DeeSpencer

Agree with the deck chairs and also agree Rivers is a shocking match up for Crameri. Frawley would be a decent one but in his absence it was Joel Macdonald who played on Crameri last year and despite the fact I have no confidence in him he may as well get first go again this year.

Who do you suggests plays back up ruck and as a second key forward? Don't say Dunn. Or Clark - because who'll kick the goals! Or do you want to [censored] Jamar even though he's already battling and we are 0 and 9.I'd rather play substandard personnel than no one at all, so we can at least develop a structure. If Frawley is right to go then I'd certainly play McDonald as the back up ruck/forward, but Macdonald coming in doesn't look like that will happen.

Fully expecting late changes of Frawley and Green out for Bennell/Bate and Sellar in. Otherwise I don't see why Macdonald would come in in Frawley was playing and why we'd drop Sellar against Essendon. FF: Tapscott Clark Dunn FB: Hardingham Hooker Fletcher HF: Blease Howe Magner HF: Dyson Carlisle Dempsey C: Bail McKenzie Grimes C: Stanton Watson Zaharakis HB: Watts Rivers Macdonald HF: Monfries Hurley Crameri FB: Garland McDonald Nicholson FF: Jetta Ryder Davey Foll: Jamar Moloney Jones Foll: Bellchambers Hocking Howlett Int: Sellar, Trengove, Sylvia S: Bate/Bennell Int: Lonergan, Colyer, Melksham, Lovett-Murray Key matchups: McKenzie v Watson - needs to shut him right down Bail v Stanton - has to stop him being their outlet from the backline and getting loose forward Clark v Hooker/Carslile - as always pressure on Mitch to kick a bag Dunn v Fletcher - has to keep him away from the footy McDonald v Ryder/Bellchambers - If Frawley's out he has to shut down a dangerous tall' Rivers v Hurley Macdonald v Crameri - comes into the side to do a job on a dangerous player Moloney v Hocking - needs to break a tag for once!!!

How are we going to run out a 4th quarter against Carlton when we've barely been in a game at 3/4 time this year. Even if you have the training fitness it counts for little until you do it in the real thing. But fitness is still an issue, and Neeld's game plan is one that both rewards and revolves around having fit players. At the end of the day we need ever player who plays between half back and half forward to have strong fitness bases. I look at guys like Sylvia, Davey, Blease and Tapscott who should have top line fitness to play on flanks and go into the midfield but who just don't for whatever reason be they injury or otherwise. McKenzie and Grimes are 2 others who would seem to get up and play despite interrupted preseasons but I'm sure they'd be better with a big preseason.

I'm glad he's not bashing Neeld, but that only means he's not a peanut like the commentators who are. However we can't misunderstand a rewiring to defensive game plan as an excuse to play as poorly as we have. The other thing we have to 'rewire' is the desire to play consistent hard at it, hard running footy for the whole game. Very few on our list have seemed to understand this. Be it attacking or defensive play not enough on our list have the mental or physical characteristics to compete for 120 minutes. I respect Green for his actions on the weekend but I use his injury as an example of what has been wrong. It may simply have been an unfortunate incident but the way I see it is that years of poor preparation, poor training and not enough experience has led to him getting a bruised lung for putting his body in harms way. I get the feeling that if you swapped Green and Selwood that Selwood wouldn't have been off to hospital after that contact. Now Green has at least set a benchmark it means someone like Bennell has to work harder in the gym, train harder and hit the footy even harder than Green did. We need the same leadership from Clark, Frawley and Jamar when it comes to playing like talls and from guys like Moloney when it comes to midfield work rate. If Moloney can't bring it then Trengove and McKenzie have to set the bar.

Certainly not the worst kick at the club, not even close whilst Bartram remains on the list. He's a similar kick to say Nicholson who under more pressure will make more mistakes but when in time and space is more likely to use it well. I still think he'll end up a forward. His size, endurance and marking lends more to CHF and with Watts looking more and more like a CHB it just makes sense to me. I've got no problem with him down back whilst the midfield means that's where the ball is.

