nutbean

One of the best contested marks one on one (not necessarily taking speccies) was Robert Flower. We had a series of coaches who I fondly remember all employing the same strategy from the kick in from full back. Put all your backman on the right hand side of the ground and then leave Robbie one out with his opposing wingman on the left. The ball would be kicked to Flower and he would body his opponent to mark the ball 9 times out of 10. Alas ,he would look up the ground and have no one of talent to kick it to.

You have just got to stop "liking" your own posts....

It will happen again when a player who's time is up doesnt think his time is up.

Its not rocket science is it ? Whether Neeld and Co are successful or not havent we seen enough of pandering to soft footballers at our club. Look at the Scotts no nonsense approach at both North and Geelong. There is a reason we havent been anywhere near good enough for so many years. We lacked a tough edge and this is exactly what Neeld is talking about. Has the talk translated into action yet ? No but I applaud the direction and hope it will pay dividends.

Unsurprisingly there are none - because again you are looking and judging using a rear vision mirror - at at the time of doing due diligence on Energy Watch did it occur that the company was flying (hence 3 codes taking their sponsorship dollars) and their CEO's erratic and offensive behaviour hadnt surfaced ? (dont confuse offensive with quirky as you wouldnt take money from half the companies in Australia based on quirky CEO's). Alan Bond tipped a fortune into Richmond only to end up in jail years later. Christopher Skase was hailed as the hero of Port Douglas before his fall from grace. You need to look no further than compass and its management for a company that took tens of thousands of people in. So at the time the sponsorship deal looked good -or if you really think it was bad decision by CS then you can only draw the conclusion that at the time it was common knowledge that the CEO was a racist scumbag and the company would go belly up.

I see what you did there- you choose to ignore every argument and honed in on the twig that was Craig whose time was up at Adelaide after 8 years. Bravo- a career in deflection (politics) awaits.

I remember at the time the numerous posts you made about this sponsor suggesting it was a deplorable decision. At the TIME, it was one of the fastest growing companies in Australia and it sponsored 3 major codes in Australia. Remember Pauline Hanson got elected and did little wrong and give little hint of her inner self until she delivered her maiden speech in parliament.

you did say a "good" conspiracy didnt you ?

How dare the players get blamed, after all they are only the blokes who go on field and actually kick the football and you cant blame a coach as he is only the one who controls the tactics and motivates the players. Here's a tip- footballers are paid handsomely to play football,coaches to coach and admins to administer. If players don't like what is going on elsewhere - fine- at the end of the season go and play for Edithvale or Bunyip seconds (go the bulldogs) but whilst you are being paid good money by a club to pull on a jumper, suck up it Stephanie, grow a pair and play the best football you can. That you want to deflect blame away from those who dished out the dross is beyond me. Note Craig this year and I will paraphrase- " the MFC will not be to all the players liking and thats fine - either hop on board or at the end of the season you find somewhere else to go". More power to you !

couldn't agree more - if we have peeheart footballers who still want to sook over administrators who have put us in a more secure position financially, moved us into great facilities and put in a place what looks to be a solid football department structure (albeit one that is not yet producing results) then I say sack 80% of the footballers.

I think we are being naive if we truly believe that this fund raising is that directional and we wouldnt be able to pay 100% TPP without it. Dig deep people because a) we need more account receivable clerks in the admin area: OR B) more dencorub is required for the boys groins: OR c) we need more punching bags in the gym because Chunks head is wearing thin: OR d) so we can splash out and buy Cloke, Goddard and Boak. Which one has the most appeal ?

Deevoted- excellent post. In any business structure be it sporting or otherwise, when there are weaknesses such as lack of resources, both financial and human, you will find dysfunction - People involved in areas they should not be involved in. I can see this happening during the bleaker days at the end of Baileys reign. We seem to be in a completely different situation now where the business side of the club is quite settled. The football department, even though it has delivered little to date looks well structured,well resourced and stocked with reasonable people. There seems little reason for interference from the business side of the club (aka CS). To want to blame our showing to date on the CEO firstly shows that there is little acknowledgement of our reality. But it is also deflecting blame from those who are primarily responsible - the players and then secondly - the coaches.

Won't happen but I am happy to profess my manlove for him.

So he is being offered $1M a year and you would offer $850K a year to come to the Dee's - there's a tempting offer.

There is a difference between ducking the head and acting for frees Nobody would suggest that Jordie acts for frees - he goes in hard and in many occasions leads with his head - so the simple solution is that if you duck your head into a tackle OBVIOUSLY as Jordie did a few times last weekend- dont pay the free. Lilly livered acting for frees is another thing - humiliate the players so it is stamped out.

Why not offer them Lawrence and our 5th round draft pick ? You do realise that the crows have put a contract on the table that will earn him in the vacinity of $700K per year. Does that sound like a player you would nab for Bate and a second round draft pick ?

