10 more years and improvement left if he's going to have a good as record as Neitz but I still see a lot of similarites. And just like Neitz he may well be even better as a defender. I just agree with the comparisons of Hurley to Neitz and I also agree with comparisons of Watts to Hird in a way. Watts has yet to prove he is fearless or can win games like James Hird. But he does have that time with the ball and silky skills. I'd also say that Hurley remains a pretty decent chance to make it as a key forward who is very handy and just as good a shot to make it as a class key defender. And for that reason I'd take him if I had to pick one of the two. Watts has shown me a lot of promise but at the moment if I'm betting I think his career ends up on par with Jack Gunston as a third tall who can go into the midfield than it does progressing to the Hird level or even the Goddard level. It's not that he doesn't have more talent than Hurley but Hurley is closer to fulfilling his as a handy tall at either end.

Don't be surprised if we see this set up: Petrie - McDonald Tarrant - Pedersen Black - Dunn Thomas - Frawley I certainly think Frawley will go to Petrie but I worry that Thomas is the most dangerous forward at the roos and neither McDonald, Dunn nor Terlich are capable opponents.

I think it's a great comparison. Neitz started off and in a good team would've remained a very good defender. I bet you one dominant key forward would name Hurley as his toughest opponent. Maybe Nick Riewoldt who Hurley towelled in his first season. Hurley (like Neitz) relies on work rate and some speed on the lead to get his marks and goals up forward but (like Neitz) can't take strong pack marks or one on one grabs. What did Neitz win? One Coleman as a predominant FF? Neitz was very good in his prime but never at the level of the real star forwards of the era like Lloyd or Fraser Gehrig.

Anyone care to stipulate about the motives for this appearance? Is it for PJ to try and put pressure on Roos either way through a showdown? I get why Roos has to be there, it's his job and I doubt he gets to veto guests. But I don't see why Jackson has to go on if it will disadvantage him in his coaching selection task. Should be interesting.

Yep was going to post this myself but sometimes people never listen anyway. The only thing you missed out was for a period there Maxy Gawn was doing well playing predominantly forward as well so it's not like Fitzy didn't have competition. It all worked out nicely that he could come in and contribute as well as hold his spot and at the same time Gawn could reach match fitness after his own injury interruptions and also hold his spot in the ruck.If Neeld did something wrong it wasn't not playing him. But he might have provided Fitzy with no confidence he was ready to take a step up where Craig obviously has.

Clever decision if Nicholson ends up getting a run in the 2's instead of missing a weeks footy. Especially considering he's shown he can get the ball at AFL level it's his disposal that's one of his weaknesses. With his pace and endurance he could easily rack up big numbers in the VFL 2's and really get some game time disposal practice even if it is at a weaker level.

Played at Western Jets with Majak Daw didn't he? I thought they got along pretty well. These are hard times to be a White male in Australia

The appalling Etihad stadium deal will probably mean we lose more money at Etihad than we would've at the G. But closing the top level is hopefully a measure that aims to alleviate some of that lost money. Also I'd rather not play North there - they have something like a 30% win record away from Etihad and 70% at Etihad under the Scott leadership. But once again at least it will drag in some North supporters which should hopefully boost the crowd. Given we would lose anywhere I'd rather not lose money as well.

One thing Craig seems miles ahead of Neeld in is player feedback. I know they have game reviews every week but it seems Craig is making it a priority to break down trainings and games and really give feed back to the players on what they need to improve on. Where as Neeld seemed to have a very limited dialogue with the players. These are Gen Y guys, you can't just keep flogging them and telling them what to do you have to break things down and explain them and tick off goals etc.

Possibly with Pedersen contracted and Davis not it makes more sense to give game time to Pedersen if they've given up on Davis. But players have saved their careers with unexpected performances in the last 6 round many times. The possiblity is that Pedersen was always playing better VFL than Davis was and Davis has never to date showed enough to get himself a gig in the AFL team. Which is why they sent him forward at Casey which to me is the biggest crime. Sellar, Pedersen or Gillies should've been playing forward and Davis should've had an uninterrupted run at being the number 1 depth defender so that he could come in at a time like this. The thing about Davis is he's a guy who hasn't ever showed enough to break into one of the worst AFL teams in modern history. That alone means his chances of actually being any good are very slim. So I'm not going to be too upset. But I expect Pedersen to put in a much improved performance than his last stint in the team where he looked slow and soft and his defensive skills look very average. A few well timed spoils and some serious attack on the ball would be a start.

