Pates

Definitely I think he needs to go. Has had a lot of time at the club and has not got one area he was involved in to click. Does anyone know at what point he took over the midfield?

Ok the intent is there with competing at contests and running, disposal and decision making is what is really hurting us. We should have at least 2-3 goals on the board if we'd kept our heads or disposed properly.

Why? What's changed? Last week we had a crap list against an average side, this week we've got an even worse list against a better side. I don't really know why people expect him to be gone week to week at this stage. If he's going its not going to be before mid year.

It's a tough call to blame Melbourne for not developing him considering he was only at the club for two years and did fairly well in that time. I will agree that our record of developing talents into good players (not even stars) is abysmal. I honestly reckon he would be doing better at Melbourne if he was still here. The pressure placed on him at such a young age with his price tag would be too much for a lot of people, let alone a bloke of 21.

Although I'm not glad that Hogans injured, I am glad the club has given him leave to go home to spend time with his family. Hopefully Dawes gets through this week well, we need him in ASAP with Clark gone for a while.

Other teams get early prognoses' of worse outcomes but they end up being 1-2 weeks, it always seems like for us what appears to be an innocuous injury turns into a serious one. Look at Lecras! He was meant to be out for ages and came back after 3 weeks! Back luck (again) big fella. Come back fit, healthy, and hungry!

I understand what you're trying to say but the major difference they have apart from facilities (before we got to AAMI) and people is that they have a successful team so their young players are made to earn games and they also have these great players around to mentor them. In a sense I think that is what Neeld was trying to create in some ways with the likes of Rodan, Byrnes and Pederson. Get people in that can almost walk into a team and make the younger players earn their spot. I don't think it's a complete failure in that idea as players like Kent have been made to wait and dominate at Casey. To me I think the issue is the step up into AFL, it's partially to do with the fact that when they come in we need then to have an impact because the current senior crop is doing sweet F-all. This goes back to another thread (Eat our young) about how we bring the kids in at such an early stage and not just expect them to have an impact but need them to. It seems to me to be a revolving door system until we get one or two out and out guns that lift the team around team. A settled team creates competition for spots, we're not even close to settled.

Give me a break, this is extremely similar to how Neeld approached his first few sessions with our guys. Pathetic thread.

He will not be stripped of the captaincy so you can forget about that one and perhaps there will be a time where he gets a run at Casey but from what I've read he was very far away from our worst player today. As rpfc said, don't expect much from him this year. Last year he had something hampering him (blind Freddy could see that) and he's had pre-season issues hold back his fitness and confidence. At best we will see him get into form second half of the year. I would not against him going to a VC next year with Grimes as solo captain. He is so young and I do wonder whether the captaincy is hurting his game.

You are correct with that, he had had multiple 30+ possie games but we didn't play him and they kept asking why. It was certainly a mistake to use him as a promo tool but certainly we were damned either way by the media. I agree though with Jimmy. Pressure and expectation needs to be lifted off him to allow him to grow and mature. He's played in very successful sides all his life, playing in 3 games for a combined losing margine of 300+ points would be a massive shock. We shouldn't play him until he puts in a couple of good games at VFL.

Well Beamers joined the very non-exclusive club of former players who play well against us. Adam Maric is actually the only one I can think of in recent times that has played against us poorly! Hell even $culldog, who doesn't seem to do much through the year, played well last time! Anyway, I do wish him the best but I wish he hadn't played so well against us!

Bulls---, there's a reason why people say anyone else would've picked then in that position. It's because it's true. Not because Emma Quale and Co. do a phantom draft and say this is where she expects them to be picked, because we have people going around the country to U18 teams checking them out and then picking them on what THEY have seen. Do you really honestly believe that we pick players because that's who other teams and football commentators think we should pick?We have a lot of grunt players with average disposal, Toumpas has been rated as one of the best kicks in the draft. He is also athletic and has been playing SANFL so can cope against heavier bodies. Does Wines look like a good player? Yes. Would he be the difference right now? No. Can Toumpas become a good player? Hell yes. But we as supporters need to stop looking at these kids as messiahs and just back the F off if they are struggling. Honestly who'd want to be picked by Melbourne with impatient supportes like us?

Did Dawes play? The only info I've seen is about Toumpas (which is ridiculous the amount of talk there is).

Hopefully he'll look at it and think well I survived so I'll keep doing it. I've always thought that he's been so afraid of contact ever since that first possession v collingwood where he got crunched. If he keeps taking hits and getting up then that's a step in the right direction.

This kills me every single week. The players seem to go to a spot and stand there flapping their arms. No one leads to make space or any kind of running at all. EVERY other team is able to hurt us when we miss and we see it as another opportunity to stuff up. Brisbane had 20 behinds today, image if we became a team that hurt the opposition 30-40% of the time on kick ins. Bring back Wheatley!!

