Webber

Actually they are conclusive.....they DON'T prevent concussion. They help prevent scalp and cranial injuries, e.g. lacerations and skull fractures. Concussion is a product of the brain 'sloshing' within the cranial cavity, which in turn is a product of the head coming to a sudden 'stop', generally termed 'decleration forces' such as with any of the hits we see that result in concussion. Helmets don't prevent this.

I don't get that Spencer has 'half the ability' of Jamar?!?!?!?! He gets his hands on it around the ground about 4 times as much, and then does something with it. Faster, better mark, as good a kick, more aggressive, more competitive. How does he have 'half the ability'?

With all respect to Mark Jamar, and his loyalty and work over the years, can anybody here give a justification why he should play next week, or perhaps even ever again?. We all know Gawn is the obvious long term prospect, and is tearing it up at Casey, and should get a gig next week, particularly given GWS youth, but don't forget Jake Spencer. I know he looks like he can't kick or move, but in the end of season games he played last year, he was of MUCH greater value than Jamar. He is in fact quick, had very good efficiency with his kicking (despite the woeful heart in mouth style), takes a good mark, and is a competitive animal. I'd like to see them both in the team somehow. The personal attacks on Jamar are gutless and disrespectful. He's not cutting the mustard as a footballer, but why don't we just leave it at that?

Out:* Pederson (completely ineffectual), * Jamar, and never to play again. With a midfield as ratty as ours, there's just no value in having a tap ruckman who can't take a mark, get a kick or even make a contest. And he hasn't for 3 years. He's not AFL standard. If Neeld is true to the rebuild, just develop Gawn and Spencer from now. * Toumpas (horribly lacking in confidence, poor kid). In : Gawn, McKenzie, Kent (has run and mongrel). Sellar to share the ruck. Or Clark, cos he really gets bored down near the goals. Would love to put Watts back in, but he wasn't given a chance to redeem himself, so I don't see how he can be reinstated. Very odd indeed.

Except that would be a different article, with an entirely different purpose. One which he is not engaged in. You're criticising the article for what it isn't, and clearly has no desire to be.....

WAClark, he's written a number of footy books, all of which are IMO excellent. Try 'the Call' which is a lyrical dramatisation of the Tom Wills story. He also delivered the 2011 John Button oration on Tom Wills, beautifully arguing that his cultural significance to Australia is akin to that of Ned Kelly. Also his retrospective look back at the 1970 Grand Final is great reading.

I urge all of you to read Flanner's piece in The Age today. Simply the best football writer we have. Makes a mockery of the volume and vitreole in the rest of the media.....

It's no longer matter of judging how much worse we are than our opposition by goals per game, but by goals per quarter. I guessed before the game we were a 5 goal per quarter worse team than Essendon, and thus undervalued the Bombers! Considering the Eagles aren't in the greatest form, I reckon 4 goals a quarter, so a 16 goal loss. We're gonna set SOOOOO many records this year......

Greg Healy?

If you read the VFL review on the club website, the raves are for Tapscott and Bail. They will both come in..... Nothing is surer.

Death by media or gutless scapegoating. Bit of both probably, but I still don't understand why CS has anything to do with these first two games. Change for its own sake, and really nothing actually will.

Couldn't agree more dee-luded. As the club have stated emphatically and emotionally over the past 2 days.....that's players, coaches, president and admin, the thing they have is unity. They're ALL saying the same thing. So NOBODY at the coalface is suggesting the CEO, or the coach, or any of the other targets here are to blame. They're devastated, and they want to deal with it together. It's just stupid for some of you on here to imagine you know who's to blame, why they're to blame, that they should be executed, and then we can all know it's going to get better. Emotional witch-hunting of the most destructive kind, and fracturing of solidarity in the most ridiculous and irrational way. Pure reactionary change, with not one shred of current evidence that it is what the club wants or requires. The club says, as a collective, that they want to fight their way out TOGETHER. Why shouldn't we believe them?

Gillies already has a disease.......just not sure what it's called, but it's highly bloody infectious. For those who want the following..... Dunn in : he's got a hammie, so 3 weeks minimum. Watts out cos you think he's uncompetitive : he ain't alone from the last 2 weeks, but he is one of our potentially most important players, and he HAS shown this last year.In buckets. Short memories people..... It's just all about confidence. Sellar is a lesser example of this. He was reliable and efficient down back last year when he was there, and is basically a barometer of confidence. Magner or Couch in : he's an ineligible rookie, FFS. Nicholson out : the kid is no Brett Lovett, but he's remaining competitive whatever the situation, and there's a bare handful of them out there. I just don't get why he gets such a slagging on here. Any of Taggert, Fitzpatrick, or Barry in : you CANNOT be serious.

Oh, and Neil Mitchell is a shock jock with a very thin veneer of respectability....

Fitzpatrick injured, so not eligible, AND has no form. Magner ineligible due to being a rookie. If you suggest changes, make them informed.

Well said lowdown. You're definitely going glass half full, but from everything we've been hearing from the club, and looking at the list objectively, this is a far more logical appraisal than the 'blow it all up' glass half empties on here and elsewhere....

Confidence. Pure and simple.... he was reliable and efficient in defence last year, and was resurrecting his career IMO. Gillies on the other hand has managed to become the worst player I have ever seen for MFC.

The worst thing is actually that he allowed it to be filmed. Like he's trying to make his efforts public. A very odd and very concerning act of desperation to somehow call of the dogs who are calling for his head...

I'm not sure she does b59!!!

Cos you're scarred by your dad's betrayal of loyalty to the dees??? As kids we like our parents to be reliable and consistent. At the moment I'm sure he's happy though!

Cowboy, you based your support on a charismatic player and against the arrogant vibe from Essendon. A very personal response, and against family trend. Too good!

Great story hbt. I was 22 when sitting at Waverley watching the same. Who would've known Jimmy would become what he did from that day? Brett Lovett was just great to watch. So balanced, brilliant reader of the play and decision maker. Best midfielder to have lived on the half back flank ever! Those of us born in the sixties were very very excited during the 87 finals, needless to say.

Bloody technology!!!! Before the meltdown, I'd just asked people to give their stories as to how they came to be MFC supporters, and it was great reading to those of you who had already posted. Parents, friends, grandparents, location, rebellion all having been reasons. Keep putting your stories up, and any other anecdotes of supporting passion. It's both fascinating AND good therapy, and a distraction from the frustration of Sunday's stinking debacle. So keep them coming!

I agree with all you say longsuffering. There is a disease of second guessing and confusion amongst this group as to how to play. Footy is so quick these days that decisions have to be made rapidly and with confidence. Our boys make them sooooo slowly and with no confidence at all. I hate all this talk of them being spineless and lazy, cos it's just not logical. ANY AFL listed player, elite skills or not, will show the right stuff if they have confidence and belief in their teammates, and the way they collectively play the game. As a TEAM. My point is, what or who is responsible for their collective inability to respond competitively when they're on the paddock?