I'm shocked as well. I just hope it's more of a title change and a more regimented program which is probably good but could largely just be semantics. But if we already had Viney and 3 development coaches why weren't they running what is practically an academy anyway? I like the idea of structure but I get it's not for everyone. But to me you take the 6 young defenders on our list and you say ok today we are teaching spoiling and until they get it right you don't pass them. Then you teach them spoiling with their non dominant hand. Then you teach them spoiling using your body to run a player under the ball etc.

1. Tanking. Yes tanking happened for years but here's the thing. Just because the PP is gone doesn't mean clubs wont continue to focus on next season and continue to try different things. See Mitch Clark out until next year and Jack Watts in the ruck. The AFL has now got itself in a another conumdrum about what to do with us this year and probably several other clubs over the next few years. 2. Tribunal. I saw the two incidents Corey McKernan lost a rising star (trip by hand) and a Brownlow (incident drop of knees to a players neck in an awkward marking contest) and I thought the tribunal will always be contentious. This tribunal throws up some bad anomalies - sling tackle >number of weeks than elbow to head. But the decisions are often explained in a straight forward manner and we now know with most incidents whether they will be reviewed and subjected to the points system or cleared. That's good enough to me. If a player gets 2 instead of 1 or 3 where 2 would've sat better I don't care. A numbers based mandatory sentencing system will always throw up some slightly out of whack penalties but almost every decision the match review panel has made this year has been consistent and reasonable. Yes the bump is all but dead but it's time we get over it. Tapscott this year for us has shown you can bump if you are very careful otherwise you are asking for trouble. If he can adjust I don't see why every other player in the comp can't. 3. GWS. Going to the moon cost a bit as well. So did going to Sydney the first time. If you want to be on Demonland the Soccer forum so we can debate whether we will beat Melbourne Heart that's great. But I want AFL to continue to grow and to stake its self as the national sport. 4. Drugs in sport. Firstly anyone who links recreational and performance enhances drugs like you have is a nutter. The league has acknowledge a recreational drug use problem and put in place a policy to fix it. If you want a zero tolerance policy to illicit drugs that fine but call for it properly and show me it will actually deter players. And show me it will influence the community because I doubt it will. I'd rather we be more open and less confidentially and give players who get 2 strikes a 4 week ban but I understand the AFL's policy created with EXPERTS. 5. Players ducking in tackle. I haven't seen the White incident but I doubt it happened ducking in a tackle. Ducking in a tackle usually results in a high tackle that 99/100 times results in no injury. Casey Tutungi got injured after picked the ball up he innocously ran into a players stomach. More like the Jake Spencer incident a few weeks ago where he got 3 weeks despite so little intent. The AFL are continually working to make the game safer so it's very harsh to criticise them for 2 freak injuries. 6. Diving. Firstly I don't think the Selwood's dive (besides maybe Adam). They duck and draw free kicks. The CEO of the league shouldn't review this but the Manager of footy ops (who is new) and umpires should wake up to it. 7. The compromised draw. This one I agree with you. But bare in mind to keep the comp strong we need to have some commercial advantages in the draw I believe. No body wants to watch GWS v Brisbane on a Friday night, the balance will hopefully be corrected not exaggerated. At least Demetriou has started the conversation on equalisation. 8. Goal line technology - It's early in it's existence. Tell me goal review is worse than Cricket DRS. It's not. 2 goal umpires might be better but what happens when they stuff up in grand finals? We need technology and we need patience. The rules of the goal review are simple, it's the umpires stuffing it at the moment and the lack of good TV angles which needs to be adressed 9. The umpiring. People have and will always continue to complain about the umpire. AFL is a crazily hard game to umpire, get over it. 10. For 12 years every rule change sped up the game for TV. The rules of the game committee were also trying to make the game more like it was intended to be played with one on one contests and quick ball movement. The game looks pretty good right now. 11. Jeff Geishen. See point 2 and 9. My point I guess if you have raised some interesting topics but not all of them are broken I don't think. And a lot of them are for the new football operations manager in Mark Evans to fix. He comes from a strong footy background having worked at Hawthorn (and you guessed it) Melbourne. So I look forward to seeing what he can do. If I was him I'd review the position of Jeff Geischen but he may well be the right man for the job, the umpires need help on ducking and diving but it's not a major problem. I'd continue working on goal line review and aim for mandatory goal line cameras in all games this finals series and look to make it all games next year. Then I'd look to review the match review panel to see if some simple changes can make the crime fit the time a bit better. Now that we've got a TV deal for the next few years locked away I'd look to even the fixture out a bit for weaker Victorian clubs and keep working on equalisation. My comments on the PED issue will wait and see the outcomes. Right now I'm glad Essendon players have Demetriou and the AFL on side. I hope the club isn't spared so easily.

