binman

Third time? Do you mean the Lisfranc? He's only had that happen once has he not? (3 question marks?)

I'm with you Don. I don't get how negative people are about Strauss. I went to last weeks game and some whacker was from the get go yelling insults at Strauss - the biggest one when he turned the ball over (which incidentally did not result in a goal). What's worse (and a complete pet hate of mine) was he was a MFC supporter. So i really watched Strauss closely and yelled my support when he went near the ball. Strauss played really well in the tigers game. He linked up well, was solid with his handball (often getting the ball to free players behind him in space) and after the turnover in the first q barely missed a kick. His only real misstep was the fumble on the wing that allowed the tiges to regain possession and stopped a potentially promising move. Whilst the tigers then scored a goal its a bit of a stretch to blame him for it given it was on the wing. Even if you do blame him for that goal he got one back with a beautiful kick from half back to half forward to, i think Bail who then gave it to Howe for a goal. I got home and was surprised when i jumped on DL how many people were bagging him. So when i watched the replay i again watched Strauss closely. And again all i saw was a good, solid game from a player who had a role and carried it out. I've read people say he lacks awareness and that he is too easily beaten one on one. I saw nothing that supports either assertion, particularly the former criticism. And as for the kicking turnover? You have to be kidding. There were far worse culprits, Frawley (whose turnover actually cost a goal, at what was a critical time in the match) Trenners, Grimes, Michie, Vince and Jones just to name a few. Jones was also guilty of trying to do much (and perhaps lacking awareness?) and giving away a goal when he got caught near their goals. He was, in my view, in our top ten players on the night and i suspect if injury free will be in our round 1 side (which if the case indicates Roos is also a fan). I'm not saying Strauss is a star or that he doesn't have limitations. But I really believe he is the sort of player Roos is referring to when he talks about players carrying mental scars as that hesitancy people have noted, is, i think, in part a product of poor coaching and development. I reckon he has, like many of his team mates, been playing with fear - fear to make a mistake, fear of not following the rules, fear of failure etc - which causes them to freeze and not back themselves. Once he gets more confident, and has a coach who encourages him to back himself and play with some freedom (from being criticised as much as anything else) i think he will become a regular best 22 player and be exactly the sort of role player Roos loves.

If this is a beginning what was last years NAB cup (as opposed to NAB practice matches) debut for Melbourne - a false dawn?

Not hard to imagine what they'll say about Dawes - 'look if it was a home and away game he'd play but he had a bit of tightness in his calf after the intra game, no real issue but we figured no point putting him in a plane and sending him to Central Australia for practice match. He'll do full training on (insert day the non Geelong game players do training) and his normal running, the camp in Leongatha and be right to go for the praccy match against the Hawks down at Casey. So yeah perhaps a little frustrating for Dawsey as he was keen to have a game and perhaps we are being a bit conservative but look there are no probs and he'll play next week'

Is it just me or do those dees caps Roos is wearing make it look like they have two caps on? I loved the clip. Looking forward to the sequel.

Could not agree more. Players are often the worst culprits - he just reinforced sticking to our structure, we lost our structures, structure was key blah blah. But much worse when commentators (especially ex footy players who just love to highlight their tactical nouse and that the fact they once were warriors - dermie being the proze example o this tiresome phenomenon ) say it because it is usually not clear what they mean by it . The job of the commentator is to MAKE THINGS CLEAR! not use made up footy babble words.

And to have a chat

Yep, but i was thinking of the early motivational use of the quoted dialogue. I had forgotten (until i just looked at a yo tube clip) that it was also used at the very (tragic) end. As Chook says blam! Lets hope Mitch has a better outcome!

His job is to yell: 2nd conditioning guy: 'what are your legs?' Mitch Clark: 'Springs, steel springs' 2nd conditioning guy: 'What are they gonna do?' Mitch Clark:'They're going to hurl me down the track.' 2nd conditioning guy: 'How fast can you run?' Mitch Clark: 'As fast as a leopard'

I don't get the angst but each to their own. What i would say is that whilst we're forced to sell 2 games a year to the NT we are going to have to keep finding ways to raise revenue. As someone said (Nasher?) its just a glorified tin ratlle and no more or less tacky than the raffle at the ground, the competitions they ask you to pay to enter or the scratchies they [censored].

I missed bobby too

No not really.

I was going to say, ET's dreams are quite humble - mine are a lot more grandiose; i kick twice as many as Tony Lockett

Except at boozy dinners for prospective foundation members!

I agree, he was a real cry baby

I want him back too. Perhaps we could start an online viral get bobby back campaign

I think you've hit on something here. Wattsy is indeed a good looking young fella and i wonder if the Watts haters (you know who you are) are actually repressing their attraction to him and rather than deal with it go the opposite way.

Roos leaves nothing to chance. He knows its a winter game and has organised a cold, wet day to ensure we can practice in all conditions.

Well he should have directed his anger at his team mate who pushed Cross in the back. I think it is a silly rule in so far as it was brought in as a reaction to one event (albeit a shocking one) - Rohan having his leg broken. But seriously how many times has an injury occurred from someone going head first at the ball and taking an opponents legs out from under them other than that incident? I certainly can't recall any, though there have no doubt been isolated incidents. But enough to warrant a rule change that is about protecting players?

I assumed the free was for taking Martins legs out. From the Laws of Australian Football 2013 the relevant rule is 15.4.5 Prohibited contact and Payment of free kick A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player where they are satisfied that the Player has made Prohibited Contact with an opposition Player. A Player makes Prohibited Contact with an opposition Player if the Player: (a) makes contact with any part of their body with an opposition Player; (i) above the shoulders (including the top of the shoulders or bump to the head); or (ii) below the knees. As you rightly point out what the umpire missed (as did i at the ground, only noticing it when i watched the replay) is the shove in the back Cross received that propelled him forward. Actually very dangerous and he was lucky not to be hurt.

Yep completely with you there OD. My pet hate(s)? Posters accusing others of not 'having a clue about football' (and any number of variants of that theme), implying of course that they do. Using the phrase 'íf anyone actually believes (insert opinion/view) they don't understand football' - easy way to slag of specific posters and warning those yet to post on the matter that they best not support the initial post lest they fall into the no clue camp Use of the acronym NFI - i mean c'mon

Is that an article?

Yep, spot on

One assumes then OD that you see value in this thread.

Grimes made the point in his interview on 3aw that it actually might have helped them not having the talls against the tiges as it forced them to 'lower the eyes', chip the ball around and not just bomb away as they might have done in the past