Lost Highway

Don't know about the Hun, but the article in the Age was as dreadful a piece of 'journalism' as one is likely to read. There was hardly one relevant fact in it; the word 'rumours' was used many times. We had unnamed 'sources' (saying things like his monthly pay had already been used to pay back debts) and such hyperbole as 'half of Australia' knows about his gambling problem, which later in the article became 'all Australia'. Things like the failure of the restaurant were thrown in when there was no link established to his gambling debts. Furthermore, there was no reason given or even hinted as to why anyone should be the least bit interested in anything this nonce does or does not do. Junk.

Dunn is not for the drop, he played quite well today and is presently the only player anywhere near 'tall' for forward duties of any kind, even if intermittent. Bennell is not for the drop, he has speed, balance and class and newfound guts. Things look good for us when he gets the ball. The only change should be to bring in a tall - Spencer or Martin. No need to bring in Rivers, and I'm not sure he's right anyway. I don't think they'll bring in Watts yet, against such a formidable side. Newton won't get another go. So, who to drop for a tall? The only ones I'd consider would be Bartram, who admittedly has been OK, Bruce who seemed to get quite a lot of the ball today and will simply be considered too experienced a defender to drop, and Trengove on the excuse of needing a rest. But I like the idea of the young guys playing and I think Trengove has played well most of the time - he was just about our best in round 1 and up to today was superior to Scully, who played really well today. Who ever said he can't kick? I wouldn't mind betting they'll go with Jamar alone in the ruck one more time, but I'd rather make room for Martin or Spencer. If Sylvia goes down, which would be a joke, the club won't have to agonise.

Good observations, particularly about Petterd's kicking action - the ball hangs for a long time in the air before boot makes contact. Too much room for error I think. Dunn did look OK across half forward, but I'm not sure Bate is all that good. He gets a couple, but doesn't impose himself on the game like Sylvia can. I worry that this short forward line will be impotent against a top side. I hope no one suggests Newton as the answer this week, as the players who are there now are at least cohesive. Morton might make a good option when he returns, but let's hope Watts isn't rushed in against the second top side. The one thing that could be tried is bringing in Spencer to give Jamar some time up forward.

Fair enough, I was a bit extreme. I'm very happy after watching the game actually. I thought there was enough stuff along the lines of 'Newton will be brought in' yesterday, mostly illogical. So you have my apology. But I do think something that's just hearsay shouldn't be lumbered with the phrase 'on good authority'.

What utter nonsense this has turned out to be. It was utter rubbish the moment you heard it. Threads like this I can't stand. The words 'on good authority' have no meaning, except that you can bet that it's no authority at all. That phrase is like the word 'rumours' that appeared so many times in that hopeless piece of 'journalism' in yesterday's Age about Fevola's gambling problem.

I see some posters still think Juice will be called in 'to help Jamar'. What, pretend Scully's got the flu so neither he nor the club will have to suffer an embarrassment? Perhaps the club has actually decided to [censored] Richmond with C-L-A-S-S, no matter what size it is. An absence of Newton means more class - it's intrinsically true, true by definition, call it what you like. If they are going to perform a stunt on Sunday to bring in support for Jamar, don't forget Spencer is still an emergency; I wonder why. I would call him up ahead of Newton, despite Newton's trying hard last week (within his profound limitations). He's a genuine ruckman by height, would not be completely outclassed by a faded and pretty useless Simmons or another youngster, and would allow Jamar to have a good spell up forward to take a few marks. This makes more sense to me than bringing Juice in at the last minute. Spencer needs games and here's an apparently less challenging one for him. But I don't think Scully will be pulled.

Unlike some here, I have no great desire to see Newton succeed. He's had long enough, and all I get from him is a bitter, resentful feeling that he is a lost cause. However, he has tried a bit in the last two weeks and would be very stiff to be dropped from a winning side against a team that might just make him look better than he is. He did little last match, but also did little wrong, bar a dropped mark or two. He showed a bit of aggro. I very much doubt that he will rise to the occasion, but he'll probably be given the chance, one more chance - in that sense, yes, it's Juice's week. There is simply no other tall-ish player to bring in this week, and no real urgency about doing so. I reckon this might be his last match, something I won't regret. Before the end of this season he and Miller will be extremely redundant. Hope I eat humble pie after he gets the bag some are hoping for - another week of footballing life for him.

