Rogue

What'd be better is in the event of some clash they made the team with white wear the white shorts and the team with a dark colour wear the dark shorts.

Missed a bad one against Collingwood in the second qtr iirc - it was at the city end. One of quite a few for a guy who has good skills around the ground. If he's wasted down forward where's he going to make it? I can't see him ever holding down the #1 ruck role. If you're a back-up ruck you need another string to your bow.

I read this in 'The Age': Not a bad trio. It's a shame Hughes got a duck in his first innings. Yeah, I agree. Apparently the second venue won't be so pace-friendly. McDonald's hung on, which is good for the one-eyed Victorian fans - now we've got two Test players, and I'm sure Rogers will be feeling a little frustrated after Hughes' failure. I don't really like the idea of picking a number 8 based on his batting ability, but it might come in handy during the fist innings considering we lost three quick wickets up front.

'Told us so' how? He's played zero games. He'll be playing zero games when we next have a crack at a flag (while kids we give opportunities to instead will be carrying us there).

Does anyone else think this thread has popped up out of nowhere? I haven't read many comments 'laying into' Jones of late.

For sure He's been pretty unlucky, with his injury in India and then gastro in SA. I hope he gets a cap at some stage on this tour. Since we're playing North, who is a legitimate middle-order bat, at six I'd like to see our four best bowlers picked. In that case Hilfenhaus gets the nod over McDonald. McDonald would definitely strengthen the tail but that would leave us with just there front-line bowlers, and the aim of the game is to take 20 wickets. IMO let the top six - and the keeper - worry about scoring the runs, and choose the bowlers most likely to take 20 wickets.

That's funny, because I think supporters have been complaining about our lack of press for years. I also think we've been getting a decent run in the press lately. List decisions shouldn't be compromised for publicity. It's a short-term view that's recipe for long-term pain.

He'll need elite skills for that to happen, won't he? I don't share your optimism and would be happy if he cemented a best 18 spot. I do agree re: Bate though.

Good to see they've finally got a photo for Bail up there.

I think it was a joke.

It was nice to read that David Boon wants Australia to show faith in a core group of players, just like they did in the mid-80's. Craddock wrote a piece about this back in November which reflected my thoughts on our recent selection woes, although a few others didn't see it quite the same way. I agree. I'd still bat him higher than McDonald. It's probably a moot point as I imagine North will get picked.

Freo making the prelim in 2006 was about as good as us making the second round that year - on a road to nowhere.

You've nailed it - that was precisely my point. His output to date has not been good enough.

If the NAB games were over I'd agree with the approach suggested in the OP. However, there's a bit of water to go under the bridge just yet.

No it's not. The problem is that he's not as good as you think he is. In 2008 he recorded a career-high number of disposals but his ~19th ranking in the B&F - despite playing a high number of games - suggests he hasn't been a good or very good player so far. If he were to do that it'd be great. He's nowhere close atm. Last year he averaged 15-18 possessions but they weren't quality (ranked 25th in disposal efficiency according to 45hotgood) and didn't average 1 goal a game, let alone a couple. Don't put your house on it.

I don't even know what that means but it's gold. He's been on the list for five seasons. However, If I was ever on the Sylvia bandwagon - and I wasn't - I wouldn't jump off after one game, particularly one that was much the same as countless others over his five full seasons with Melbourne.

Yep - we're scheduled to play at Casey in the final round of the NAB Challenge. The link in the OP confirms that.

