Harrisonrules

You omitted Bartram. His selection baffles me as if untouchable. I'd like to see Cheney in his spot. I believe he is a better runner - speed and endurance - than Cheney, but Cheney is clearly a better footballer. Somebody on the radio/TV stated that no forward has kicked a goal on him this year, but if the football department believes that statistic then pity help us. He turned the ball over to enable the doggies kick the winning goal against us. Last week he turned it over twice for goals to the blues. Statistics tell many stories. I think the FD believes that if they put enough games into him he'll become a good fottballer.

Harrisonrules is code for Aussie rules football. Harrison and Wills being the founder. Harrison House naturally has a significant place in many a footballers story

I claim to have been at the 54 grand final as a young kid and am part of a small group of us who saw all the 50's as kids and how we regularly love the remnice. Always gather in Percy's Pub (Percy Beames Bar) after the game to cool down, and freshen up, let the crowd disperse and then return home to watch the replay with a less emotional analysis and confirm how wrong the umps were.

I long to see Lyndon step up and hold down a key forward position. He has a lot of skills but over the past year has been a bit sloppy at times, eg dropped marks. Generally speaking he has good hands. but one thing I have never seen him do is fly powerfully in a pack and take a strong mark that way. It is confusing because he seems to be able to jump when third man up for a knock out. Unfortunaately he doesn't tranfer that into the pack mark. Just remember 1 to 3 goals will be an acceptable start for him. Don't get fooled by the 8 goals in the VFL. I think it was the dropped Henderson at Carlton similarly got 8. But like most of us I'll be right behind him and I hope he is left forward for the remainder of the year. He could forge out his future in the next 10 games. Miller couldn't

Once upon a time the football world talked about the 2nd year blues. In this professional era we don't hear as much about it. Players being tagged but learning how to counter tag etc. Cale has all the emerging skills necessary. He might not end up being an A plus player but he will be an A grader, and you need half a team of A graders to take home the bacon. He is an essential component of our outfit. He was looking sensational in the practice games before injured. He will just gradually pick up the pace and overcoming such adversary will make him even better. There are several other players you need to worry about rather than Cale. Diplomacy suggests I shouldn't name them.

Unfortunately that's the name of the game and why its all about depth. Talk to any cats fan and you can see how gittery they are becoming and what about the saints with the loss of Riewoldt, McGuire (totally) the Hawks last year, the Bombers and Gumbleton. Only just getting out there. What concerns me is that the FD has not stock piled enough taller forwards for depth. You can't expect to win with a lucky season. You must rely on depth

Prof, It's an interesting time to start, just after the great era, but many of those who were core to the 50's were coming to an end by the 60's not because they had lost it but it was time to get a real job, in those days and what hadn't they achieved. I have some other favourites that I believe should be considered against some names. Back flankers were Tony Anderson. Hard as nails, fast courageous a lovely 6'1" marking flanker and A Vic rep. Doc 'Roet' looked a bit awkward at times but rarely beaten. Lovely pack mark and regular 60 to 70 (yards in those days) kick the latter naturally with the wind which we often got on those suburban grounds, windy hill, Arden street, Whitten oval etc. Then Donny Williams, speed, leap mark kick you name it. These I would say would make it hard for Lovett and Ingerson to play. I'm certainly a Dicko fan. Not the prettiest but as effective as any, Faster than he looked, one of the best overhead marks for his size I can remember. I'd love to see his stats. Just for old times sake there was nothinbg more exhilerating than seeing Bluey Adams sprint the living day lights out of the opposition (I think he was a world record holder for the 400 as a professional. Only 5'6" but with his bulk you dare not get in the way. we loved it, he was on our side. Johnnie Townsend is worth mentioning. He was just beginning to emerge as a elite rover when knees cut his career short. And any memory of rovewrs has to make mention of Tiger Ridley and Stuie Spencer Sadly I have to disagree with you on James McDonald (don't all through bottles at me) but as courageous as he is, his skills, eg kicking are just not up to the level of a really elite player. Barry Bourke came on with great expectations through the under 17 but I don't believe was any better than a good player. Geoff Tunbridge was better than Barry Vagg. Barry carried the mantel of being the new Tunner' but never got there. The trouble with Todd V was that he took such a long time to reach his peak, but was very ordinary for a long time through 3 quarters of his career. Of the rucks I think I would put Geoff White ahead of Ditterich in the Melbourne colours, and what I wouldn't give to have 'Big Bob' available these days. Whatever our opinions we can all celebrate that the demons have produced great and entertaining players over the years. Surely we can do it again.