Good points. I vaguely suggested Rivers could be tried out up forward a few weeks ago. If Garland can hold down a spot in defence, why not try it? Alternatively, try Garland up forward. You have to remember, though, that neither of these two are TALL in the way Watts is tall, or Jamar or Martin. But they're much neater footballers than Dunn or Bate (who can't mark in an overhead contest) and would add more to the attack than Newton offers. At least Juice appears to be trying, but he's not the tall we need. The Richmond game shouldn't be taken lightly, but it's the sort of game where Garland or Rivers could be tried out up forward. Throw in Sylvia instead of Bate (but they won't) and you have something half decent.

The real question is: Is Grimes the best player in the AFL with only 15 games beside his name? He looks it to me. As good as Green, Davey, anyone, in the Melbourne side. He's a monty for the captaincy.

I hope you never get a job coaching a footy side. You could be very wrong. In most ways this is a harder match than the previous two; we've gone from having nothing to lose to having quite a lot to lose, especially pride, confidence and a sense of progress. A loss, or even a very narrow win, might set us back. I loathe this sort of attitude - it's probably what the Pies and their supporters were thinking after round 1. They scraped home luckily and suffered a morale sapping loss and let-down the next week.

Trengove was quite good, and that is all. He's played pretty well in all three matches - the first was his best; probably the most consistent young player so far. He'll get a nomination sooner or later, but this thread is ridiculous. When looking at 'gun' youngsters, don't forget that Grimes hasn't played many games - not even a full season's worth? Is there a better player in the comp with only that many matches under his belt? Scully didn't look great today, although not shocking. I think there are two factors in this. 1. He may not be as not as fit as he should be, having come back from a serious injury. Forget about that beep test rubbish; it's not relevant when you've missed as many weeks as he did. I don't think he did what you call a 'full pre-season'. 2. He's not playing in the right position. He's an on-baller, not a wingman. In videos of his play from last year, he seemed to have a license to go where he likes. I think he'll be fine, but at this stage Trengove is showing a bit more.

Miller? Forget it. There, forgotten. Bate probably won't be dropped, despite his relative mediocrity, neither will Bruce - actually Bruce improved over the match and though his delivery is shonky, he can play a good defensive role. Bartram and Dunn made a fair fist of things, although Dunn's decision making and delivery/disposal in the forward area was shocking. But he is mobile and took quite a few marks. I'd keep him. The only players who should be considered for Sylvia's place if he's fit are the three B's: Bate, Bartram and Bruce. Newton might be considered for the drop, but his place in the side really depends on who they're going to put in as talls. He shouldn't be dropped for Sylvia. There are two things to address: 1. A tall forward 2. Help for Jamar but I'm not sure the club will view those as vital for the Tigers match. I'm not sure Newton is either of those things mentioned above, not a good one, anyway, but if he is to be flicked who would come in? I see only 4 possibilities: Rivers, Martin, Spencer and Watts. Rivers' fitness is not known. And what about Spencer's? It might be said that Richmond are not a threat, but I think Jamar should be given more support - he seemed more tired today than last week. I don't know if the club will see it that way. If Spencer comes in as a second ruck, who would be dropped - a small? Hard to think of one that deserves the drop after a win, and he would be replaced by Sylvia if fit. If Newton is dropped regardless, Spencer would not be a suitable straight swap, if you ask me. Martin and Rivers (the latter is not exactly tall) are both defenders but Rivers could be tried out in attack or Martin could be tried out as back-up ruckman. And Watts? Does anyone know if he is likely to be 'ready' for AFL football? If he's anything near ready, the Tigers might be the right mob to try him out. Well, I reckon the club might keep an unchanged side after a win, with Newton being the only one considered for replacement by one of the four above. If they drop him and don't bring in a tall they've got rocks in their heads. I'd only bring in Sylvia if he is completely ready. Edit - I'm wondering about Scully now. He wasn't that good today, or so it seemed to me. Anyone else got a thought on him? I think it would be bad management and damaging to his confidence to drop him from a winning side. He was OK in the first two matches. I'm not sure the wing is his position.

1. Frawley - awe-inspiring; I'd like to see him take on Brown, having seen him take apart Riewoldt in the last game of 2009 before he was shifted. Best big defender we've had since a guy called Paul Prymke was cut down by injury - he was going to be great. 2. Junior - what an effort; anyone who said he's not in the best 22 should be eating their words. 3. Grimes - how many games has he played? He's as brilliant as anyone in the AFL with similar experience; he's probably the best of them. Next captain. 4. Bennell - pace, balance and can hold a mark overhead. 5. Jamar - AA tap ruckman; can take on anyone. But should have more help next weekend. 6. Davey - still not 100% if you ask me, but delivers superbly Honourable mentions - Bail, Warnock, Trengove, Green and maybe Dunn and Bartram for players who have been run-down by many, including me.

