Webber

Nathan Jones' 17 year old brother is tearing it up at the Dandenong Stingrays' He's just been on the TAC future stars show. Assuming he's of the same attitude and application as his bro, grab him now recruitment team. I want more Jonesies. Brothers of most of our other players need not apply.

With apologies to those few umpires of quality and professionalism, the rest are making the top level of our game close to unwatchable.

Has ticked all the boxes this year....... Gives truth to the idea that players improve with maturity, in every sense, and that we have to be patient with some of them. All class Colin Garland, and a true leader now.

Never gonna happen.....doesn't have the desire.

Really bloody good!

Kent is very promising. He did one thing on Sunday that sold it for me. He chased an opponent from inside our 50 to the wing, wasn't going to run him down, but didn't drop his intensity, and ultimately gave him a bit of body after he'd disposed, just to justify the chase and make his opponent earn the possession. I sat there wondering if I'd ever seen Jack Watts do that. And sat, and wondered.........and sat.......and wondered.......

My feelings too. Something a little precious about Paul Roos, but he does have a very good record. So does Rodney Eade however, and if you think about what he did with what he started with (at the dogs AND the swans), he's clearly a master at DEVELOPING the successful unit from scratch, which obviously fits the bill for us. He's always struck me too as having an enormous hunger for footy and coaching, without needing acknowledgement. My favourite by some margin. Have heard also from an insider that John Worsfold is in the top 3 wish list, but is entirely reliant on him not staying at WCE, and then making the leap east, away from his domestic troubles. Thus it hasn't hit the rumour mill very hard yet.

His 2 goals came from an uncontested mark and a second goal straight after from the hit he got after the mark. The ball didn't go back to the middle. He was barely serviceable otherwise, and I remember being surprised at his brownlow votes. There was a sinking feeling that day also that the talk about him from preseason being the next Michael Barlow just wasn't going to be the case. He was slow with poor disposal and with average to poor decision making. Tough as nails, which makes him very likeable, but a player whose failings are readily exploited by the opposition.

That's an elegant illustration of your argument, and hard to argue against.I realised yesterday for the first time that the problem with Jack Watts is resolutely not the MFC, and we all know we've been a problem to so much, but that he just doesn't have the stomach for it. The reason I'm as keen as yellow spice to get rid of him for something decent is that he's just not up to it. But having lost that worry, now I'm concerned every other club knows it. So here's hoping the right people at those clubs think he has real value, like many on Demonland still do.

His competitiveness and physicality is inspirational. His sheer desire for the contest was so stark against some others yesterday as to be like a lightning bolt of revelation. This club just can't afford to carry some of the players we give credit to on here, and Jack Viney yesterday just made it ridiculously clear. The 3 that stand out for me are : Jack Watts. I've been a fan because of his talent, but have realised we simply MUST get rid of him. His lack of physicality at the contest, and absence of hunger is staggering. Poisonous even. Jeremy Howe. I know. As per Watts, and sadly the highlights don't compensate. He's just NOT competitive when the body has to get involved, other than throwing himself at marks. The opposition know it, play him appropriately and he becames utterly ineffective. Sam Blease. Terrible lack of anything but speed. Basically the opposite in speed and desire to Jordie McKenzie, and of much less worth. A pretender.

Howe is a frustrating type. We love him for his skills obviously, and he's quick, courageous and now kicks a good set shot. He significantly lacks physical presence though, and gets pushed off the ball, past the ball and is shepherded/obstructed from the ball way too easily. It's not about absolute strength he lacks, it's about how well he imposes what he does have, and the physical teams just lock him out of the game. Unless he grows this part of his repertoire, he will continue to be that spectacular but bit-part player.

Eminence........... prepare to have your character built some more. Your mettle will be tested, your hackles raised, and your sanity questioned. Yeehaaaaaa.....

