Rogue

I agree. As an aside, I reckon I got shouted down for mentioning this shortly after he made his debut (seen to be raining on the parade of the premature '300 gamer elite of the competition' talk, I think). I also think his decision making is fine - it's just the execution. I think today was just a particularly bad kicking game, but in general it seems to be the easy ones he misses - perhaps a concentration thing, or a technique thing when kicking relatively short (not kicking through the ball, perhaps, or a slack ball-drop?). What a strawman assertion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man Most of those who have noted Grimes' kicking issue are also on the record as fans of Jack (including me).

I don't think players are always able to make a conscious choice - sometimes there seems very little time between a whistle and the player taking an action that's deemed to be choosing to play on.

I haven't seen it post-game, but I thought that Davey's report would get thrown out before it got to the tribunal.

Yeah, nice article. I liked the quote from Trengove regarding his impression when he saw Tapscott, who I might call Bullet. He kicks it like a bullet and when he hits you you're down like you were hit by a...

It sure was. He played well today. If he keeps it up it will make it hard for Newton to get a gig, as Jaded has suggested.

If it was the four man int I'd pick Petterd, Jetta, Martin and Trengove from the seven listed, leaving out Spencer, Warnock and Strauss. I think you need a second ruck option in the game - not as a sub - so Spencer or Martin play. Otherwise, are those suggesting otherwise thinking we'll ruck Jamar 100% until some point in the game when he's totally gone and then replace him? If not, who rucks when Jamar is resting and the second option has not been subbed in?

You don't take wickets with wides. You do take wickets when the batsmen are under pressure though, and once Tait got smashed in those two overs the game was over - there was no pressure. Had we continued to build the pressure, as we had been doing up until that point (you would have noticed the run rate was constantly increasing, and weas up around 6), the batsmen would have been more likely to get out. I also disagree with the implication that Tait was the most likely to break the partnership at that point in the game. Each to their own, though. Ponting's played more cricket than me and he clearly thought the same as you. As an aside, if Ferguson had faced 22 balls - the number White did - and scored at his average career strike rate the Indians would have been chasing 270, which would have made for a pretty interesting game. To chase 12 runs in the last 14 balls doesn't sound much, but that's not the scenario - with a larger total to chase there would have been more pressure on the Indian bats throughout the innings so who knows how it would have gone. White did achieve a run out, which I saw someone tweet as the best (or was it only?) thing he's done all WC - perhaps a fair call (unfortuately, because I like White). - - - - Anyway, a shame about the result from an Australian perspective, but there were some good individual performances. D Hussey shone, and it was nice to see Ponting bat well. I think Lee's been pretty good since he came back into the side, too. It'll be interesting to see what the selectors do from here.

According to Cricinfo, Lee would have had him at the 15th if Kreza had fielded a little better. Anyway, as it happens your post is a nice segue into a comment I wanted to make re: Ponting's bowling changes. I was liking them until Tait was brought on. Watson and Lee had 5 overs left and Johnson 3, with ~13 overs to go. These bowlers were all going at less than 5 per over and the run rate was ~6. All the spinners had plenty of overs too (including D Hussey, who has gone for less than 4 per over). Tait was introduced into the attack and went for 19 off two overs. Not a choice I would have made, with Yuv and Raina at the crease. Anyhow, India's in the box seat from here - we need wickets quickly. - - - - - - - Ouch, Lee returned to the attack, was hit for six and the equation is now 16 off 29. I think it's curtains.

Argh.

I agree. I don't buy that we can't win the World Cup, or that our chances are near zero. We need to win three consecutive games and no teams - not even SA - are looking unbeatable. We're certainly not favourites, but it's a pretty open season. (I reckon most teams are lucky this World Cup isn't on a more seam-friendly continent, because SA would be super hard to beat then).

Good innings by D Hussey.

I disagree with the reasoning presented here. First, carrying someone who is out of form doesn't help you win, regardless of how good they could be - it hurts you unless they turn it around. Second, you don't need guys who are able to smash it out of the park on a consistent basis to win (a run a ball gets you 300, after all). Third, Ferguson has a better strike rate than White.