First, I'm sick of reading about how we wouldn't have a hope against a top 4 side. If so, this could also be said about most of the bottom 8 teams, and is simply not an appropriate response to the form the team has shown in the last two weeks. Besides, at this stage I'm not sure anyone could name the top 4 sides; it's still in flux. Six months ago, Collingwood and Adelaide played a memorable final; we've lost by a kick to one of them and beaten the other by coming from behind. If the team can keep playing with as much spirit and dash as they have in the last two weeks they should be able to knock over a middling side like Carlton, Essendon or Sydney, and that would be great progress. Even more telling will be the growing idea that a Melbourne victory over one of them would not be totally unexpected. Second, the mistakes made today were shared by the two teams, and made to look worse by the very poor kicking for goal. But this wasn't confined to our match, not by any means. St Kilda wins many of their matches by choking the opposition, and today Melbourne's tackling choked Adelaide. Forget about the beauty of the football or the lack of it; only winning matters at the moment. But when you can remember plenty of fluid, quick movement of the ball from defence to attack, even when goals were not coming, it tells you something good is going on. Third, for mine, two of Melbourne's best three were Junior (his goal was icing on a superb, hard, captain's effort) and Grimes (he has pace, balance, and can spear it 50m); Frawley obviously the other - a giant figure now. How the Hun could not name Grimes in the list of best is gob-smackingly ignorant - like the Age's failure to mention Jamar last week; he was BOG. But having named the best three in my eyes, it has to be said that it was a very even performance - the stats show that a couple of Crow players had mid-30s possessions, but that many more Dee players had over 20. Fourth, Dunn should not be allowed near the forward line with decision-making and disposal such as he displayed today. It spoilt a fair effort from him. Newton is still a big question mark, but he did show endeavour. At this point, we still need a tall target, and I have pushed Miller out of my mind altogether. The only others who could be tried out are Martin and Rivers, both defenders, and Watts who is always in cotton wool, or is it moth-balls? But what the hell, the youngsters in the team needed a win today for self-belief. To be 2-2 if we beat the Toiges will be great for the side's confidence. The question for the doubters and pessimists is this: Does this really look like the same team as the team of the last two years?

Big Carl is king of the dirties, by a mile. In the days when the tribunal actually gave real punishments, he just kept coming back for more and bigger ones. A 4-week suspension would have no effect on him at all. Matthews a distant second. Sheedy not bad, either.

I haven't read this thread with great care, so he might have got a mention somewhere already... But can I just put in a word for Brereton, for the day he sort of accidentally-on-purpose stood on Graeme Yates' head during a game (might have been a final) out at Waverley in about 1990? Anyone remember that? Funny how Yater's head so rudely got in the way, between the ground and Dermie's boot, as Dermie was levering himself up from a melee which the ump had signalled to be a ball-up. Maybe he wasn't the dirtiest, but he was among the nastiest, most offensive presences on any football field.

I agree; he's good but no world beater. Doesn't have enough arrows in his quiver - unlike Petterd - but has the turning circle of a Landcruiser. Can't mark overhead, as a rule. I'm not denying he's an important if limited player, but under-done he's just not giving enough. Perhaps if he retains his place, he'll show something next week.

Very sound comments. A game by Newton in which he did not disgrace himself is a rare thing. He did what he was asked without making us groan. He contested well in the ruck where his spring made up for height difference and even Jolly by no means towelled him. He supported Jamar's Herculean effort soundly and kicked a goal that he might normally have fluffed. He could be given another chance on the strength of it. If Sylvia's really ready to go, then his selection is the only certainty. Rivers would be good, but he's not a certainty like Sylvia. Bate and Bartram are the most likely drops if you ask me. If confidence was shown after the drubbing in round 1, it's hardly likely that the selectors will go for the doctor after such a good team performance. They'll look on the positive side of players like Bruce, Bennell and Newton, who all gave something. Bate gave pretty close to nothing, but mistaking him for McKenzie didn't help much! His hair seems a lighter shade of red. Statements about how he's a slow starter are just plain crazy. Let him start slowly at Casey if it's true.

