Webber

The Eagles will not win the flag this year, and you know this, so it doesn't support your argument. Having a bad run of injuries MAY discount you for 2016, but (again), how many teams have won from 10th or lower the previous year? Facts this time please.

Your whole answer lives or dies on the idea that the AFL 'would not risk its franchises being in a second division'. You talk about this 'franchise' idea like Collingwood are Man U and North Melbourne are East Scunthorpe. Their is no such franchise domination in the AFL. Of MUCH more concern and value (monetary as well) to the AFL will be to maintain existing supporter bases, and grow the fidelity to each. This all smacks of an 'us and them' mentality, when clearly (and the AFL knows this)it is not in their interests to foster a monopolistic competition. It is for precisely this reason that the salary cap and draft were incorporated. Who devised them?....the big, bad AFL!

For that year! But as old55 put very well, when was the last time a team won the flag from 10th or lower the previous year? I'm asking for a real answer BTW.

I see absolutely no logic in any of this reply. The competition is no longer about year to year chances, maybe it never was, but certainly not now. Injuries would have to mount over a 2 or 3 year period to damage a success window, and injuries are always an intangible. The loyalty comment is just crazy. Why do we have a salary cap? Your suggestion of player movement means a player worth 500k will move to a tier 1 club, leaving a 500k salary hole for the tier 2 club. They will get a player to take that salary from where? Make sense!

Well stated old55, as distinct from some of the other 'kneejerks' on here

Explain how Schwab's proposal is unfair?

Football is no longer a year to year plan, or even a 2 year to 2 year proposition, however much you want it to be!!!! We won't win the flag this year, and we won't next year. It has become a 3 to 5 year development cycle, and Schwab's plan recognises and accomodates this beautifully.

All the posts making comparisons to the NFL and EPL are ridiculous, paranoid reactions. The EPL is the most illogical comparison, for one simple fact.....it has no salary cap and no draft, therefore NO possibility of fairness.... NIL. It is a fantastically dull competition for that reason, and bears no philosophical comparison to the AFL. It's only attraction is that you get the best players across about 6 clubs, which arguably creates an elite 'representative' standard. But it is just woeful for supporters outside the main 6. It's a classic monopoly. Brendan Schwab's idea is inspired. He has managed to created a situation where every team still plays every other, keeps the salary cap and draft (of which supporters of the AFL should be enormously proud when compared to other sporting competitions worldwide), and rewards consistent on field performance. The real attraction, which is stated in the article, is that it brings relevance to pretty much EVERY game, and that means relevance for the future. We do not have that in the AFL now. The latter third of the season for up to 6 clubs, currently becomes an exercise in playing out the season, where cynically jockeying for draft picks becomes a soul-destroying exercise. One of it's clear attractions for me is that it does away with the ham-fisted fixture massaging that season to season gives some clubs an easier/more difficult run than others. Arguably, we have an easy run this year, but I can admit it is unfair. The idea that this evens out over several seasons, is nonsensical for the very reason that teams rise and fall over this same period. Schwab's idea is much fairer from the fixturing perspective. Change will come to the AFL, and with expansion, there is nothing surer than that the competition WILL split. Schwab's method as to how to do this, seems elegant and fair to me.

3 weeks is the MINIMUM requirement for the mildest of hammies. Tapscott's looked in the grade 2 area to me, definitely not grade 1. He WILL NOT PLAY on Monday, and he won't play for Casey either, given it's on Saturday. As a physiotherapist, recurrent hamstrings are one of our major sporting bugbears, and to avoid them there is a basic 3 week minimum rule. The incidence of retear grows exponentially as you bring them back before this. The ONLY exceptions are obviously elimination game situations, such as a grand final, where you accept the substantially elevated risk. Dealing with recurrent hamstring tearing so often becomes a career problem to manage, it just isn't worth it for a home and away game. Let's hope he's a chance for the following week.

With all respect to you Captain Jack, and Matty Bate, I cannot remember him taking a contested mark. He actually struggles to take an overhead mark uncontested, particularly on a fast lead, or if he is under any contested pressure. He is able to create a forward presence in attack, largely as a link, and is a beautiful set shot kick, and pretty good kick on the run, and good handballer. He has no right foot though, and is just half a yard slow for today's game. It may be becoming too late for him to improve on his deficits, but let's hope not. His stats this year haven't been good when he has played, and this is reflected in him being at Casey. I hope he finds a way back in.

Whether people on here like it or not, Bartram will be selected if fit. He is undoubtedly highly rated by the selection committee, and one of the first chosen each week. Strauss got the gig in place of the injured Barty. He did pretty well last week, but he will make way. Luke Tapscott WILL NOT play. There is NO such thing as a 'less than 3 week hammie', except in elimination type finals. Ricky Petterd was dropped for Howe. Howe was excellent, therefore Petterd will not displace him. I like Petterd, and I think he will be a successful part of our future, but it will not be this week. Unless....... Gawn came in for Newton, and to cover the 3 bomber talls. Now this is where it will be interesting to see how they go. If it is felt that we don't need the extra tall against the Pies, then he will make way. Again, it's no slight on big Maximus, he did quite well, but this may be better for team balance. But for who? Of those who were in the best for Casey, it probably has to be Petterd, and possibly as sub. As much as I want to see Blease, it won't be this week, on account of balance. Tom McDonald would be a chance maybe, for some more height options in the backline? I'm tipping, Out: Strauss, Gawn. In: Bartram, Petterd.

And there it is.......beating Collingwood would invert the whole equation, but is it even possible?