I'd get Gary Lyon, Neita and thge Ox as a tag team for forward coach

I am conscious that to raise the question of the coaching panel is to venture into what many regard as a no go zone. I have watched Cameron Schwab's whiteboard Wednesday's with interest and believe we have a quality person in his position. Along with Chris C and Jimmy we are as well lead as we have been for some time. Nevertheless I go back to some of Cameron's early presentations and one area of the club which he had not included in his scheme as needing to be accountable was the coaching. No doubt there is some mechanism for coaching evaluation, but the fact it was not identified in the clubs declared plan raises the alarm bells in my mind. I don't believe it is truely accepted seriously enough as needing to be accountable, yet it is one of the most vital areas that determine performance.Dean impressed the selection panel by presenting himself as a Developmental coach. Development is one portfolio of the coaching role. Could you see Malthouse, Sheedy, Voss, Thompson, Eade, Roos presenting themselves as such. Are they any less developmental coaches than Dean. Certainly not, they are developing players all the time. But they see themselves as senior club coaches and embrace every area of that task. To me this suggests that Dean really sees himself as a DEVELOPING coach. A friend raised this with Dean in a social setting and he suggested he talks about his coaching with the other coaches and his wife (I'm sure it was a friendly comment and I don't begrudge him talking to his wife about the football and his challenges, I would myself). I have had some concern about our coaching panel. My probably less than informed observation is that each coach on the panel is relatively inexperienced. My cynical observation is that this is to Deans advantage because I can again understand he would not want his assistants to be significantly more experienced than himself. At least Williams had the courage and confidence to take on Laidley. I believe the supporter base is still confused about Dean's ability. Selections, slow starts, little experimentations, at one stage no game plan now perhaps one, are the types of constant discussion points in the bar or lunch room. It is difficult to find any particular point that one can clearly say, "gee I really like what Dean is doing in that area". Am I bagging DEan. No. I believe Dean is inexperienced in terms of successful coaches. It would be professional for the club to have a senior advisor to review and challenge him and his team. I believe Cameron Schwab should have this clearly schematized in his plan. When I see it there I will know the club is serious about developing the whole club. Dean is no where near a Premiership coach nor are his panel. He will not drift toward it. The atmosphere around the club wants to know that this stone will not be left unturned. OUR DEVELOPMENTAL COACH IS MERELY A DEVELOPING COACH. IT WOULD BE PROFESSIONAL FOR HIM TO HAVE A COACHING MENTOR AND BE ACCOUNTABLE TO THE CLUB ADMINITRATION FOR IT. JCash, well done for daring to ask the question. I suggest you look at the above thread I have presented under DEVELOPMENTAL COACH.

I'm a great sympathiser with your opinion on Martin down back and believe we've lost games because we lacked his height down back. I'm not as negative about Garland but why he hasn't been tried forward beats me.

We are struggling with tall forwards and a second ruck. The obvious contenders are Miller, Martin and Johnson. Each could fill both positions. Miller is the third ruck option of these three. Johnson and Martin can both adequately fill the 2nd ruck and both can play forward even if it is well below what we dream of. Both do no worse than Miller on the forward line so I would chose one of them and rotate them through the ruck, the bench and forward line and especially in Martin's case down back when needed. Johnson has done OK down back in the past. Personally I think Martin is the best as he is more likely to have a future. Miller would surprise and disappoint most if he lasts this year. Johnson probably needs to be around for depth. Don't forget he carried the ruck in the first half of last year and did a servicable job. Martin has to stay as there is still to much up side to let someonther club grab him and develop him further.

I think Carlise was another highly rated tall who went to Essendon in the mid 20's (a guess) but I heard on the radio a bomber voice saying how pleased they were with the way he was coming on at CHF. A bigger question was the year we took Maric at 22 when we were crying out for talls and Roughhead went to the doggies early 30's