On the right track. But I'd drop Bate before Strauss - see my previous post, above.

Have just read through this thread. First, the call for Frawley to go is imbecilic. Ditto Scully. Second, Bennell will be put to the sword by the replays; he showed spark, real spark on the forward line and should be in the side once more but on notice. Bruce has been making bloopers with disposal for a couple of years now, but can play a very tight defensive game, which he did yesterday. The only reason to drop Newton after a serviceable game backing up Jamar and getting hands to the ball on the forward line is to make way for a real tall like Spencer or Martin, or Rivers. Adelaide's rucks don't seem formidable so maybe Jamar can do it again and Spencer is not needed. But Newton, it must be said, while not doing a lot, did little wrong for a change. I liked the way he gave Ball (was it him?) a real shove when he was injured or cramped or whatever. Bate was pretty awful. Talk of picking Garland already is plain silly; the reasons are obvious. They won't make big changes to a nearly-winning side. Yes, Sylvia must come in if ready. Rivers may be ready, and I suggest that if Newton is to be dropped Rivers get a go at CHF. But these two shouldn't be rushed in - the side is in building mode not maintenance mode; we don't have ladder points to defend a week from the finals. The most likely drops are Bartram who only came in late, but was OK; Bate who is not fit and playing like a spud; Newton who may not be needed but will play if no other tall comes in to the forward line/ruck; maybe Strauss, but the 'play the kids' approach is clearly important to the match committee and Bailey, and he does move well. To sum up: I would bring in Sylvia and Rivers but only if absolutely fit to play. To make way for them, Bate or Bartram (prefer Bate, and Bartram could fill Bennell's role in defence) for Sylvia, and Newton for Rivers. If the perception is that Adelaide's rucks are weak and Jamar pulled up OK then neither Spencer nor Martin need to be selected.

Actually, I think the Crows are collectively suffering from that hopeless loss to C'wood in the finals, which they squandered in much worse fashion than our loss yesterday. They had trouble scoring, handballed into and out of their arses, and I think they still do. Their two bad losses will leave them very shaky with the prospect of a nerve-wracking game against the so called bottom feeders of the AFL on the MCG. They'll be tight, we should be loose, so to speak. We should be stronger if Sylvia comes in, maybe Maric or Cheney. Not sure who they'd drop, but I'd suggest Bate and Strauss, maybe the unchanging, always-caught Jones. Bennell's balls have been questioned, but he might be stung into some kind of statement, and could be a live-wire on the forward line. Doubt they'll drop two, though, from a near-winning side. Melbourne would be very disappointed, but that should not affect their game; it's the Crows who are up against it away from home and seriously questioning their own ability. They'll be worried. I've gone from pessimism to optimism after seeing the way the side can play. I keep seeing Mckenzie in the mind's eye, streaming through the middle or laying tackles; that bloke is good. I loathe the Crows, whose supporters are actually worse than C'wood's. A win would be great, with Richmond to come.

One of the pleasures of the game was the very long periods of silence amidst the Army. Even at the end their rapture was half-baked, almost embarrassed. They were premiers in their own minds couple of days ago; big come-down for them yesterday. I think they had close to their best team out there, and didn't deserve to win. I can't see any real improvement since their drubbing by Geelong in the finals. Unfortunately, their win yesterday reminded me of their undeserved escape against the Crows in the finals. But it's clear that Ball and Jolly have added bugger-all to their prospects.

Hear hear. I've said in a couple of threads that he is in the elite of bounce rucks. He proved it again yesterday. His only weakness has been injury. I seriously wish he'd kicked a goal when he broke from the pack at the Punt Rd end. But he did everything else right, and his palming to our onballers was sublime.

Dunn OK, to stay. Only really riled me when he did a pathetic kick towards goal from the boundary in q4. That should have become a goal opportunity but was rushed away with ease. Newton did little but then he did little wrong. I hate to say it, but he was quite serviceable in the ruck when he had to give Jamar a well earned rest. He rarely marked but got the ball down a few times. If Spencer isn't to play, he might be the best bet to continue as Jamar's sub when the big man has to rest. Bate useless and should be the only forward to get the flick. He's not ready, and when he's like that he is amazingly spud-like.

Is good, but not FF. Green for FF till someone else arrives - Fitzp., Gawn? Not Jurrah either. Was the best forward on the ground, but BOG was Jamar by a mile.