You're so right. I lived in London for 11 years until returning to Melbourne 3 years ago, and was amazed at the over-regulated, conformist Nanny-state that Australia/Melbourne had become. There has been no let up in this bizarre push for sanitised expression, as evidenced by this recent discussion of swearing fines. This is just staggering garbage. It was bad enough that I watched people wait at pedestrian crossings for the 'green man' without a car anywhere on the horizon, as if transfixed by their lack of options, but what now? Everybody saying 'fudge', and 'golly'? FFS!!! What are we afraid of in this country? Individuality? Imagination? Subversion? And this media frenzy over the Majak Daw abuse, how can that ever be an issue of police, or legal intervention? It's a crowd, and the crowd should deal with it. Or are we too numbed by our powerlessness in the Nanny state? If the brainless idiot who was abusing Daw was standing anywhere near me, he would only have said it once, and he wouldn't have wanted to stay at the footy. This would not require violence or even the threat of such, but just a modicom of social interaction with a few friends. Let's show some guts and conviction in protecting our rights and the rights of others.

Second this. Anybody who can't see his abilities as a midfield utility along with his wildly improved rucking, just isn't watching. His speed and ground work are superior to any of the ruckman mentioned above, including Jamar. He was second in the Grand Final sprint 3 years ago, and I would imagine he is top 5 fastest on our list. That he is now getting to show that, and as a ruckman, is very exciting. By season's end, he will be absolute core selection for this team, Jamar or no.

Agree with all of the above. He and Jamie Bennell were thrown in the deep end when they first arrived as barely 18 year olds. Nev has come on in leaps and bounds this year. To me, he has realised that where he can involve himself in the game....being tackles and contests, it creates the opportunity for proper possessions. This is happening, and his confidence is growing accordingly. I would like to think that his competitiveness at the contested ball will become a constant, because everything else flows from there. This holds true for others on the list, who are realising that being in a 'contest' for the ball, and working hard on the opposition with the ball, means you'll be much more likely to get touches.....seems simple.

I noticed this too.....and there has been a precious lack of it at MFC. He runs, he tackles, he marks, kick well, and makes good decisions with good timing. This kid is the real deal.

His kicking out of the goalsquare is simply a rapier.....once it becomes more consistent, there'll be lace out [censored]-hitting all over the place!

Don't forget his left boot.....which, like Tom Scully's, will find it's measure against the big boys in 10 or so games. He's got all the tricks this boy, we did VERY VERY well in picking he and Michael Evans up.

Looks a couple of inches taller, and a country mile quicker.....no disrespect to Shane Valenti. I was a fan.

Jimmy, you are simply an extraordinary human being.

A couple of years ago, I read a retrospective analysis of the correlation between injuries and season's end ladder position at each club, over something like a five year period. More specifically, the total accumulated games absent through injury, for the entire list (not just the best 22) were compared club to club over a season. The relationship between this and ladder position was remarkably linear. That is, the top teams had the fewest games lost to injury and vice versa, and there was virtually no interruption to that relationship, from top to bottom. Now this is not an attempt at excuse making, but merely an academic observation, and obviously there are many factors that fit with the analysis. The most patent being that a young list will suffer more injuries because of less mature bodies, similarly an aging list suffer from fatigue and wear injuries. Put this alongside the reality that 23 to 28 year olds have more experience, honed skills, wiser heads, and it all points to a conspiring set of realities. If you think deeper into it, as the injured players accumulate, you lose the insurance for out of form players that a fit list provides. If you have no pressure on players from underneath, then out of form players keep their spots. Also, continuity is lost, and it is hard to maintain a situation where players know each others games when you have a heavily changing personnel. Losses come, confidence ebbs, and it becomes a tough gig. This is the situation the MFC faces right now, and from a purely statistical viewpoint, our season will be very poor as a consequence. The silver lining of course, is we get more than a glimpse at the fringe/new players, and what they might give us for the future.

I totally agree, and I think we are better placed than the clubs you mentioned for the future 3 to 6 years from now. I didn't say anything about how they are coached and managed. That may well in fact change if it needs to, and we may need a better tactician and leader. That has nothing to do with their potential, merely what we are seeing from them now.

very well put btdemon.....teams lacking in confidence and results, and we surely are, become whipping boys for all manner of reasons. We ARE perceived as soft, but we HAVE seen this team play hard contested footy (both games vs. Collingwood last year?). Our skills have been lamentable recently, but we HAVE seen them play skilled attractive football (Adelaide this year). This is an issue of maturity, confidence, and consistency. I'll completely agree that for whatever reason, we're not seeing the best out of this team's potential, but I'm confident it will turn around. Jabs and blows like these sledges, shambolic tribunal decisions and injury lists will be grist to the mill for this team over the next 6 years. We need to keep the faith, because the youth nucleus of this team are hard, contest-loving footballers,(and that includes Jack Watts, whose aggression is notching up weekly) and will have success. It will not be this year, and in fact with our games lost through injury, statistically we are going to have a shocker of a year, but this is a team which WILL have success, sledging or not, and the slings and arrows will just toughen their resolve.

He has FAILED??????? This simply must be a joke!

Bailey said Gawn was in the mix BEFORE Saturday's Casey game, and then he goes BOG for Casey. Gawn WILL play on Friday, and I for one am excited about seeing him being the tallest AFL player running around in Round 11. (Sandilands still out). I would suggest that Howe being named in the best assures him a gig also, particularly in light of Bate and Petterd's form sitting somewhere near the S bend. Trengove is an obvious, and Scully will be the unknown til Thursday. Given the state of our season, these are exciting in's for a bit of a glimpse into the future, No? Just keep repeating....silver lining, silver lining, silver lining, silver lining.........