binman

Yep i agree. Balanced, fair and right on the money

Yep i'm with you on that. Refreshing actually as there is so little of this sort of analysis. The politics of football (and the odd soap opera) dominate footy writing these days. I rember Charles Happell (i think) used to have a weekly article in the Sunday Age (i think) about tactics etc but there hasn't been anything similar in either the Hun or the Age since except for the odd article. Interstingly Healy's old teammate Gary Lyon has written some good artilces about tactics etc. I really wish the previews of upcoming games and reviews of games played were more sophisticated. So much rubbish written and usually within a dull, same old, same old template. A computer program could spit them out with the right inputs. While i'm at it bring back the Winners! As for the article he makes some excellent points and has some valid criticisms. I think an area Bailey has struggled with is the speed he tactically responds to obvious issues in games. This was indeed evident against the Bombers. Also as another poster notes he has placed great emphasis on using speed of ball movement to beat zones, which can work great on the "g when we're "on" (eg last years game against the Swans) but not nearly so well in the confines of Crocklands, or against sides who really love to bottle it up (eg the first game against North last year) or when we are not switched on (eg against Wet Toast last year). Without reviving the no b plan palaver i have always had a concern that Bailey doesn't seem to respond very effectively when the preferred approach isn't working.

I prefer hip hop and bling to R&B

I will never forget the game Farmer mentioned by WJ where he kicked 9.1 (so close to perfection) in the second half against the maggies. One of my all time favourite footy watching moments, perhaps even my fav I was sitting at the top of the Ponsford Stand (city end)and there was a magpie fan in front of me who in the first half was absolutely giving it to Farmer. All half he was bagging hi whenever he went near it. His vitriol tipped over into mindless racist drivel. I think he must have thought himself quite witty as his insults were along the lines of "typical, always looking for a handout", "hoping for easy welfare" and other such rubbish. The fella was absolutely relentless and as Farmer barely got a kick in that first half he had plenty of opportunities to have a go at him. What made it worse was he was with his son, who was probably no older than about 9 or so. It was for this reason that i elected not to say anything (and a sense that it would have been pointless and perhaps he was trying to provoke something), as there would have been some sort of confrontation an more than likely violence. That said i really i struggled throughout the first half not to say anything to him and with the tension of thinking i should. Well Farmer answered such rubbish in the best possible way. 9 goals in a half of footy and it could have easily have been 10. Awesome. With each goal i was able to go wild for the Wiz and was able to "respond" to the dill without ever having to do so directly. I yelled out stuff like "that's it Jeff, do it all youself, go hard", "you don't need any easy frees or handouts from the umps" etc etc. As the Whiz lined up for his 9th at about the 15 min mark of the last this fella (having barely said a word, little lone an insult, since about half way through the 3rd quarter) slinked off, leaving his son with a mate of his (who funnily enough had not at any stage yelled out any abuse). He was a beaten man. The Whiz had seen to that. There had beee no violence and perhaps his son had learnt a lesson. A great day and a great talent.

A question for the moderators. Is it possible to report an entire thread?

As i said there is absolutely no way the AFL did not forsee this possibility. Footy fans are the key stakeholders in this business an we deserve transparent leadership from the AFL. Lets say for the sake of the argument that they are incompetent and did not see this coming. Given they are bankrolling the whole shebang they could still put (private) pressure on GWS not to sign Scully. Yes of course this would be retstraint etc but none the less they could do so. Or they could come out publicaly and say they didn't see it coming, don't support clubs losing high draft picks in say a window of 4 years since being drafted and commit to addressing this loophole before the next period GWS can secretly approach uncontracted players (between this upcomming season and the next). But they won't and this will expose their agenda completely. Without trying to scare the horses (or create another posting firestorm) Trengove comes out of contract at the end of next season and hypothetically GWS could sign him. In the very unlikely event they do sign Scully and also Trengove, Melbourne would have lost our number 1&2 draft picks from 2009, one of which being a priority pick for poor perforemce over seasons. This would be a clear distortion of the draft system and run contrary to the purpose of the draft and notions of equity and a level playing field

"There's been a lot of comment about the absurdity of the AFL giving the Demons a priority draft pick one year only to effectively take it back two years later. To be fair to Demon sympathisers, it is a strange one and probably not a situation AFL lawmakers saw coming when they formulated the list-building rules for the new clubs." This to me is a key point. How much is the AFL worth, the next TV rights may be a billion dollars, they are expanding the league into new territories and they didn't see it coming? That's just a joke. They are a huge business. I mean lets get serious if they didn't think through all the ramifications of the 2 new clubs entering, including exactly such a sceanrio (ie the draft system they created being distorted) that would be be amatur hour. Of course it "was a situation they saw coming", please. They have alot at stake with the 2 new clubs, particularly GWS which is a massive gamble (and one that has a big chance of failing)and they will give them what ever assitance they can get away with

