nutbean

Its not tired old cliches that get to me. Its not criticism deserved that gets to me... Its..."this player is crap and should never play for the MFC again".... "trade that spud...trade him now..."..."he is a gutless peaheart, he is a splineless jellyfish, he is brainless...etc". Criticism (measured) ? no problem...vitriol and bile ? that I have a problem with... imploring certain players to do better...no problem at all

Telling Jamar that he has to take more marks is not constructive ? Suggesting that Lynden needs to impact more contests ? Tapscott needs to show more than cameo brute aggression ? In most of the cases RR has either mentioned specific areas or in the case of Trengove, Watts and Sylvia that a general lift in output is required. As to your point of thinking it strange that four of these guys are mentioned yet are in the leadership group - unfortunately I think it is more a reflection of where we are at. We have two players in our leadership group that were willingly traded by their former clubs ! Edit - i dont want to be the cheersquad here but there are posts imploring players to lift and improve like this and others that just slag off players - i see a difference

The criticism is constructive and yes, there are many others that could have been mentioned however if by seasons end you have put a tick next to all those names as having improved like you have suggested then we are in for a much better season.

I believe i will change my name to Nutdank

Morton looked okay when he first arrived

true - because it amounts to the same thing - if we are passing the ball around and not getting tackled then we are getting men loose/free - one of our big problems last year was not enough outside run/loose players.

me me...pick me

Im not sold on this. What you want is your ball carrier especially in the centre to draw hopefully more than one tackler leaving a player free. Judd has gone from being a sublime outside player in his days to working inside drawing in two to three players at clearances and releasing the ball effectively just as he is tackled to loose teammate. I saw our problem last year as not being about evading tackles but not having the loose to receive a handball from one of our guys who has drawn an opposition tackler (s) to him. ( there is also a fair bit of skill in being able to release the ball that split second before releasing becomes impossible due to being crushed to death in the tackle)

You see, this is what irks me. You posted earlier that you pray the Liam gets justice. You have shown a complete lack of understanding of the word "justice" as justice in this country carries the presumption of innocence so to enlighten you on this is "sticking to the topic" and is not petty. So if as you posted you want Liam to get justice then I presume you want Liam to have a trial and let the jury decide his innocence or guilt and you agree with this process irrespective of him being found innocent or guilty. Or is your argument that you dont want justice - you would just like to skip the trial process and punish him on untested evidence to hand ?

Again, I'll wait for the outcome of the trial. A decent lawyer can tear that apart ? Im not even a decent lawyer and will pick giant holes in it. - for police to suggest that Jurrah was caught red handed you would ask the question caught red handed by whom ? If everyone there was beyond drunk then you would assume the police werent there when it happened ....they were called to the scene...so...in summary...Liam Jurrah was caught red handed by people, not the police, that were beyond drunk....(the last person the NT police caught redhanded was Lindy Chamberlain) I will not condemn nor defend Liam until the "process" has run its course I will only defend the process.

ok.ok...sheesh...no need to ram it down my throat...

umm no...defending his right to innocence until proven otherwise. you are not quite getting this concept. Julian Knight was innocent up until the finish of his trial where he was found guilty by a jury of his peers. All some of us are doing is defending Liam Jurrah's presumption of innocence until a jury determines otherwise. You do not need any facts to be afforded the presumption of innocence under the law until a trial determines otherwise.

seriously ? going with lame New Zealand sheep humour ? Ewe should know better....

I dont see a great many defending him without the facts - i see a whole lot of people suggesting that justice should take its course and whilst not to get too pedantic - he actually should be defended because right here and now he is innocent - thats how our justice system works - innocent until proven guilty.

I dont know why I am trying to make you see "reason" - except drink driving you do understand that he hasnt been found guilty of anything yet. It is not proven that he has belted anyone - man, woman or child - you do realise this dont you ? That is what this little thing called a trial is going to determine.

Exactly - let's deny them all justice I say......

Your outrage ( warranted) is getting lost by your classification. Attack the education, level of ignorance and intellect of the poster and the only thing you can be accused of is being smarter.

Why even have courts ? [censored] I say, [censored] - lets skip the whole justice process, just pronounce him guilty as anybody that has done what he done is and then do your worst arrrrrr ( I have gone a bit pirate and Im not even sure why...)

its actually all over the ground and makes for very slow ball movement and kicking to congestion or to flat footed players.

and your choice is ...?

It amazes me that not many see Swans disposal - agree 100% on his disposal and I think the commentators are dazzled by the continual 40 plus output and dont look at what he does with the pill.

Me too - My squeeze is a dirty filthy Collingwood supporter so I take her to some games. I use the committee room during the week taking clients to lunch there ( highly recommend it) and I like to go to finals and at this stage they dont include the team I support.

Love it - Can i use that ? "you're a bin searching skip digger"

I think it was pointed out last year by some commentators that somewhat know their stuff that one of our problems is that we took Neeld too much at his word and had too many going about getting the contested footy. We had too many contesting the footy as opposed to good midfields who will back their one or two tough midfielders to get the footy and have others work themselves outside to receive or be there for a loose ball get. Our contested footy was too high overall when compared to our uncontested. That translates to too many chasing the contest and not enough backing your teammate in to get the ball and you presenting as the next easy target. Jordie is a prime example of that.