On McKenzie, who do people suggest we put in as a tagged instead? We don't have a damaging midfielder we can put on someone to make him accountable. Don't forget everyone was lauding some of the efforts he did on players last year. Sounds to me like he's struggling for fitness. As for TMac, he has always butchered the ball but last year he was good at spoiling players on the lead and intercepting spoils. He was an ok mark last year but not 100% confident. He's still very young and raw so I wouldn't be chucking him on the trash pile just yet, put perhaps a stint at Casey would help his confidence.

I find this thread so funny. I'm in the USA at the moment so I missed the game, but you have to understand that I have been going to sleep expecting the worst and find something even worse than that when I wake up. People are saying Neeld was happy with a 28 point loss. BS he is taking positives to build on with the playing group, any massiah coach we got in that's had this start to the year would say just about the exact same thing. Of course they bloody well play to win, but sometimes it's good just to say, "well at least.......".

This article makes me even more angry at the AFL and specifically Demetriou, what a pathetically armature response from him when the 7:30 report story came out. He put petrol on this firestorm of controversy for us, when if he'd bothered to look at and state the facts it would actually have shown that we did in fact inform the AFL of the relationship. We then did a meticulous internal review and it was the club doctor who lied to us (I guess they'll fine us another $500k for employee acting without approval and lying). The 7:30 report also made references (while naming players) to 5 substances that we did not use and the one that we did was not banned. This article also answers my earlier question of whether Trenners could find himself in trouble for using this cream, the answer is no. So to review: - we informed the AFL of the relationship as soon as we knew and terminated it immediately - we (and certain players) have been associated with substances that we did not use - as far as anyone can see, the doctor and Dank (who clearly leaked the info the ABC) were the only ones with any knowledge of this cream and it was not illegal at the time of use so there can be no retrospective action on Trenners. Bates did not inform the club during its review and he has stood down - Demetriou instead of taking a breath and contacting Melbourne before going on the radio post 7:30 spoke extremely heavy handed about us and chose not to reveal that we had in fact told the AFL about communications with Dank. Now who's the liar Andy?

At the time he told Trenner to use the cream it was not a banned cream to use, but correct me if I'm wrong but it was also not cleared. Does this leave him open to potential issues if he has been found to have applied it? If so that's kind of like moving the finish line at the end of a race. On the surface it appears that we are ok in terms of WADA/ASADA but I think the AFL is getting very sick of us and how we're running things (although the feeling is mutual when it comes to the tanking fiasco). I get the feeling that the AFL is breathing down our necks for every little thing we do. It turns out that we disclosed the nature of the relationship with Dank a long time ago, despite what has been reported. The only thing that wasn't disclosed was that the doctor asked JT to use a cream on his foot that only NOW has been banned.

I imagine they've got a very structured plan with him to make sure he doesn't burn out. The most important thing with him will be conditioning to try to get his body ready for AFL next year, but the best part is that he's doing this against men in the VFL. I am not at all concerned about them over doing it with Hoges this year because they had a test run of sorts with Viney last year.

Are there grounded accusations at the club for doing something outside the guidelines? Or is the major issue that our doctor and potentially the club lied to the AFL about a link to Dank? What I find annoying about our part in this is that AD said that decisions as to what to give to players should be left in the hands of the club doctor. Did we not do this? Wasn't it the doctor that signed off on everything going into the players? I also agree that it's a disgrace they named Melboirne players but felt obliged to blur out Bombers players. Regardless of the outcome it has dragged Trenners name through mud by perception.

I was thinking the exact same thing, what a springboard for an AFL career he has here.

Every time we were bad and Malthouse was commentating for Seven he'd say Howe is one player that he can see becoming a special player for us. The one that can do the impossible when needed to spark the team, but at the same time still be a solid contributor.

I still think that defense is the wrong place for him. It was good for a period, it got him intercepting the ball and giving run of half back but clearly he's not accountable enough. I think wing position where he's given license to roam at both ends is where he belongs, make him a defensive winger but when he get the ball he's instructed to back himself with his delivery. The enigma is how to get him wanting the contest.

I'm stoked to hear Flash had an impact, I really hope he has a good year. What (very little) I've seen of him he seems to have gotten a bit of his Davey dance back. Give thing is backing this quarter up with a good 4 quarter effort v Lions. I can accept us losing but we must so everything to try not to be blown off the park. If we can achieve that it'll be something to build on. The important thing is its given a few of the younger players a taste of victory at AFL level. Even if Viney didn't have a good game (whether he was injured or not) he has had his first win.