The Jacks

This kind of stuff is ridiculous. Sylvia is employed to help us win games of football. Not sure what this incident has to do with winning games of football, particularly in 2012

Depends what you mean by "ok"... I wouldn't racially abuse someone on a footy field, nor would I talk about raping a player's mother. Neither are nice things to say. But if it's on a football field and it's something said between players it's just one of those things that can, will and does happen. You're a [censored] if you do it but they don't hand out four points for being nice, do they? I think abuse is abuse. You can draw lines between talk of raping a player's mother, killing someone, and racial abuse if you want.

If you were a player would you be looking for a slightly bigger piece of the pie given all the circumstances? I certainly would be. Have any of you ever asked for a pay rise? Doesn't sound like it...

Sounds like exactly the type of bloke we need involved with our club. Will do anything, absolutely anything to win, and has unbelievable talent. A modern Leigh Matthews is exactly what we need in players and coach. Maybe Leigh Matthews himself still has it in him? Perhaps complaining to the umpire and dobbing an opposition player in for saying something mean about your mum will get us to a flag...

You guys are embarrassing. Explain to me logically why you feel so much hatred for Scully? I will boo the kid and try to put him off his game to gain an advantage when he eventually comes to play us at the MCG (probably Docklands...), because I feel that is what home fans should do. It's like appealing to the umpire for a free-kick that probably isn't there: I'm happy for fans to make a noise and put pressure on the ump, but you need to get over it quickly and not be so angry. Why would Scully show as much loyalty to the club as a supporter would? Fans have a life long investment in the club and have a genuine relationship that will probably last until they die. Scully wasn't a Melbourne fan as a kid and has only spent two years at the club. He's just been offered a huge salary increase and a long term contract that is probably twice as good as any other player of his age would be able to get. I would find it odd if Scully stayed at Melbourne. It would have been nice, but very unlikely. Time to grow up and move on. Quickly.

My team, by the way: FB: Birchall Scarlett Gibson HB: Kelly Fisher Thomas C: DalSanto Mitchell Judd HF: Swan Cloke Murphy FF: Milne Franklin Petrie R: Cox Goodes Pendlebury INT: Thompson Ablett Selwood Goldstein

Jamar played one or two good games all year.

What has a betting market got to do with who coaches us? Someone care to explain the link?

Huddles or "clusters" of players can still be employed effectively against zones, not just man-on-man. If you bring a cluster of say 6 players into one back pocket, hit a short target, work the ball through that part of the zone with run and carry, then hopefully break over the top of the zone with the next kick.

Just playing young blokes in the hope that they will eventually be good enough isn't "good enough". What people fail to realise is that Howe will never kick 100 goals in a season, and it takes a rare talent to even get close to that. People talk about blokes kicking 3 or 4 goals every week. You know who has averaged 3 or 4 goals every week this year? Franklin maybe, that's about it! I'm not suggesting that if we signed Fevola it would go perfectly or even work out in the end, but it's just ridiculous that this is the only game on the planet that would have no professional team interested in a player as talented as Fevola.

You and I have no way of ever knowing what kind of influence Fevola had on other Carlton players. I assume you are judging Fevola on a few incidents that were all over the TV, papers and radio when the guy did what almost every other footballer has done and will do, he just caught in the act. There is almost no doubt that Fevola is of below average intelligence and has made some bad decisions in his life. But you know what, I've seen him play some unbelievably good football that can help his side win games. That's the part I'm interested in. By the way, why would we ever take up a trade with an opposition club if the club clearly is happy to move that player on? There must be a reason, eh?

What actually went pear-shaped at Carlton and Brisbane? I'm talking on the field, not some made up rubbish that is hand-fed to you by football "reporters". I'm talking about the stuff that wins and loses you games of football.

I'm happy that Rudeboy shares this information with us, it's very nice of him and it adds to this forum. But I don't understand your "17 year old" comparison. What are you trying to say? What has this got to do with playing football in the bush? Jurrah has unbelievable talent and I just want him to have it drilled into him over and over and over that his talent will get him 40 goals a year, and that's it. If he could turn himself into a more valuable player he could kick another 10 goals a year himself, make the team 2 goals better every week, and we'd be loving him even more. Jurrah has the ability to kick 3 or 4 goals in any given game. He can kick goals from nothing and his opponent can do almost everything right and Jurrah will still kick a goal or two. It's the fact that in many of those 35 games Jurrah has contributed very little to the side other than kick 2 ro 3 goals. With the little he contributes you almost need Jurrah to kick 4 to call it a "break even" game from him, and that's not good enough, because he doesn't do that every week.

It's not like we've got 22 blokes that all deserve a spot in the team each week. Why do we have to choose between these two. I'd have both playing!

The guy is as soft as butter. If he had a little more determination to win the footy, chase after blokes, tackle them and actually put his body in the opposition's path instead of getting out of the way the guy could be anything. Jurrah has talent most footballers would die for, but he's missing the most important attribute a GOOD footballer needs, he doesn't "have a go".

What is "that", then?

I just don't understand the mind set that we only play blokes who will be around when we (apparently inevitably) win the flag.

I happen to think we're unlikely to win a flag while any of our current players are still playing in the AFL. Would I then be justified in sacking the lot of them and starting over with 18 year olds like the Gold Coast/Western Sydney, but without all the AFL concessions? Or is it a little less black & white than that?

If you're sitting back soaking up pressure, your opposition has 60% of the play with most of it being played in your defensive half, and you are essentially playing "on the counter attack", you are bound to have less inside 50s (and genuine goal kicking opportunities) but perhaps a better chance of converting those opportunities when the ball does go inside 50. I hate how much time is given to "off-field" issues (aka "not football") at football clubs. If a guy like Fev rocks up to training when he's supposed to and performs in games when he is supposed to, getting drunk occasionally and making a fool of himself isn't that big a deal. The guy is a fool, don't be surprised when he acts like one. The guys is also a gun full forward, don't be surprised when he plays like one.

Carlton tore us a new one playing this "double huddle" a month or so ago. A few other teams have been doing this from kick-ins. No idea who's idea it is, but it can work well. My guess is the Gold Coast would be the perfect team to try this against. The entire game seemed a bit like a training drill, which I have no problem with. Tried a few things out, still got a win. 2012 can't come soon enough!

Nice. Not "amazing", but nice

Not suggesting we trade the 'soft' players I mentioned. The issue I have is giving them games when they continue to play the same way. Don't give them a game until they change. New players don't get a game till they are willing to "put their head over the footy and step into it"

If we're looking at trading players or players we should get rid of, it should be those that aren't hard enough or tough enough to give a consistently hard effort at the ball. Players like Bennell, Morton and Maric. What we need is a bit of the Sydney Swans. new players come in there and know what is expected of them if they are to get an game. Like that [censored] ad, "nothing soft gets through". Make that the starting point. Petterd has a fair bit of skill, the ability to pull of the spectacular out of nothing, and has a big dip. Therefore, I like him.

Sign up as a member with you first pay cheque of 2012, mate. I'll be there but find it weird how so many of my mates I usually go with just lose interest when we aren't playing well. I obviously understand the excitement when we're winning and playing well, but I don't go to see us win, I go to enjoy watching us play. Winning is always better but just change teams and support whoever is looking like a chance for flag each year if that's what you're after.

How about 5 in a row. Then 10 in a season. In 2014 he can aim at playing 20 games. If he does that again in 2015, he might be in line for the captaincy in 2016. I voted for Moloney, but this is worrying, given there is no obvious choice.