nutbean

you are indisputably a very attractive man...

This whisper makes no sense to me. There is zero ambiguity on our coaching structure going forward. Roos is going - contract will expire - Goodwin will coach - a contract in place. I would be gobsmacked if there was any significant movement in the coaching structure at all.

if Hogan is 10% as excited as Demonlanders are about how we are travelling why would you want to leave ?

These stats are a nonsense as so much of disposal efficiency depends on where and how you play. Jones and Vince play inside games - so their D/E would always be a little lower than Dunn for example who gets his D/E number up as the backline switches and chips and that is an easy kick. Watts has definitely improved his contested ball which would lower his D/E as he is kicking more balls with heat on. To me you should judge disposal efficiency with your eyes rather than stats - Watts is a great kick as is Dunn and Salem. Jones has become much more reliable over the journey and Vince is also good by foot ( with the very rare fluff). To back up this argument you only need to look at Tom McDonalds D/E of 81% and tell me who you would prefer to have disposing the ball - McDonald or Watts ?

He is probably our only backman who can play body on body - most teams have someone in their forward half that Dunn is a good match up for - players that aren't too mobile. He doesn't offer any run but that is more than compensated for by the penetration in his kicking which is a weapon ( and the balance of our backline does run).

He ain't quick..he hasn't got a massive tank..he is nice by foot and hand. I would call him honest - you pretty much know what you are going to get and that's not a bad thing

close - Jetta is hard as nails - Whelan was plain suicidal in his attack on the ball and player.

How close must he have been to getting the chop...and now look at him. He is rarely the best and rarely the worst - he just seems to do his job every week.

I think that's jockeys

How often do you see players how are called to "play on" or if there is" touched play on call" who clearly do not hear the umpires call. Happens pretty regularly. (FYI - I am poster who is deaf or partially deaf to other peoples arguments)

I have heard of players being duped by opposition mimicking their team mates by yelling out "leave it" or calling out their opponents name to hopefully get a handpass by accident - I have yet to have heard of cheating by impersonating an umpire and I would suspect that if it not illegal that if it did happen it would viewed in a very poor light and action would be taken to rectify the practice.

Umm... this argument is a nonsense. When an umpire calls a player to play on - an opposition player could have also made that call that out as well. Is there a whistle involved in a play on call ? Do you suggest that players ignore these calls ? Every player in the league responds to an umpires call of "play on" ( some better than others) Umpires give frees and stop play by whistles but there are also many calls which are verbal without the whistle and players rightly respond to them. Edit - sorry to be a tad aggressive but I cannot fathom any footballer watcher thinking that footballers do not respond to umpires verbal calls

Simple - if an umpires call can lead to a choice of action by players after the call then it should not be reviewed. The idea that players do not respond to umpires calls is a nonsense. Umpires calls (such as "play on".. or "made an effort .. play on" or "touched play on" are clear and precise - and players absolutely respond to them. You also see players that do not heed umpires calls and get pinged At the Swans game a player had a split second to respond to the umpires call of "not 15..play on" and didn't and got pinged for dropping the ball.

Please....I have watched the replay and the call was so loud and clear that it could only be an umpire - the umpire actually yells out "touched play on" twice whilst the ball is in the air !. Does pose an interesting question - is there a rule regarding players mimicking umpiring calls. You do hear players yell at the umpire "ball" or such like but if any player thought the touched call was anything but an umpires call I'll go he.

Spot on - the touched call the field umpire made may have affected the next play - who is to say that our defenders didn't run the forwards under the incoming ball as they heard the touched call and didn't care if went through the goals because of the touched call.

I think the coaching staff are using him better. Some time deep and some time up the ground. Firstly makes us less predictable and on Hogan himself he is very aerobic so if you sit him deep the whole time and clog up the space in front of him you can put more of plodder on him - but once you move him up the ground you have to adjust your thinking and have someone on him who can cover ground.

Was it a different umpire that called for the review ?

I understand that if a ball is touched on the goal line and there is uncertainty the umpires might review. I even understand that if the umpire DOESN'T call touched off the boot and the ball goes through the goal that they may want to review to see if it is touched. If there is NO call from the umpire you, as a defender or attacker, will not alter your decision as the ball comes towards you. However, yesterday, the umpire clearly called a ball that was kicked at Collingwood's goal "touch play on" loudly and clearly. The ball just flew over the players heads in the goal square and went through and the umpire then asked for a review to see if his call touched call was right. I'm not sure this is not taking a review too far. When the umpire called touched play on as the ball is coming towards the goal , that may change the way defenders/forwards actually go at the ball. I don't think a review in those circumstances should be allowed. A review should not be allowed where the original call of the umpire may impact the way the players attack a contest.

Yes there is a god - and his name is Jesse Hogan - I thought I'd make this argument even more circular than it already is....

I would suggest not when there are two years left on the contract.

start to worry when he orders a soy chai latte..

Again whilst I am in no way shape or form comparing him with Scully but I cannot help but laugh at posters reading Hogan's body language and nuances and suggesting they are indicators. The exact same thing transpired with Voldemort - constant looking at how he acted and reacted. There is no doubt that Scully's demeanor was odd at his time at Melbourne - well so i thought until I heard on SEN talking about the GWS boys after the game in the hotel and they said the banter between all the players was really good except for one T Scully - he stood around by himself like a cardboard cutout So like Nasher, I am going to enjoy watching Hogan play like lots of others in our team and work on the assumption that Hogan will remain a Demon right up until the time he is not - be it 2 years, 5 years or when he retires..

Nah.... more fluff - Roos was sprouting the similar stuff about Frawley and Howe. All coaches say the same thing about their charges. "he's happy here and I think he will stay". The only time I can recall that a club waved the white flag on a player staying or going was the Hawks with Buddy.

Watch after he has handpassed to Salem - you can see that he gets on his bike again... he just loves being involved...

Not a hope in hell. (go team Oliver)