Interesting is that we've appointed Greaves as interim head of development Yet we already had - Todd Viney - General Manager - Player Development & Strategy Now I don't mind that we have an academy. You either give it an official title or you don't one way or another you have to poor time into young players on specific areas and graduate them through that training. But I'm confused about Viney's role and I'm confused by what on earth Neeld was doing!

I'm not at all musically inclined, BUT.... Does the guy only know 3 chords? It's not a bad song but you can't fake a galvanising footy song. We have our song and if we do find something else to pin our hopes to it will come naturally. It won't be Mike Brady or a Bugler or a special logo. Read the story about how "We'll never walk alone" and you'll understand that Liverpool embraced the song naturally in a lot of ways and of course it's been built up over generations. That's our hope I guess.

Mike Brady is a musician and not running the club. He can buy an expensive desk and sit at it designing blazers, logos and whiteboard wednesdays all day long as fair as I care.

Also saw them win the 2000 grand final and almost be the perfect team.

Bit of case of whatever they say making news as well. Harry O and Eddie are always in the news, it's just this time they made a bigger splash. Not convinced the other 4 players said anything too out of line either. And you can add Dane Swan to the list. Buckley is revamping the club to do things his way. He would've learnt that under Mick and with his natural confidence/arrogance it's not a surprise either. It's just a question if it will work.

You can only have 1 of Clark or Fitzy in the team at once and only 2 of Hogan, Dawes and Watts. To me Jack will undeniably asked to play a lot of other positions including midfield and half back because they will still be a weakness. I'm not saying we don't want Watts or Craig can't make Watts into a very good player. I'm just thinking if I was impartial and advising Watts my advice would be not only would he get a fresh start somewhere else he'd also probably get better treatment.

If I was Jack I'd leave. He still plays his best footy without doing any hard stuff as a third tall forward who may be able to get up into the midfield and float around or even be a decent undersized second ruck in the right side. With Clark, Dawes, Hogan, Fitzpatrick and Howe all more than capable of playing similar positions I'd be considering my future. Because if I was the incoming Melbourne coach next year the first thing I'd do to Watts would be Mark Neeld 2.0 and get him to toughen up and play off half back until he shows me he can consistently win one on one battles and play well under pressure as backman must do. Because his ability to read play and use the ball with beautiful foot skills is still so adeptly suited to being behind the play. Or if he showed he was up to it I'd release him to a wing in a Goddard style role. But I wouldn't take out a decent key forward prospect like Hogan or Fitzpatrick to gift Watts games as a floating third tall when the team has plenty of other roles to fill and Jack has the talents to fill them. So as I said if I was Jack I'd ask for a trade and get a fresh start. If I was the club though I wouldn't accept anything less than a ready to go decent midfielder and if that players talents aren't worthy of a high second pick I'd say no thanks.

It's all about best available and it has to be. The problem with Predergast's drafting was that he went for these apparently skillful types in Blease, Strauss and Bennell (as our skills in 2008 were deplorable) and then the next year over corrected and went for Gysberts and Tapscott because they were meant to be hard ball winners and forgot best available. Our midfield mire is a complete issue both with contested and uncontested ball. We certainly need another inside guy but say we got Wines last year and then all of a sudden this years draft was full of inside mids but didn't have anyone with outside class then you'd be disappointed. We have to give our (New) recruiters some faith. After his rising star first season where he drew comparisons to Joel Selwood everyone thought Rhys Palmer was a star and certainly if they were choosing between him or Chris Masten who was drafted higher everyone would've gone for Palmer - but now look where we are at.

Lyon - sounds like complete crud he isn't going anywhere B. Scott - As noted has a contract Bucks - Eddie wouldn't fire him if they hadn't won a game, reasonable pies supporters know where they are at Malthouse - Again most reasonable Carlton supporters know he was hard up this season Sheedy was pre-arranged and he actually got an extra year Hird - still has the supporters on his side So really it's Neeld and Worsfold and so far every indication from West Coast has been is they won't push him out. Not too bad in a highly strung competition. Certainly doing better than the NFL or major soccer leagues.