DemonWA

i went for Trengove, but would say Grimes if he can stay on the park for extended periods over the next season or 2

i have #31 on the back of my jumper, but i voted for #9 in the poll Trengove has obviously played alot more this year hes got alot to be exited about; Great marking, great kicking, all round class! Importantly he looks like he loves the club and the playing group Scully offers us some different skills which are similarly as valuable. I hope we get to keep them both, because they are both guns. its like trying to ask Carlton supporters whether they'd prefer Gibbs or Murphy

i think Bailey has made a rod for his own back. If we had'nt shown quite as much as we did in patches last year the expectations would have been less and he would have been sitting ok to keep his job /sarcasm i like deam bailey and I admire him for taking the path of developing youth etc. Problem is that alot of other clubs are going down the same path, with less fanied draft picks and are showing better signs than us?!

Dont agree Old Dee Freo are pretty much bunnies without Sandilands. losing Mundy and Balentyne will hurt them too. Not saying we're better than them, but they are'nt that good, especially at the G

Anyone else been following the Western Force / james Oconnor situation?! Rumours have been rife for months that he had done a deal with the Melb Rebels. Then a week or two ago he came out and said he was staying with the Force but was just going through the fine print before signing on. 2 weeks on and the Force have had enough of his games to drag out his contract discussions and have said that they arent going to offer him a contract at all! BAM! Doesnt really apply to the Scully situation ,although as many people have said, the longer he doesnt sign the more likley it is that hes shopping for more cash and therfore loyalty wont play a part in it?

here's hoping they dont bring Dunn back!

Well in that case "play on!"

Sorry mate, wasnt a criticism. I actually repsect the fact that you're post reflects the general thoughts by everyone if we were dicussing form or selections.

i did enjoy Gerard's bit on Mclean though, i also thought he was a gun untill he hurt his ancle so i'd be happy for him to get back to some decent form

Harsh but fair old dee. I wish him all the best, and hope tha if he does choose to come back he can recapture the form from a few years back!

I rekcon the clubs that do the best have the best head coach, best assistants, best recruiting staff and obviously playing Talent. its all icing on the cake beyond that IMO.

Im bagging the write up for praising one single instance where Morton showed comitment to the contest as some sort of match defining moment for him. If the coaches expect this stuff from him then whats the big deal?

Frustration with on field performances!

Yep, i'd say that about probably 50% of the footy department at every club. Jobs for the sake of having more jobs

Totally agree with you. But if there is a more suitable place to vent my frustrations with such trivial demons related issues other than Demonland let me know?! The only thing more pointless than the player review is the chat regarding team selection with Matt. Seriously you'd get more juicy info regarding selections on here.... but thats another story!

Not the case, i (and probably most fans) would just like to know if the coaches were happy or unhappy with a players performance/contribution (in black & white). In the majority of the reviews they make a token nice comment before addressing an area for them to work on. In many cases this leaves a balanced "review" (half good, half bad). Does this mean they are giving the palyer a Pass mark (50%)? I doubt it. So why not indicate on a scale how they rated the players games? Atleast then we could get a clearer picture of what they expect from each player. This way we can also temper our own expectations? For me the perfect example is Jack Watts. We all know he is improving but what do the coaches expect from him? do they rate his recent form as fair, or very good? Are they thinking - this is the minimum we expect form you Jack, or well done Jack your playing good footy.

I guess what I’d like to see from the club (and this player review is a forum where it could be conveyed) is an indication of any sort of benchmark for what they expect from the players - a review. Most reviews are out of 10 marks or 5 stars; Pass or Fail.. I couldn’t care less about whether Petterd's "physicality was good" or if he "provided an option" what i'd like to know, is whether the player's performance was acceptable to the footy club. Did they get out of Ricky Petterd what they wanted as a minimum when they picked him to play last Friday? I doubt it? But at the moment we don’t know whether bringing physicality and presenting but being effective for one week is acceptable or unacceptable. That’s why I’d be happy with less words. Telling us "fun facts" like Morton winning one contest early on isn’t a review of the player. So I’d even be happy with this; Ricky Petterd: Ricky was ineffective. We know he is better than this, and he knows we must see an improved performance next week. 2 out of 5 Sherrins That’s my opinion. You don’t have to agree with it! counter posting your opinion is unlikely to change it! Go Dees!

Beamer isnt inconsistant IMO, he gives 100% every week and you get the type of performances that you expect from him week in, week out. Inconsistant is more like Petterd, Maric etc. Gun's one week, hardly sighted the next.

We can all read between the lines. We are all also capable of reviewing the players performance ourselves. Do they think we don’t watch the games? Maldonboy38 summed it up for me; If they’re not going to at least be honest in their review why bother? Also to those who are saying the website cant hang player out to dry, I agree. But being honest and fair is different than "hanging them out to dry". At the moment its all rose coloured glasses IMO. An example; MFC site Ricky Petterd: Ricky’s physicality was good. He tried hard to be an option for us, but he was ineffective on the night what i'd be happy seeing; Ricky Petterd: Ricky was ineffective. We know he is better than this, and he knows we must see an improved performacne next week. or MFC site Neville Jetta: Nev’s physicality was good again. He had six tackles. Nev must continue to work on his involvement in the game and his use of the ball what i'd be happy seeing; Neville Jetta: We love Nev's tackling and pressure but he must bring more to games than this alone.

your're right. If the players wont play for Bailey (which i admit is becoming clearer and clearer) then its time for him to go....

i can read between the lines, but there is still too many positives being drawn IMO.

That comment about morton sums up why we are pathetic! Basically reads to me; "Cale tried to do the right thing, but the umpires told him off so he went back in his shell which is ok with us; we accept mediocrity"

you know what i meant! Im sure bailey would have said something along those lines, but if players dont follow instructions to the letter the coach cant achieve what he's trying to achieve

Its pats on the back all round???? WTF? Only players who really get a negative write up is Jurrah and Juice? Link: http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/7415/newsid/115120/default.aspx

i was happy to see them put the heat on the players. They didnt whack sylvia that badly. If any thing i think Roos was trying to say that hes a better player at a half forward flank / more attacking position than on the ball? The small clip which showed Sylvia giving judd 5m was used to demonstrate the types of things that coaches cant control. I.e. Bailey can put sylvia on Judd, but at the end of the day its up to sylvia to mark him closley.