Don't be fooled by how awful Carlton were, but you aren't completely wrong. If we do get a competitive midfield we certainly have a backline that can hold up and a forward line that can cause problems, but the personnel isn't only lacking talent that is the frustrating thing. If we were plainly useless it would be sad, but were not very good but also burdened by poor work rate. I'm sure a firing Davey, Jurrah and Sylvia thrown in with Clark, Howe and Blease would make us a gun froward line but when are Davey, Jurrah or Sylvia going to be firing again? That was and still is Neeld's biggest challenge - getting a competitive and consistent effort from players who haven't done that before. Then it's the midfield problem. Carlton missed Murphy and Carrazzo and whilst they couldn't move the ball for 3/4's they still smashed us in clearances. It's going to take amazing recruiting to get the 2 midfield stars and 1-2 more midfield depth players we need and then even better development considering out poor record in that regard. Even if Viney and whoever else we take are the next Dusty Martin, Fyfe, Cotchin or Mark Murphy it will take them 3-5 years to routinely influence games. You are certainly right to say that Trengove, McKenzie, Gysberts, Magner and Morton need to keep finding new levels in the mean time.

Every game I have a damn Blease that was awesome and a 'wtf' was that Blease moment. Same goes for Nicholson. But give me guys with the pace to make an impact rather than plodders like Bate, Dunn or Joel Macdonald any day of the week. We have to keep playing these guys and building their game because they can be weapons.

I'd drop half the side if we had anything decent to bring in, but I'm afraid we don't. I really don't see any point recycling the likes of Morton, Sylvia, Davey, Petterd or Bate who haven't shown any reason to be recalled. It's time we keep going for something new. I know I've been calling for it all season but I'm desperate to see McDonald have a shot at CHF. He's has a good taste of playing back and shown he can compete, it's time to try him up forward. I wouldn't be disappointed to see Watts have a go on Hurley either. Out: Moloney, Sellar, Bennell, Green In: Couch, Martin, Taggert, Davis FB: Nicholson Frawley Davis HB: Garland Watts Rivers C: Grimes Magner Bail HF: Trengove McDonald Tapscott FF: Howe Clark Taggert Foll: Jamar Jones McKenzie Int; Martin Couch Dunn Magner Also for those keen on bringing back Bartram I'd ask them to remember the week before against Sydney before they are so keen. He's battling a knee injury and it's not making him any better of a kick. Nicholson isn't much better but competed well on Garlett today.

It might be crazy for Collingwood, but its twice as crazy for us. How we can enter a vital draft without a proper recruiting manager is beyond stupid. Then just to make it more interesting the person doing the recruiting is also the father of a guy who we are committed to, therefore leaving us ripe for the rest of the comp to black mail us with Jack Viney. Crazy.

I don't care about missing Lyon. He would have sharpened us up a lot quicker than Neeld but at the end of the day if he couldn't get it done at the the saints I'm not sure he'd have much luck here, especially as we still needed a coach who could develop players. To be honest I think the pool of coaching prospects that included Neeld, McCartney, Sanderson, Watters and even Scott Burns was exceptionally strong. What I'm worried about is that we entered into a fantasy land and tried to pick the best fit and not the best coach. Ie. we recruited for a need with the number 1 draft pick instead of going best available. Just like how we went for Bailey when we felt we need to get a development coach now we've gone for Neeld because his tough defensive attitude was what we needed. But that is completely neglecting all the other aspects of coaching. I don't take much interest in psychological profiles but I wonder why we wouldn't do this step as ever other club did. Why not get as much info as possible? I also feel our selection panel was short on football knowledge, so really in a way when Garry said Neeld was the man the rest didn't challenge him. All this said I still have a lot of confidence in Neeld, but I'm disappointed to see Melbourne again not doing this as professionally or as rigorously as our competition.

It's time for our footballers who are running around like they are in the under 12's to be treated that way. If I was coaching at half time I would have simply swapped the midfielders and the forwards. Why complain about Sylvia but do nothing about him. A couple of quarters at full back would be a start, and if it meant we could move Bartram from a position where the ball goes and hide him in the forward pocket like the dud kid in under 12's that would be a win as well.

Jurrah must be the sub, it compromises Neeld's defensive ethos to have him starting when he's very likely to still be underdone.

Obviously isolating Clark on an underdone Gilham or Schoenmakers is our best one on one match up but I have significant doubts Hawthorn will let us do it. And if both teams dropped a man back I feel it would only play into Hawthorn's superior midfield winning the game. I'm concerned there is no match up for Tom McDonald with Hawthorn only having Franklin, Roughead and Hale as talls who will go forward (and one of them has to be in the ruck). So really after Frawley and Rivers, with Garland playing small who does McDonald go to? I get concerned when we carry extra tall defenders who aren't needed. With Sellar out I'm super keen to throw McDonald to CHF and let him have a run there. It would at least tire out the other tall defender who isn't on Clark. Fitzpatrick would also get a nice match up at least height wise. If they don't play McDonald forward for at least the last quarter if the game is over but hopefully the whole night I'll be very disappointed.