My source re Schwabby leaking false was the girlfriend of the brother of Schawaby's dentist. Nah just having a laugh, however so much of this topic is absurd that nothing would surprise me. If he does in fact re-sign it would be a great boost - perhaps enough to tip us over 40, 000 memebers

Heard from a very reliable source that far from the Scully to GWS leak being a Gubby Allen beat up it is actually a plant by Schawbby to build a level of hysteria, only to make a big announcement that the Scull is signing on to stay with the dees. The logic being that it will be hue fillup for the club, help memebership sales and reinfroce the vibe we are going places. Announcement to come before the season starts

An intersting element in the saga about Scull potentially going to GWS has been the dicussion about how much better off he will be finanacially he if goes. However i belive that this benefit maybe to an extent illusory and that there are significant longer term financial opportunity costs Tom would forgoe if he were to move (to say nothing of the lifestyle oppurtunity costs such as having his support network weakened) Other posters have noted the cost of relocation etc so that is one obvious area. Another relates to his marketability and capacity to attract personal sponsorhip and endorsements, both now and post playing days. I doubt Scully has the type of personality and/or x factor to be the "face" of GWS (or become a "celebrity") so therefore his chances of getting huge sponsorship dollars in Sydney 9a non footy town) may be more limited than has been suggested by some. Indeed he may in fact be in a better position in Melbourne to attract sponsers as he would be living in a footy mad town where his footy skills are lauded. Also his repuation may take a hit ie a view that he is mercenary or disloyal. However the biggest potential opportunity costs from a financial perspective relate to his chances of being in a successful, premiership winning side. It goes without saying Melbourne are much more likely to be successful in the next 6-7 years than GWS. If we do push on he will have a chance at playing in a premiership winning side and therefore a chance at winning a Norm Smith. Being in a winning team and being a gun midfielder will give him a great shot at winning a Brownlow (or 2). He will not get these opportunities at GWS, who i believe may take 10 years to seriously threaten, by which time tom might be close to retiring. All the footy greats have a history of playing well in finals and usually a flag next to their name. Robbie Flower's lack of final footy can be the only reason he is not routinely considered by (non melbourne)people to be one of the modern greats. Flags, finals, Brownlows and success. All are within Scull's reach at Melbourne. If he wants to be one of the greats then he is more likely to achieve that at Melbourne. Even if that is not the motivating factor and money is, achieving those things will set him up finanacially for life and continue to drive his income long after he has retired from footy (which is likely to be when he is only 30-31 if modern trends continue). Endorsements, media opportunities etc will be enhanced by achiveing these things and being one of the best. And once he gets them he will still be in a position to leave Melbourne at say 26 for a huge figure, as did Barassi and Ablett before . Melbourne as i said is football mad and a footy great will almost always do well here financially If he plays at GWS he is unlikely to become a great of the game. If he goes there for only a few years before moving again (which i reckon would be on the cards ie wanting to "come home" as Judd did) it would simply reinforce an image of someone chasing the dollar and negatively impact on future endorsements. I hope the advice he is getting takes into account these future potential earnings and ensures he doesn't simply focus on an offer in the here and now. I'll bet anything Schwab and co have gone through all this with Tom (or will if given the cahnce)and heres hoping he heeds the message

As i have said on another, mercifully vanishing thread i would be more concerned about losing Watts than any one else

Absolutely agree with this, he was terrifific for the first half of last year and his kicking is alot more reliable than the skull. Trengove reminds me of Greg Williams, perhaps a lttle slow but great hands, good in traffic and top footy brain. As he get stronger he will be such a key in the engine room.

I have read this thread with a mixture of bewilderment and bemusement. So much piffle, so little time. Of course i could have simply not read it but like watching a F1 car crash or reading an Andrew Bolt opinion piece sometimes i just can't look away. Some of the posts have simply been absurd, bordering on hysterical, with only a few glimmers of logic sneaking through. The points around the GWS deliberately providing disinformation (and it being lapped up by a compliant media and fuelled by sites such as this) are well made. As are the recent ones about Scully's true worth to GWS. There is no way he is worth the sort of money being bandied about. My thoughts on the matter are that as i said above Scully is not worth $1 million a year at this point in his career and that we should not allow ourselves to get into a bidding war (which of course is what his management will be hoping for). Don't get me wrong he is a terrific player and may become a champion but i stress may as he is not there yet and there are no guarantees he will become one. He could develop chronic injuries , he may not improve his kicking to an elite level, he might suffer from burnout (as by all accounts he has been training with a fanatical level of intensity since he has been about 12 yo) or simply may may not take the next step that will be required for him to become a champion. He is not a marquee player in the vain of say a Buddy Franklin who can sell the game in Sydney and i don't think he has the sort of x factor that is going to get the turnstiles spinning or merchandise selling like hot cakes. GWS will make their play but for that sort of coin? So of course it would be terrible for us to lose him and it would, IMO make a mockery of the pain the club went through to secure a number 1 draft pick (and to an extent the draft system itself - a key fcomponent of the AFL model). The AFL should have ensured that this could not happen, however like for GWS this sort of media palaver is probabaly seen by them as a positive. However i believe if he were to go it won't be the end of the world and contrary to the views of some will not dash our flag winning hopes in the next 3-4 years. Thanks to the terrific recruiting over the last 5 years we have built a strong pool of mid fielders and whilst losing such an obvious talent would hurt we have depth there. I for one would be much more concerned about losing Watts, Jurrah or even Frawley. We will not win a flag without some guns up forward and a rock solid backline.

