bing181

More than anything else, disappointing. Disappointing in the longer term by way of making the team attractive to free agents etc., disappointing for the young players we need to keep, disappointing in terms of building our membership and sponsorships and the financial limitations that that will create, and disappointing for the players themselves, regardless of how much they've brought it on themselves. The gulf between where our players are and where Hawthorn are ... impossible to see how it can be bridged in anything under, what, 5+ years. There's not a Hawthorn player out there you wouldn't be happy to have the ball in their hands, have them going for a one-on-one, have them needing to nail a disposal. We have only a handful of those kinds of players. To Roos' credit, we've seen surprisingly few of these blow-outs, which for those with short memories, used to be almost a weekly occurrence. But to even have one match like this just shows how far behind we still are, and how fragile our gains are. Disappointed, disappointing.

Which will achieve what?

Me too. Out of the three teams we've played in a row, Hawks look the most threatening. Ominous when they get the ball. Not much we can do with the cattle at our disposal, frustrating as it may be.

ANB ... looking good. Another week or two and he could be knocking on the door. Good to see Jack W amongst it.

So much angst over swapping a few fringe players for some other fringe players. 3 of the 4 dropped contributed next to nothing last week. Mitchie and Jones would be an upgrade on JKH and Newton, at least the way they've played recently, Grimes, we'll have to see, and Bail will probably be sub, and snaffle a goal when he comes on. Jones and Grimes, at least, have been very good at Casey, and the Roos ethos is, if nothing else, play your role, work hard, do what you're supposed to, and we'll support you. But the most important for me is that it's not so much about who comes in, as who goes out. The message has to be, if you don't perform, we can't guarantee your place. I'd rather be bringing in NQR players to keep pressure on those already in the team, than let mediocre performances be enough for players to hold their place.

And another interesting article from an unexpected source, Chip in The Australian: WADA's appeal to place more faith in Dank's word

Anyone know what these cases were? Quick search didn't turn anything up.

Incredible. I always expected it ... but still really shocked. Just confirms what we all felt, and confirms what more than a few have been saying about the Tribunal and its judgement.

Wouldn't be unhappy with no change unless it's for an injury, JKH as sub. Agree that JKH might be due for a spell at Casey, but don't see that anyone there would really be an upgrade. I'd leave JKH in until Viney is ready to come back. Alternatively, JKH for Matt Jones. We know Jones' shortcomings, but he would at least bring a bit of movement and pace.

That's what makes the opposition good in the first place.

Just when I think Demonland can't be even more ill-informed, along comes a thread like this. Next we'll be hearing that the earth is flat because, heh, you only have to look around you and obviously it's flat, what were they thinking. Given that we out-scored Sydney in the second half, you could - if you were so inclined - take that as evidence that our boys have more stamina and endurance than Sydney, and that that's down to the success of the diet.

That's right, we're losing against last year's grand finalist because of our game plan.

One word: Skills

Some odd comments on these pages. More than a few pushing their personal barrows, irrespective of the reality. Happy with the changes, the new ins have earned it, and it would seem that the outs have earned it as well.

Can people stop going on about Riley. There are question marks on his disposal and his fitness. He does one thing well. As we're seeing, that's not enough.

Do something with the ball once he gets it.

Goes to the heart of it.

Exactly. Look at Stringer. Plenty of "I told you so's" around now, but at the time, no-one knew if he could come back from a badly broken leg or not. So, come draft time, caution prevailed and he slipped a little.

No, helmets don't stop concussion in sport any more than seat belts stop road fatalities. FFS.

I'd suggest you do one of two things: a) provide us with links to the studies and research that validates the above b) delete your post

Hasn't stopped you.

He posts here all the time. Visit the Watts thread.

Don't know that we'll be dropping JKH with Kent out.

Could be anything, especially at VFL level. He could have been given a run-with role, moved back (where the ball/game wasn't by all reports), rested ... maybe someone has some more specific info, but by anyone's standards, 15 disposals in a half of footy is more than decent. Follows up on being the highest possession-getter the week before, so he seems to be responding. Certainly rather that than a Harmes getting only 9 possessions (might also be a story behind that of course ...) Just feel Jimmy T will turn out fine, maybe even more than fine. It takes some players longer than others for it all to click, especially mentally. Of course, I could well be wrong ...

None of us are shareholders. You've got tickets on yourself. We saw (again) yesterday arguably the best player of a generation: Nat Fyfe - wasn't even taken in the first round. The draft = informed guesswork. Very happy with Todd's work.