It's great to kick long if that's the best option. Unfortunately the cry of 'just kick it long' and the like are excluding all other options - it's not about best option footy, it's a call to just kick it long, regardless of the percentages. Do they? I've never known a supporter to act like that. If you're forced to kick to a 50/50 contest it's clearly better to play the percentages and choose the longest contest. I'm certainly more frustrated when, all other things being equal, we choose a 50/50 contest a few metres away instead of 50/50 fifty-five metres down the ground. Was this at the end of a close game? Did the opposition have a huge flood? I'm not sure I heard the quote - I certainly don't remember it - but from what you've descibed it sounds nothing like the same context. I don't think Blight would have recommended Melbourne just bomb it long yesterday, particularly if there were safe shorter options. I also think that in situations like that - and particularly given the decent amount of time left - it's better to attempt to score. However, we weren't chipping the ball around to 'wind down the clock' - we were chipping the ball around because Hawthorn had a huge flood happening and we seemingly had no options in our forward line. What was the best way for us to score when the Hawks had a mega flood in place? A. Retain possession outside the 50 metre arc and wait for an opportunity to present itself within scoring range. B. Bomb it long into the heart of the flood (note that we chose this option and it didn't work). Of course, there's also the fact that we would in fact benefit from any time wasted looking for a decent option. Who are you saying 'see' to? Who said it can't work? I certainly didn't and I can't see that anyone else in the thread said that. Anyway, you do realise the entirely different contexts, right? Hawthorn were behind and the clock was running out so they had to score. They also had a very open forward line and a great target to kick to. In contrast we had time/the scoreboard on our side and were battling a mega flood with no forward the stature of Roughead (let alone pretty clear).

Perhaps you should try reading some of my other posts re: Sylvia today before you jump to (incorrect) conclusions. Feel free to show me where I said a typical Sylvia day is anthing remotely 'good'. I just don't see what was so outstandingly bad about Sylvia's game today that has everyone jump off the bandwagon - to me it was an average performance from him (although perhaps a little quieter than normal). I don't care what draft number players were ranked at, I just want to see them worthy of their spot on the list. If they don't live up to your expectations of what a x draft pick should be then blame the recruitment managers or development coaches. It's the same attitude that sees people hang on to shares that are in terminal decline far too long because they bought at a high price when they should be basing their decisions on current output and future potential (not the past).

Sure, it can be very hard to tell when you're watching on TV. However, even on TV it was obvious they were flooding and we were kicking it around the arc for a reason. You do make a good point though, and that's why I said I hope I don't hear 'just kick it long etc.' when I'm at the footy PS. Thanks, big_red_fire_engine!

First, forget about what number Sylvia was picked in the draft - it's irrelevant. It's a ranking based on what one recruited thought of him when he was ~17 years old. He's been around five years, and takes up the same number of spots on our list as any other player - one. Second, Sylvia wasn't particularly terrible today. He was pretty quiet but I actually thought he had a fairly typical Sylvia day.

I'd like to dedicate the dying stages of the loss to Hawthorn to those who love yelling out 'just kick it' (or variations). Example 1 - Bate bombing it into the forward line a couple of minutes before the end of the game, despite the flood Hawthorn had on. For those who didn't see the game, Hawthorn had most of their players defensive half of the ground and we were kicking it around outside the 50 metre arc waiting for an option. I was watching it at a public place and a Demon fan, clearly frustrated, yelled out 'just kick it long'. Bate promptly obliged, a turnover resulted and they ended up kicking a goal. Example 2 - Bartram's turnover even later in the game. Despite the loss there were plenty of positives from the match, and most of those relate to our younger players. However, the biggest potential plus from this loss is no longer hearing someone yell out 'just kick it long' when I'm at the footy and there's no one to kick it to.

Really? This is written like it is a fact: It's wonderful Sylvia is in the top-ten for kicks and handballs etc. I wonder if he's also around the top-ten for games played in 2008. Btw, it seems players like Garland or Warnock will never make the top 10 if that's your criteria and I think they both had better years than Sylvia. Fwiw, who are your top 10? Making comments like this shows an inability to see other people's point of view IMO. I see Sylvia along the same lines as Hannabal: 45hotgood mentioned Sylvia's disposal efficiency was outside the top 20 for our team, and considering our skills last year that's certainly saying something. PS. Another great performance today from Sylvia today. EDIT: Haha, at least you acknowledged it (you wrote your above post while I was writing this one), well done on being a good sport Maybe he'll come out and kick a bag in round one...but I'm not holding my breath.

Massive over-reaction IMO - particularly the sponsorship bit. In fact, I'd be pointing to the performance and telling potential sponsors 'Sure, these young kids are going to be inconsistent, but Hawthorn were struggling a couple of years ago and look where they are now. There were plenty of positives out of that game and we're only going to improve over the duration of your sponsorship'. I can understand people being disappointed straight after the game, but with some sort of emotional distance there has to be an acknowledgement of the positives, despite a loss.

A nice piece about the Dees but I'm not sure what was thought-provoking.