Rogue

I haven't heard anything yet.

Pretty dull article, even taking into accout the fact that it's written for the general footy punter, not for avid Dees fans.

Welcome to professional sport in the modern era

I think it's fair to say that Garland's been one of the shining lights this season, with 17 games and a Rising Star nomination while playing in an inexperienced defensive unit. I stumbled across this article, written pre-season, and found it interesting - he's exceeded the 10 games he was aiming for, but as a backman. - source I'm not sure if Bailey's as surprised as some Demonlanders, though. "New coach Dean Bailey has recognised his preseason form enough to mention him as one of six players he had been impressed with." Where should Garland end up playing? Are we going to have another Neitz decision in a couple of years? Garland's '08 stats

Matthew Whelan - Matthew Whelan Paul Wheatley - Paul Wheatley Nathan Brown - Chris Johnson Daniel Ward - Simon Buckley Clint Bizzell - Colin Garland

Very nice. I'm feeling lazy, so I'll copy my post from Demonology: In contrast to the headline, CC's comments - which are buried at the end of the article - suggest that Carroll is to blame:

I wouldn't be shocked. I expect us to be more competitive, but think that's likely to be reflected more in our % than in our win/loss.

I'd use Grimesy and caddypgt's alternatives to Option A & B in the poll. They're derived from the Club proposals, but probably a little more popular. Regardless, all this talk about what other Clubs can do with their clash strip seems moot.

I think there's a level of understanding with fans and commentators regards talls taking longer to develop. I imagine many fans would compare Morton to Palmer in an 'apples for apples' sense. This is unlikely to happen with Rich and Watts.

I think it's more about poor execution - we certainly have plans. The obvious one that comes to mind for me is where we sit a guy off the pack 5-10 metres defensive side of the contest, win the ball and handball behind to that player. I remember them practicing it out in the middle of TD when I was early to the Richmond v Melb game.

We don't play Pagan's Paddock. We sit 2-3 forwards our half of the ground who are generally double-teamed (at least). They're often stationary/leading to the ball (rather than back towards goals).

I'd like to see this one (although the MFC insignia wouldn't get a run there - sponsor placement). I think this one is also better than Option B:

I think this is a fair call. Put it down to cognitive dissonance

Who's asking for mircales? Perhaps I've misunderstood, but I think some people are asking for more than two guys in the forward fifty, so we have someone to kick it to who isn't outnumbered 2-to-1 or worse. The 'cattle' cry seems to be missing the point. Guys like Miller, Newton, Green, Bate, Sylvia, Yze, White, Holland, Maric, Wonna, and Garland have some sort of chance if there are five Demons versus five defenders when we go forward - not so much when it's two of them versus five. Many times when we win the ball out of the backline and break down, it's because the options forward of centre consist of Melbourne players double or triple-teamed. That has a fair bit to do with it, wouldn't you say?

Hehe

That sums up my hopes for 2009.

Our forward structure is at least part of the problem, and not a small part, either. Countless times we win the ball in the defensive half of the ground, only to find that we have to 'over-posess' the footy going forward (and sideways) due to a lack of structure up forward. I assume you've seen at least a few games live, and if so you would have noticed a recurring theme over the season, exemplified by Richmond's four to five defenders camping in our forward half against two Demons. As Franky_31's said, this isn't as obvious on TV, since the camera focusses on the ball/where it's going, but if you're at the ground it's bleedingly obvious. Bailey might not be asking players to 'handball unnecessarily' (OT: talk about a loaded comment), but if we have players outnumbered 2-to-1 or worse in our forward line, it's inevitable that we'll muck around with it going forward, or have it come out of the 50 promptly.

Ouch.

Like-for-like changes are mostly positive, given the form of the players dropped: Maric for Wonaeamirri Petterd for Bate Grimes for Dunn Holland for Newton Frawley for Martin Carroll for Jamar //well, Carroll played in the ruck on the weekend

THE TEAMS MELBOURNE Backs Matthew Whelan Nathan Carroll Daniel Bell Half backs James Frawley Matthew Warnock Colin Garland Centreline Cameron Bruce James McDonald Brad Green Half forwards Ricky Petterd Brad Miller Simon Buckley Forwards Addam Maric Colin Sylvia Adem Yze Followers Jeff White Clint Bartram Nathan Jones Interchange Jack Grimes Ben Holland Cale Morton Paul Wheatley Emergencies Stefan Martin Michael Newton Shane Valenti In Nathan Carroll Jack Grimes James Frawley Ben Holland Addam Maric Ricky Petterd Out Matthew Bate Lynden Dunn Mark Jamar Stefan Martin Michael Newton (all omitted) Austin Wonaeamirri (hamstring) New Jack Grimes (Northern Knights) RICHMOND Backs Chris Newman Will Thursfield Kelvin Moore Half backs Jay Schulz Luke McGuane Jordan McMahon Centreline Matthew Richardson Shane Tuck Brett Deledio Half forwards Matt White Joel Bowden Richard Tambling Forwards Shane Edwards Jack Riewoldt Trent Cotchin Followers Troy Simmonds Kane Johnson Nathan Foley Interchange Daniel Jackson Mitch Morton Adam Pattison Greg Tivendale Emergencies Daniel Connors Dean Polo Alex Rance In Adam Pattison Greg Tivendale Out Tristan Cartledge Daniel Connors (both omitted) Like-for-like changes are mostly positive, given the form of the players dropped: Maric for Wonaeamirri Petterd for Bate Grimes for Dunn Holland for Newton Frawley for Martin Carroll for Jamar //well, Carroll played in the ruck on the weekend

He didn't say we shouldn't take him.

a) they have value B) they won't be around when we're next in flag contention

For many people, the membership itself is a donation. Furthermore, even for people that have a 'spare few bob', there are plenty of worthy causes. Anyhow, $2,905,681 is the total raised so far.

Insurance in case of what? It's not like we're going to be a flag contender next year. White's getting on, and clearly isn't part of our future.

Aye - that's what I was getting at