I am conscious that to raise the question of the coaching panel is to venture into what many regard as a no go zone. I have watched Cameron Schwab's whiteboard Wednesday's with interest and believe we have a quality person in his position. Along with Chris C and Jimmy we are as well lead as we have been for some time. Nevertheless I go back to some of Cameron's early presentations and one area of the club which he had not included in his scheme as needing to be accountable was the coaching. No doubt there is some mechanism for coaching evaluation, but the fact it was not identified in the clubs declared plan raises the alarm bells in my mind. I don't believe it is truely accepted seriously enough as needing to be accountable, yet it is one of the most vital areas that determine performance. Dean impressed the selection panel by presenting himself as a Developmental coach. Development is one portfolio of the coaching role. Could you see Malthouse, Sheedy, Voss, Thompson, Eade, Roos presenting themselves as such. Are they any less developmental coaches than Dean. Certainly not, they are developing players all the time. But they see themselves as senior club coaches and embrace every area of that task. To me this suggests that Dean really sees himself as a DEVELOPING coach. A friend raised this with Dean in a social setting and he suggested he talks about his coaching with the other coaches and his wife (I'm sure it was a friendly comment and I don't begrudge him talking to his wife about the football and his challenges, I would myself). I have had some concern about our coaching panel. My probably less than informed observation is that each coach on the panel is relatively inexperienced. My cynical observation is that this is to Deans advantage because I can again understand he would not want his assistants to be significantly more experienced than himself. At least Williams had the courage and confidence to take on Laidley. I believe the supporter base is still confused about Dean's ability. Selections, slow starts, little experimentations, at one stage no game plan now perhaps one, are the types of constant discussion points in the bar or lunch room. It is difficult to find any particular point that one can clearly say, "gee I really like what Dean is doing in that area". Am I bagging DEan. No. I believe Dean is inexperienced in terms of successful coaches. It would be professional for the club to have a senior advisor to review and challenge him and his team. I believe Cameron Schwab should have this clearly schematized in his plan. When I see it there I will know the club is serious about developing the whole club. Dean is no where near a Premiership coach nor are his panel. He will not drift toward it. The atmosphere around the club wants to know that this stone will not be left unturned. OUR DEVELOPMENTAL COACH IS MERELY A DEVELOPING COACH. IT WOULD BE PROFESSIONAL FOR HIM TO HAVE A COACHING MENTOR AND BE ACCOUNTABLE TO THE CLUB ADMINITRATION FOR IT.

eth38 I'm happy with all you have said but believe you have not assessed Bate accurately. A good solid ground player. Excellent goal opportunist. 90% plus shot on goal from as far as 50. One of our most reliable shots on goal, but only plays small. Cannot jump for a serious contested mark and might hold overhead uncontested mark but rarely a contested one. I challenge you to take a closer look.

Back from my swim. Nothing overly creative but for first post I'll outline my analysis. Jamar is there already as we all know. But lets not forget how best to manage his talent and experience. This idea of one ruck is a bit of a fools paradise and suggests the coaches are stumped. He needs some reasonable rest rhoughout the game and we could utilise him up forward. He is an excellent shot on goal. We are not taking advantage of this. So the problem then focuses on the back up ruck. First things first. I believe that several should be seen as project players knowing that the talls traditionally have taken time to develop ( Jamar 8 years )Spencer, Gawm Fitzpatrick should be forgotten about for 2 to 3 years, unless they begin to truly show exceptional talent. Spencer looked promising early and so was rushed into the team. There is so much more to learn especially for a basketball player than jumpin at the centre bounce. His other skills are abysmal so he needs time. I'm personally hopeful that Fitzpatrick will develop as a key forward or back as he has shown in his younger days that he marks well and is very mobile for a big man. With some bulk he might push ahead as the second ruck. Gawm is such a tall streak I personally think he will be primarily our prime ruck, probably to replace Jamar. He is mobile and can mark but with his physique I think he will take even longer to develop. So that leaves us with Johnson and Martin. Martin has sshown he can play down back. The problem is that the coaching staff are reluctant to go with such a tall on the back line. I disagree with them. I think there have been games we have lost because we didn't have a super tall on the backline. To watch our second tier talls outmarked eg, 'the Pod', North etc is frustrating because we have someone who can cope with this problem. I was happy they tried him forward but looks like a far slower process than we thought. I think his marking would have developed on the backline more than the forward line. Johnson has more experience and maturity than any of them. He looked so good we thought it was just a matter of time before he took the game by the scruff of the neck. But I guess most have stopped believing that. It's 50 /50 on these two and I might be inclined to pick Johnson and let Martin deveop at Casey or if you prefer just use Martin and stick by him believing Johnson will never be the player we need. Martin still might do it. Miller and unfortunately Newton just do not have the agility or hands to be an intimidating forward. Frawley and Warnock have settle into the backline and I believe are our best prospects as the two key back positions. I believe Warnock has gone past Rivers due to bulk and speed. Rivers and Garland offer some versatility. Both have had forward play experience so I can't understand why they have not been tried there. Garland has time to develop further. Is a tall who can play tall and small thus must be persevered with. Thgere are a lot of Rivers bashers on this forum. While he does lack a yard of pace it's not the greatest problem I am one who believes he has excellent marking skill in a team that lacks it. I'd try him forward to give him some versatility. Jack Watts just needs experience, experince, experience. Break down his game and we see he has excellent skill. The press the Club Board and win starved supporters have created great pressure to play him before he was really ready. Lynch at St. Kilda, Cordy and Roughhead at doggies, are all acclaimed, but haven't appeared, Gumbledon at Bombers, Anthony at Maggies are just beginning or in the latters case struggling. The hardest position on the field takes time and the synchronisatioin of many factors. Kruezer is getting there but as a ruckman but beaten by Jamar. Cale Morton is a tall who plays better small but is developoing the confidence to develop his taller game. Best to let him play as he has been, but with some time up forward. I'd have him float forward more than float back. Dunn and Bate came together and haven't quite delivered as we hoped. Bate actually is a tall on this scale but can really only play small. Overhead marking is one of his weak points and he can't jump. A great kick and an opportunist. He is better thought of as a small in the mould of a Cat Chapman. Dunn plays small than his height suggests. Similar can't jump very well and doen't attack the ball in a contested marking pack. I'd play him as a mobile forward, ruckrover (if there are such things these day. As Sheedy says, Melbourne have always erred on the side of the smalls. And our talls don't always know how to play tall. One gains advantage with footspeed, strong bodies, quick minds and in the air. Of the latter we are lacking.