I understand you were saying he plays a role that would be handy for us, it's just that I don't agree with you. I don't think we need defenders who don't play tight and butcher the footy. Sure, Bartram makes me worry every time he's got the footy*, but he plays tight. Buckley could run - that's it. He was a Ward clone that didn't win the footy as much. That said, maybe he'll improve, but unless he's made some dramatic changes in a very short space of time I don't see he fills a role we have open. As for losing Bruce, we already gained MacDonald. I just wanted to clarify that, according to the article you cited, it's not 'IN: Simon Buckley' (unlike the title suggests). I'm sure others may have assumed from your title that he was playing in round one, and not everyone is going to bother clicking the link and reading the article.

Not so good now, but Sydney certainly has a few outs.

Do we really have a need for a defender who doesn't play tight and butchers the footy? By the way, the article actually strongly suggests Buckley won't play.

Why not contact the Club directly? http://www.melbournefc.com.au/contact%20us/tabid/7494/default.aspx

Given that our first half percentage is 94.5, it suggests we're in the game at half-time. (Of course, we could have a first half percentage of 100 after having a bunch of games where we doubled the opposition's score in the first half, and had ours doubled in other games, but my memory of 2010 was that it was generally closer than that).

I think 2007 is a great example of how expert footy prediction is so often wrong. We were tipped for big things post-2006, even though we were very likely to only get worse. If he had a source telling him Scully was going, why would he say otherwise? Being a MFC supporter doesn't have anything to do with it. It would be different if he said 'I want Scully to leave' - then you might wonder if he's aDees man.

I like White, but he's been in a prolonged slump. He does have power hitting that we would very much like, but if he can't stay at the crease it doesn't matter how far he can hit the ball. I'd be interested to know whether he also seemed out of form in the nets. I think Ferguson was amongst the runs late last year, and IIRC he looked okay against England in his two games (including one run-a-ball 45-ish).

I take a 'star of the AFL' to mean someone who is in the top echelon of the competition - guys like Judd and Ablett come to mind, while Scarlett and Brown were IMO also in that bracket. Three guys quickly came to mind as potentially becoming stars of the AFL - Frawley, Scully and Jurrah. (Is Sylvia 'young' in the context of this thread?). A bunch of the names in this thread will never be stars of the AFL, but they might just become stars of the footy club.

It's worth correcting you on one point - not everyone was forecasting that Melbourne would end up in the eight this season. (I wasn't, so your assertion is already wrong, and I certainly wasn't the only one). I bet that many of the posters now coming out and watering down the idea that this is going to be a breakout year wouldn't be saying the same if we'd played better in the NAB Cup/Challenge, but regardless, they're right. For me, this season is about improvement. I'd like to see us play a style that looks as though it can be a success, and have some marked improvement in players that are an important part of our future. Sure, I'd like wins, but what I want is wins in a season that leads to a premiership, and that's not this year. Improvement doesn't necessarily mean making finals, or even having more wins - it's IMO foolish to set arbitrary guidelines since the context is so important. Would we be happy sneaking into finals with a relatively poor percentage after snatching some lucky wins and getting blown out of the water by numerous sides? Would that necessarily be better than just missing out on finals despite a strong percentage, some 'brave' losses and marked improvement in some young guys that step up while many of our better players miss games in an injury-cursed year? No man is an island, and that applies to footy teams too. Btw, nice research/post, 45. Leading into the past few years I've said that percentage is a better indicator than wins and I think the above indicates our improvement over the past couple of years nicely.

I think Ferguson should come in for White, and Hussey for Smith. Ferguson was batting very well for Aus before he got injured, and since Smith isn't getting much of a bowl he should be judged on how whether he's a better bat than a potential replacement. I'd take Hussey - he can roll the arm over if needed. I don't think we can do much in terms of bowling, given only Hastings is on the bench. Watson Haddin Ponting Hussey M Clarke Ferguson Hussey D Johnson Lee Kreza Tait

It was pretty clear that if the game went 50 overs we were going to lose. Thus, I can't understand why Ponting didn't bowl Lee out earlier. PS. White must be in trouble.

It's hard to predict how this will go, but I would think that you need the relief ruck to be playing. Guys like Morton and Bail might be handy as a sub because they're versatile, but those two happen to have good endurance so that may mean they're more likely to play in the 21.

If I wasn't aware of this I wouldn't be suggesting the Club needs to manage supporter expectations! Probably - expectations are overblown, but the preseason seems to have tempered that somewhat.