I'm up for a 32 goal loss as long as Pav kicks 20 goals, Michael Johnson takes 30 marks and also the margin would have been 52 goals if not for Howie and his 63 disposals and Grimes with his 42 tackles and Couch with a rising star nomination- he is too old but he will play so exceptionally well that they will give him a nomination anyway- (if we are going to be silly at least let ME benefit - aka my supercoach team)

I have such mixed emotions about Joel Mac - is there any way we can morph Sylvia and him into one person ? (and to be 100% clear - I want a player of MacDonalds heart and passion for the contest with Sylvia's skills.)

This is not a comment on Cook - this a comment on teamsheets. Does anyone take the slightest bit of notice of the positions ? I expect that team selection may be over a couple of hours and they take about a minute and a half to put them in positions. In the seniors this week Grimes in on the wing - I have seen him play in the middle - has anyone ever seen him on the wing ? Scully is on the wing and McKenzie is in the centre - does anyone doubt that McKenzie will start on Scully ? Howe has started nearly every game up the ground - he is named in the forward pocket. Player positions named by clubs should be taken with passing amusement at best.

This always amuses me - with few exceptions draftees are skinny - especially if you are talking talls. The Jono Pattons and Tapscotts are exceptions to how draftees look - not the rule. First aside is that I dont Strauss was all that skinny - needed some growing but certainly wasnt as skinny as some draftee's Second aside - Strauss's major injuries have been a sickening leg break and shoulder reconstruction - these hardly qualify as fragile body that keeps breaking down. Both injuries were collision injuries. you can point to continual soft tissue injuries but it is unfair to classify these injuries as a fragile body.

Not sure I understand the logic ? Are you saying you dont have a Swan, Ablett, Pendles, Boyd or Cox in your team ? If you do - you are expecting them to underperform compared to Grimes ? I have Grimes in my team but would not make him Captain or even vice captain. If you need to jump in supercoach or dreamteam the risk you take is for instance - swapping out Pavlich and someone else and getting Buddy back in because you think Pav is gorn and Buddy will tear it up. My big risks were in my initial selections - I picked undervalued injured players from last year and in the main they have done ok - Hayes being the standout, Lake, Porplesia (cant be bothered looking up the spelling), Cooney(meh), Clark ( coming back from O/S).

I'll answer for WJ if I may. I think the point being made is that since day dot, once teams have no hope of making the finals, they have adopted practices of putting players out for op's early, playing kids as opposed to seniors who weren't in future plans and experimenting with players in certain positions. These acts have certainly can grouped together and point to "we are not doing everything in our power to win at all costs". The emphasis is on the future not the present. What WJ is saying is the AFL has always allowed these practices and this is supported by comments they have made. Over to you WJ whether you think the AFL should try and disallow these practices. I am not a betting man but if I put big money on the Dees this weekend (and I stress, I do not believe we are tanking now), say we are 5 goals down at halftime and Neeld gets his angry pants on with team that he doesnt think is putting in - not only a blast will do - lets see how Howe goes at fullback and McDonald at full forward and teach Sylvia to be accountable by throwing him on small forward and how would Garland go as an onballer and we lost by the same 5 goal - I would be dirty - it is apparent that his moves have not given us the best chance of winning. How can you have betting on games where there are influences that come into play that can so blatantly and cruelly affect the outcome of a game. The greatest polar opposite to this was Steven Icke playing full forward in a reserves grand final for North - for the second half of the game literally on one leg. Everything being done to win a game of football.

ummm That was mentioned in the first sentence of my reply to your post. I also said in my post that players didnt leave who didnt want to play for a bottom club and specifically mentioned GWS - if he wants to go GWS he can get there. He may even be fortunate and slip through to GC-but thats where it ends. He wants to go anywhere else we have got to agree and make it happen. It was like the nonsense of Scully going to Richmond- how on earth was it going to happen. So maybe I'll say it again - if Blease doesnt want to go GWS he aint going anywhere else.

It is splitting hairs and not actually looking at little closer at who we traded - apart from Scully last year exactly which other players was a "required" player that opted out ? The closest is Bruce and he was required on our terms only not his. Keep going back through the history- good 2-3 season players who are wanted by their clubs generally dont move. These trade figures would become even smaller if you go back through history and take out the go home factor- Gunston to the Hawks for example. Boak and Tippet are other examples of players who arent necessarily disgruntled but reportedly want to go home. Blease doesnt fit into this category either. So in short - players who dont have the go home factor - players who dont want to play for a bottom club ( even GWS who offer bucketloads) - players who are required by their club - players who only have 2-3 seasons under their belt dont generally move. Cheney wasnt actually a trade either (technically he was) - he wanted out and we said sure so we got an upgraded millionth round draft pick.

Well done Brad - I am with Pates - never quite reached the heights expected after so much early promise. Im not sure how good a coach he would make - he has some fantastic qualities -loyalty, leadership,commitment to the contest and apparently a top bloke. On the flipside - he was not the cleverest footballer going around in terms of running to the right places and making good decisions. I compare him to Leigh Brown- somewhat similar but Brown at Collingwood was given a role and you would have to say that he did his job to perfection. Congrats on your time at Melbourne and an extended life at the Tiges