Interesting how the coaching staff will not try some players in other positions, such as Rivers, Garland on the forward line when we have an abundance of backs, yet pick some players to be our journeymen. Dunn and Martin showed positive signs, the former up forward the latter down back. Both have been shuffled and lost progress. I'm all for putting Dunn at FF and CHF for the remainder of the year and let him settle there. Our other options just will not work. Miller will never make it(a one skill player-lead up chest mark on the wing), Bate a flanker at best(has virtually no overhead marking ability and when he jumps his feet hardly leave the ground.) Sylvia is best when running freely up toward the midfield and best as a pinch hit mark, he's just to easily swamped when placed at CHF. Watts just needs experience by being rotated through all forward positons. I can't see Newton developing enough to bge retained after this year. Yes Dunn is the only one I think could make it on the forward line.

I think Robbo was delisted prematurely. At least some target would have kept a bit more purpose in the game plan. Millers inadequacies were obscured when Neita and Robbo played. As a lead up forward, his one skill of leading and chest mark had a place. As a prime target he fits in well at Casey.

A great question. But I've got to go out for a swim. It will give me something to think about while following the black line.

And Dicko is one past player you will regularly sittin with us mugs in the members. I guess he won't be with us on Q B Weekend but expect to see him any other day. A legend of a footballer, a politician as a leader and one of us cheering on the Dee's from the members. Our hero

Grow up and enjoy life

Two great names of young kids fronted the draft in 2006, Riewoldt and Frawley, hardly throught they would emulate their famous relies. Melbourne needed backs at the time so went for Frawley at 12, Richmond was left to take young Riewoldt at 13.Four years have past and both have had break out years. The game against the Tigers drew to our attention the value of the Toig. Perhaps Chips hardest afternoon of the season. This week the papers have been full of it. Are we seeing the beginning of another great Carey/Jackovich rivalry. If we had our time again would you recommend we go the same way. If we had taken Riewoldt we might have taken NicNat instead of Jack W to add to our Scullgrove pair. Whichever way I reckon both teams would have been happy with either. Just a simple point on how the game can change

Talk of leather poisoning. I recall a game in the wet at Glenferrie oval when I reckon Dicko would have had between 40 and 50 possessions (no junk possessions in those days). I wonder if such statistics were kept then ( Although Dicko was probably counting them.) I think he was one of the best overhead marks for his size that I can remember and only 5ft 9in tall. (Brilliant judgement and long straight arms)

Not a bad scorpion team. Predict a score against the Dees. A Whitewash or competative?

Better still, Ab Jud Scul Tren gys - music to my ears.

I like Ab Jud Scul Tren gys hard to tell 'em apart