Our ruck back up is Max Gawn, a man coming off 2 knee reco's.Spencer isn't up to it, Martin is only a back up and it remains to be seen if he's a good one at that and it's way too early to tell if Fitzpatrick can make it or not. Even if he does he might be more of a backup than a starting ruck. I don't want to lose the one position we actually are competitive in and I don't want to weaken our midfield one bit considering it is a major struggle currently.

South Australia is still west of Melbourne. But you wouldn't think the crows would be interested and port have got Renouf, Redden and Lobbe. No superstars but 3 guys who could push each other to make it. You wouldn't think Jamar would be in their window.

More like Greene from GWS was stiff. Get's 25+ touches each week in a battling side. Motlop runs around and does a few fancy things and he gets the prize.

Our "good" contested ball winning stat is actually misleading due to the fact we commit so many numbers to winning the contested ball in one area of the ground we leave the rest of it wide open.

How long til we can just play Taggart for the sake of it. If he can get anywhere near it in a few VFL games I'd have him straight in. Anyone who we haven't trialled as a possible mid, half forward or half back is worth a go compared to recycling the junk. What about Nicholson? Anyone keen to give him another shot. Brings in some much needed pace. I hope Strauss is back in the VFL this week.

Any chance you noted whether Tappy was out there jimcor? Thanks for the update though. Oh, and I'd pretty sure there is an opening for Couch regardless hardtrack. How many games do we have to lose until our most consistent performer in the VFL gets a run?

Clark's motivation to leave was family - hence go back to Perth. He wanted to be closer to his as relatives to help him look after his kid. We simply offered him an alternative way to be close to family - a good pay packet and only travel 4 times a year instead of 10 means he can fly some family over and not spend too much time on the road. Plus with all of September off most years he'll get plenty of time in Perth. Now what do we have to offer Bennell that Gold Coast doesn't? Nothing. Can we convince him that moving to Melbourne is just as good as moving to Perth in terms of home sickness, I doubt it.

The punch is one week. The bump has to be pretty minor otherwise footy isn't a mans game. Wojo should go as the rule is now if you hit a player high with a bumb you've deliberately not tackled and therefore you are up for 1 week. I'd add a second due to the force. But really we should all get over it. If wojo got 0 or 10 weeks it makes no difference to us. No one is complaining about whoever broke Gysberts (or Wade Lees for that point) jaw.

I think training loads during season would be pretty standard. You just couldn't put too much stress on guys when they are playing each week. Remember it usually takes until Thursday for guys (especially the young and the old) to be back feeling anywhere near fresh, not to mention those carrying injuries. As for our speed, I think it's brain speed not leg speed. We just can't work out how to get to the right spots and then react quick enough to what is going on. For example dynamic midfield spread towards where the ball goes from the start of a clearance but also to block outlets and open up targets makes you look lightning if the other team just stand in the middle. We are the guys in the middle at the moment. When the ball goes to our backline the other teams mids have blocked up our outlets quicker than we have guys out there getting the ball. Then without the kicking to dissect through well manned up presses everything gets slower again. We didn't look slow against St Kilda because things fell into place well, but I bet trying to man up hawthorn as they flick the ball across half back and then to their forwards we'll look like statues.

Sellar's main problem at the moment.... I just don't see the potential. What's his weapon? Doesn't seem to break free of a man on a lead, can't take a big grab and can't do anything when the ball hits the deck. When he goes into the ruck he's just having a jump and a run around, not much different to putting Brad Miller in there as we tried a couple of times.I understand he was recruited to be trialled as a backman and at the moment is just doing his best as a big body and I'm not bitter with him, but it's not impressive. I hope Fitzpatrick can make a go of it and I'd like to see Martin dominate the VFL as a big man before he comes back as well. But I'd really like to see Sellar down back because he might show potential. Another option is leave him back up rucking for a week or so as a defender (not a likely long term arrangement but worth a short term trial) and in the meantime play Tom McDonald - someone who has shown an ability to run and mark the footy as a forward. It makes so much sense they'll never buy it.

Martin at his best wouldn't be, but his best is few and far between. I'm not sure how much longer we can wait for his physicality to get anywhere near his athleticism which makes him dangerous. If (and I'm sure he should), Fitzpatrick comes in I'll be keen to see if he can play with some attitude, or whether its just his speed and size getting it done for him at VFL.At the end of the day that was what got me excited about Max Gawn last year, the big fella looked like he knew he was one and played with some toughness.