binman

I hate this put the whistle away rubbish. If it is a free kick pay it. Simple. If they are not going to pay holding/dropping the ball then change the law and remove it from the books. If not pay it. The free against Terlich was technically there (just) but the problem is that they had ignored at least 8 prior to that where players who had plenty of time to dispose of it were perfectly tackled and just dropped it or threw away. Since when is good umpiring not rewarding perfect tackles? I 100% agree Webber the standard of umpiring is a joke and unfortunately as a bottom side we get the worst umpires - week in week out. So many poor decision or no decision against us today. However we did get one crucial one our way. There is no way Watts held the mark he was payed in the goal square (from the Bail kick). We were not going to lose after that and tigers fans had a right to be aggrieved.

Oh please c'mon. His intensity today was as good as it has ever been. I just don't get the negativity about Watts in the last 3 weeks. And to be clear i called for him to be dropped due to his lack of intensity against the Swans. Thankfully i'm not coach of the dees and since then he has been terrific and his intensity and effort has been first class. For petes sake he was a key to us winning today.

He has the all so rare ability to allow the opposition to move around him while he seems to stand still. Watss has it also. Pendulbury is the best at it.

This is a rubbish post. His effort in the forts 3 quarters was ordinary? What tosh, he was excellent all game. Attacked the ball, ran hard all day, ran to space to give options all day (and as noted by a poster above was often ignored), was smart with his ball use and his coach lauded him. Was in our best 3. Just a rubbish post and typical of some so called fans who have a set view of Watts and refuse to change even when the evidence demands a reassessment. Oh and knocking him by knocking Vlaustin? This is the same Vlaustin who was almost their best player last year?

Wattsy had 10 disposals, four marks and kicked two goals in the last 30 minutes. Match winner.

I'm with you there. Put my money where my mouth was too. Backed the line and straight out. Bang

Bloody hell though - imagine if he had billed us for his time and advice!

That's why i reckon its not him. He's too smart to be a 'secret footballer' i would have thought. I mean the articles are interesting but at least the one about sex was pretty tawdry and besides the premise that it must be a smart fella writing it coz the articles are not garbage is a bit strange. They're hardly Pulitzer prize winning calibre

I agree. they have to start Salem i would have thought given he needs the run for fitness (especially with casey also having a bye next week). Jones to add his run in the last quarter and a half when the game opens up. Riley to unleash from the get go. Not much point leaving him on the bench to stew. Saty has Riley played any run with roles at Casey?

No i don't mean undecided per se. The definition of ambivalent according to the Oxford is: Having mixed feelings or contradictory ideas about something or someone. That's what i meant and is why i used the word ambivalent. But thanks for your offer of help. Your comments about him sculpting, chipping away at formless stone and shape is very Murphyesuque in its unnecessarily florid use of words. Indeed all you needed to do was include a look at me aren't i hip musical reference (used to illustrate a point, as an analogy or metaphor) and you could have been parodying him. Actually you've captured in a nutshell why i have mixed feelings about his writing.

I'm ambivalent about his writing. It has improved but still is a little try hard HSC style, with over use of metaphor and a grating flowery style. C'mon BB he couldn't fill Flanagan's ink well. Those two are playing in way different leagues

Yed def a melbourne club. Someone suggested Ball which has merit but i doubt it for some reason. Seems a bit grubby for him.

its a silent e

I agree. I don't want my club to lose and i want my club to play to win every week. But i'm not a player and all i was saying in my original post is that whilst i was disappointed we lost i wasn't gutted in part because we may end with a better pick as a result. But i probably shouldn't think, let alone admit that. It might be the football equivalent of butterfly wings flapping across the other side of the world creating a storm on this side where the losing mentality of a lowly member creates a tsunami of bad losing ju ju which infects the club. As penance i will refuse to accept a loss this weekend. And by the by i think we are a real show and as such the $4.15 for us to win looks terrific value.

Another huge difference is how often winning is mentioned by coaches and players in interviews etc after the word seemingly was verboten under Neeld. They're all banging on about it. A couple of weeks back Roos must have mentioned in 10 times in one interview. Stone talks about it in his interviews with Burgs. Jones goes on about it today in his interview. Love it.

Yes i thought exactly the same thing. As i said quite pointed.

Didn't know where to put this and didn't want to start a new thread but i thought this quote from Jamar gives a fascinating insight into how Neeld went about things and by contrast how Roos goes about things. Not wanting to rake over old coals nor bag Neeld but these are the most pointed comments from a senior player i have heard about the previous regime (not much need to read between the lines): Its been good to be back in the team, especially playing under Roosy Ive really been enjoying it. To be able to contribute to the team has been really good, he told melbournefc.com.au. The confidence you get from the current coaching group its outstanding and they back you in and they give you responsibility. They treat us like men and theyve been fantastic and Ive really enjoyed it. I hope I can continue to be a part of this team for a long time to come, because Im really enjoying the environment at the club. Im really enjoying our new game plan and I think its reignited the fire in the belly. Link

maybe. He said in his first article that he is a senior player with more than 10 years experience. Hasn't mentioned a gf win but said had seen success. Was the saints ever right down the bottom in his time there?

I reckon its boomer harvey

I'll preface this post by saying that i really. really, really wanted us to win Saturday night. I also believe contrary to some others we should have won - we were the better side but our inside 50s really let us down and when we pushed we gave up some easy/lucky goals that meant we couldn't get a 2 goal buufer. But i'm not gutted we didn't win. Why? One, as Roos has said whilst wins are important this year they are not the main thing. Development, building a successful, strong culture, competitiveness and learning the Roos game are the the main things. The game would have helped those things and were certainly evidence of them. Second , it will help us next time we are in a similar position. It would have stung the players and they will perhaps learn more from the loss that a win, particularly how to deal with the Dogs niggle. Lastly (and i'm preparing for the attacks) whilst wins are always best we will be battling with 2-3 teams for the bottom rungs of the ladder, including Dogs. A loss might mean we end up with the 2 or 3rd pick in in the draft not 5th or 6th. That has double meaning if Frawley goes as if we get say pick 2 we would also get pick 3 as compo. No i'm not advocating tanking and wins are what build culture but higher picks won't hurt.

Good point old dee. The list is missing my condition - Pollyanna Syndrome: an irrational belief that the dees will radically improve. The last 2-3 weeks i have felt the symptoms come back. God forbid if we win this week.

Perhaps we can play pop psychologist and diagnose personality disorders of DL posters based on their posts - paranoid, schizoid, dissocial, emotionally unstable (borderline type and impulsive type), histrionic, anankastic, anxious (avoidant) and dependent, haltlose, immature, narcissistic, passive-aggressive or psychoneurotic. Take your pick. Some peopel are natural medical experts so why not?

Heyzueess, that is a serious list of charges!

Yep, good call. Roos has made it super clear that players in the twos have to make a compelling case for senior selection with consistency strong performance (that no doubt have to include specific KPI's eg pressure acts, tackles). Top 10 players returning from injury like Garland and Jamar probably don't have to but for the rest i suspect they are going to have to work super hard to get a spot in the ones. Smart.

Classy response DO. I was trying a little gentle trolling on and didn't get rise from you. Well played sir