Good original post. I concur re ignoring Watts. It has been happenning alot over last few weeks and was particularly evident against the Roos. There was one example in particular that i thought was instructive. I can't recall the player but he elected to kick it to a 2 on 2 pack contest 30 metres out rather than to Watts who had run hard into space, was all by himself also about 30 metres out. In the end Green took a great chest mark and went back and kicked it and i think there's the rub for Watts. For whatever reason he doessn't seem too keen to have shots at goal so perhaps in the split second a player has to make the call on who to kick to they go for someone like Green. I wonder also if the other players think he's sometimes not hard enough or always prepared to commit to the contest. There was a couple of instnaces in the Roos game where he really had to put the body on the line and commit to the contest and didn't, one in the last quater on our half forward flank (members side) being particularly crucial. Sure he will improve his physicality when he puts on a few kgs but still there are times where a player "has to take his turn" as they say. Look at Scully, he's even skinnier than Watts an never shirks the contest. I reckon players not going to him that often might be related to this This aspect of his game is a bit of a worry and perhaps he will never be the warrior type. That said i have no doubt he will be an elite player and players will look for him all the time once he gains the confidence to go for goals and starts kicking some bags. His kicking skills of both side of the body (a rare skill these days) are beautifuland he seems to have the knack of kicking the ball 50 plus of one step. Great hands also. I look forward to watching for years to come

Matthews said on the telecast of the Freo - Blues game that the one big hole for Carlton was the lack of a big key defender. Given his brother plays there what chance a trade with the blues, Warnock (and perhaps a draft pick and McNamara/Cheney) for say Lachie Henderson

At the risk of entering in one of the silly [censored] for tat threads i would have thought that building strength would be exactly what a young player would do in order to match it with "mature bodied opposition", particualry one who was thrust into the midfield in his first few AFL matches(against the might of Geelong's midfield in his first match one might add) rather than say half back. The original post intimated Gysbert realised he needed to "build strength" if he was to match it with other AFL mids, not an unreasonable view. Given he was probabaly dead keen to make the most of his chance, with Skullgove ahead of him in the pecking order, it is alaso not unreasonable to suspect he may have pushed a little hard in the gym to build that strength in order to maximise his chance of staying in the side.

Great riposte (or should that be ri-post). I thought weights and too big a load was a key cause of OP but would have nver found the proof. To quote from the link you provided: "The condition is generally considered to be brought on by heavy loads being placed on the major muscles of the hips and pelvis. Young players are especially prone because the hip area is the last area of the body to develop and the training regimes of players looking to be drafted to an AFL club focus too heavily on bulking up major muscles before the body has finished growing." Funny when someone feels they can have a shot at someone ala "do you know what you're talking about" and get it so wrong

Say what you like about Miller's playing ability he has been a great clubman for us and i do not mean that in the patronising way it sometimes seems to be said in. Can't (or shouldn't) knock a guy who gives his all. Link says it all http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/brad-miller-chooses-vfl-over-afl/story-fn53khop-1225909498557?from=public_rss

I have to say i like Sylvia for the job. He's youngish, potentially our best player (easy to forget he was taken at number 3 in his draft), fierce at the ball, able to kick golas, can/does protect his younger teammates, has some mongrel and his best is front of him. He may be a little quiet off field and yes he's had some discipline issues but according to an inerview i read with him he's really focused now and super keen to get the most out his time in footy. The capataincy may help him go that next level and bring a real consistency to his game. Greens been fantastic but will be retired in 2-3 years and it would be great to have the same skipper fo 6-8 years. Davey would be my second choice. Cannot fault his approach and discipline and he i reckon he wants the job, which i think is important (yes and i saw the note in a previous thread that said Sylvia wasn't so keen, so perhaps that counts aginast him)but i wonder if he is physical enough. If you you think of great captains they're more often than not strong, physical players who can split packs and take big hits, Robbie being the honourable exception that proves the rule.