Thought provoking OP, and it's interesting to see the current 'equalisation' agenda, which would be the no.1 story at the moment if not for the Bombers debacle. It's really more of a re-equalisation, as the draft and salary cap were the initial pillars. Essentially the AFL has a hard task ahead, with the competing principles of allowing the lesser clubs revenue raising opportunities (prime time tv) with commercial maximisation (Collingwood v Hawthorn the optimum prime time coupling). TV is king, not so much as the NRL, where nobody goes to the games, but the major fixturing driver nonetheless. There is a catch 22 in that in NOT fixturing the lesser clubs in prime time, regardless of on field success, their supporter growth potential is limited. But in order to justify equalisation measures, they MUST look to grow support. There is an absolute advantage to the non-Melbourne clubs which must be addressed on field as well as off. Geelong has a ridiculously gifted armchair ride season after season. Their own stadium, with 90% + parochial support, a geographical supporter base, no 'derbies' to even out the support, a la WA and SA clubs, and NO games there against the power clubs. The MFC are now and have always suffered from not having 'territory', and thus an identifiable community. We are a figurehead club, and the establishment club, and whilst that sounds nice, it's a bloody albatross, and it's time the AFL woke up to that.

I think it's known to everyone, us as supporters, the media, and undoubtedly the players, that this is GWS' best chance for a win this year. They kicked us around for 3 quarters at our home earlier this year, and will use that as evidence and motivation. Make no mistake, this is the Giants biggest game for the year. Our team knows it, and how we respond will reveal just how damaged we really are. If we're all honest, our psychological form this year would suggest we will crumble like the crumbliest of things.

Swallow's ridiculous protection from the umpires is enjoyed by only a few players in the AFL, and stands in stark contrast to the hammering that Nathan Jones gets without an ounce of attention from the maggots. It was woefully on display on Saturday. Jeremy Howe is consistently blocked from the marking contest illegally, and by rights should get a stream of free kicks. It's not a righteous world however, and he needs more strategy to get past it and more awareness and willingness from his teammates to help.

Eye of the beholder.......and all that. ;-)

Removing the metal is optional, based on whether it is problematic. Richo's may well have been known to cause issue, so requiring removal. Different surgeons, different methods, but before anybody starts questioning MC's surgeon, there is nothing to question. He's as good as it gets.

The simple, and unfortunately unsatisfying answer is that in these situations, as with all orthopaedics, there is never any guarantee. I know that won't satisfy you b59, but that's the logic of it. Every case is different, but the odds are heavily stacked in Mitch's favour. Just on the footwear issue, and the spate of foot related problems at MFC, the latter is coincidence, and we see them happen at other clubs. The former will be no different than any club. Footwear was not the cause of MC's injury.

I imagine they have a plan to get him settled to be available for full pre-season. That will be the reason for wiping the possibility of return this season.

Just one of those things. There's no reason to remove the metal fixateurs unless they create a problem, and there's no actual probability they will. If it isn't causing a problem, then don't intervene. I had a patient who just "didn't like the idea" of metal in his leg, despite full function (surf, snowboard), so had it removed, developed an infection in the bone as an unfortunate result of the removal, and spent the next 18 months out of action. In MC's case, he rehabbed well and was all good, so the fact he subsequently got some irritation is just what can POTENTIALLY happen. Not botched or bungled, just life. I have no idea of the stats, and it would be fraught with analytical complexities based on the definition of full recovery, due to differing expectations through the populous. For example, a recent patient is a musician, who likes running. He had a Lisfranc fracture/dislocation, and can run again. Could he sprint/jump repeatedly? Don't know, cos it's not part of his life, so he won't be doing that. A more relevant study would be AFL/VFL players who've had Lisfranc, but it would be a smallish group.

Depends on the wearer.....

It may be just you, chook! The foot is a brilliant combination of flexibility when required, and utter rigidity when being pushed off from. Bear in mind that in sprinting it takes 4 to 5 times the body weight in load at push off, and as such must be a completely rigid lever, then softens when not under load to allow conformation to uneven surfaces......bloody miraculous kit it is!

As I've stated before, Clarke's Lisfranc injury was a dislocation, not involving a fracture, which statistically makes it very likely he'll play again, for years in fact. Yes, Richo had the same injury. No, Egan's was completely different. Obviously, MC is having some irritation when he pushes weight bearing, which given the time left in the season, doesn't allow him enough time to get match fit once he gets back to full weight bearing, i.e sprinting. This is NOT about instability of the foot structure, just the irritable tissues involved in the area, which makes it very frustrating. Sometimes it just needs time to settle, and given his ongoing value to the club in the coming years when we are better, why risk perpetuating that irritation or have him underdone for a few dead rubber games at the end of this year? If football clubs indulged in some of the impetuous impatient rejections of common sense that some on here have, half the players we see out there would've been cut loose a while ago! See you next year Mitch.

This. They will hammer us flat.

Could try it, but the footy gods would know my heart wasn't in it.....