Good thread, i thought about the chance of getting him other night when it was mentioned on footy classified he wanted out of Brisbane. I reckon he would be a terrific addition. The dees are trying to build a core of 10 -12 players capable of (and fit enough) playing in the mid field - run, carry, spread, rotate and run some more is what Bailey is developing with his game plan. Rischitelli fits that plan perfectly, is the right age and i reckon with juniour going we will need some experience. Also i reckon we are in a great position to to get him. We can afford him (aren't we only paying 92% of our salary cap at the moment?)particularly with junior going as he must of been on good wage. Also the dees will be alot more attractive than Essendon and GC in terms of chances of playing in a premiership in the next 3-4 years, his peak period. And Essendon? Jeez he wants out of a club that's currently in a bot of tur,oil, he's not gonna be too keen on a club of the brink of meltdown. I'd love to see the dees be an agressive player in the trade period, though only for players around this age. We were keen on Ball, missed him. Lets get Rischitelli

I'm often surprised on this site with the lack of respect for Rivers from alot of posters. He is absolutely in our best 22 and will be a 200 game player for the dees. He does lack a bit of strength but that is why he doesn't play on the gorillas and can miss some targets. Some seem to suggest that his style of third man up, floating role is an easy one or somewhow less valuable than the man on man style of say Frawley. He plays his role to perfection, reads the ball as well as any one in the team and is a huge part of how the back half works as a unit - each with their own role to play and each their own strength. There was no better exmple of this than the tigers game. He was terrific and played a significant role in assiting Frawley shut down Reiwoldt. I bet if you asked Frawley he say he loves the support he gets from Rivers with the way he gets back to help I often see a game and think gee he played well and jump on this site and he's copping a spray. I don't get it. You don't have to agree with me of course but i've got some pretty good support for my view. Our coach! Bailey clearly rates Rivers very highly and as i noted he is clearly an important part of his "structure" and game plan. Despite Warnock being in rare form and them also having Morton who can play a similar role he chooses Rivers. I reckon a coach of a senior AFL team has a pretty good idea about a players ability and he isn't playing Rivers out of some sort of misguided appreciation for him. Different strokes for different strokes i suppose.

i'm an easy gainer, perhaps i could do some specialist coaching and help the skinny bugger out

Cheers. Must be close to selection then you'd reckon. Interesting selection quandries with the MFC site suggesting Grimes might be a chance to return (though you'd have to think he'll come thru Casey, easy to forget with him being out for our last 3 and a half wins how important he had been for our backline early on so perhaps there will be a temptation to play him if he's fit) and Miller surely some chance on the back of 10 goals (keeping in mind he was also listed as an emergency)

I must of missed something but what happened with Cale Morton, didn't play for Casey, not injured. Emergency?

No problems with rotating Jones, of course unlucky and i'm in no doubt in our best 22, but i think Malthouse has given us a glimpse of the future with his selection policy this year - ie moving players back and forward from VFL and AFL and picking "horses for courses". In some ways it is an exstension of the philsophy behind how the bench is currently being used and in this era of incedible demand on players in terms of fitness (how often do you hear a plyers "tank" discussed theses days compared to even 10 years ago)will become standard practice, particulary for mid field players/runners. We don't have the same need for a hard grunt player, particularly with Maloney and Tregove back in,aginst the young tiger midfield that we did agianst the more hardened Brisbane and Swans team, so makes perfect sense. Of course this policy is easier to pull off when you don't have too many injuries, again particularly to your midfield brigade, as is the case for the dees at presnt (and Collingwood for that matter). Bailey has stressed time and again his forward and back half units need to bank significant playing time together (50 - 60 games) and whilst it is also true of the midfield it is less of an imperative. If you look at our drafting over the last few years (eg taking Gysberst at 11 rather than a key postion player) the club has placed great empahsis on building a large number of potential midfielders with big "tanks" and good hands. In addition to those already in the midfield (Trengove, Scully, Maloney< McDonald, Sylvia, Jones etc) you can add Blease, Strauss, Morton, Grimes, Gysberts, Maric who will all be a chance of being on ballers and coming oin as rotations. As i've noted previously about young players going back to Casey Bailey will ensure they understand the reasons and that it isn't a knock on their ablity or comment about future opportunities. Good work Jonesy, he'll go back and go hard and be back soon. He is only 22 and will be 200 gamer at the dees. If we make the finals i'll bet he'll be one of the first picked. As for Maloney and McDonald not being in our best 22, no offence but that is a silly comment. Both are are in our best 5, with Maloney having his best year, working beautifully with Kareem, number 1 in clearances and inside 50's and McDonald just a ripper. Not in our best 22? Please