nutbean

He was good on Saturday night. You may be right. I may be suffering from the "Clint Batram's". Probably didn't make that many errors but when he did they were real stinkers. Goes back to my point - the times he turns it over is when he has too much to decide what to do. Makes it look worse.

and i think people need to look at the game in conjunction with stats. I think Tommy Mac is a beauty but the part of his game that needs attention is his disposal and decision making. He is actually better when is he is instinctive and has little time to think about his disposal. The more time he has the more he worries me. Grimes flaw in his game is the same and needs to improve - I don't need a figure of 71% to tell me that.

He had a very special on field relationship with Garry Lyon ( especially standing on his head to take that hanger)

I resemble that remark !

Essentially - be Hawthorn and don't turn the freakin pill over at all !!

hence my last line - and the definite need for us not to cough the ball up. I just found it interesting that I think we still have the problem almost as bad as last year of turning the ball over but it has been masked to an extent because we have been good at recovering from our mistakes and not getting carved up because of it. The JKH dropped mark against Collingwood and the Bail almost flicking it back in when it was across the boundary line last week reminded me of last year where we turned it over through error and were made to pay big time.

Interestingly though - we have butchered the ball and turned it over - but even though some have occurred in the backline - very few have hurt us. Besides the Eagles game and to a lesser extent the North game I would suggest that our turnovers have stopped us winning games more than contributing to the opposition beating us if that makes sense. Our defensive efforts have been really good in that once we lose the ball we close the play down and either force a ball up or win it back. It was mentioned about Hawthorn by a few commentators that if they lose a clearance in the centre they dont care because they back themselves in to get it back off you through their defensive measures. This has happened a lot with our turnovers - I dont think we have necessarily turned it over much less than last year - I think we have been defensively good that we dont let it hurt us - hence the much improved "points against" part of our percentage. In the end turnovers still mean we lose games and the fewer of them, the bigger positive impact it will have on the scoreboard.

No - Petrie clearly beat him. I wouldnt have liked to be a defender the way the ball was coming in yesterday ( far too easily) but at the end of the day - it doesn't matter - I thought Petrie beat him.

No - for the record it wasn't the only thing. Yes he missed some. But he did a few shots from on the 50 or just outside and some from the angles of 45 degree or better. This has been addressed in other threads Yup - some teams are missing easy shots against us but there was an article in the age last week that we are number one in the comp for not giving up goals within 25 metres. Roos has said a few times that we are making teams take shots from difficult positions - we are rarely giving up the corridor close.

Negatives for Tom - can get lost in transition, can be outbodied, questionable footskills and decision making Pluses for Tom - He can punch - he can mark. His big plus is his willingness for a key defender to get involved. I see him as being similar to Ted Richards - the big difference is that Richards averages 12 touches a game and TMac - 16 touches. The big ? of course is whether he can clean up his disposal and decision making - at 21 - I would definitely not put a cross through him.

So obviously you disagree with trying to "develop" a player. Further consider that we have been appalling in this area for a number of years and this is the first footy department that knows anything about "improving". 13 games into the new regime - lets just flick him ? And further consider that not a single coach but ALL coaches have this benchmark of 70 games plus before footballers start to really know their trade. Then add that big blokes take even longer. McDonald has questionable footskills and is prone to poor decision making but there is also a lot to like about him. He finds the ball plenty and I am sure that the coaches will try to polish off his very rough edges. I am willing to suggest that Roos and co do not share your views on his retention so standby to see a 2-3 year contract signed. If TMac does not resign I don't believe it will because the footy department dont want him.

Wow. He does have the odd brain fade and scares me a little with ball in hand but he has been the centrepiece of a defense who has been quite miserly compared to the last four years. He is young and learning and will improve. What gets me is that he is being pilloried for getting done on the lead. You can slam jetta for that too. Or we might concede that it had something to do with ball being waltzed into their forward line way too easily last night.

You know noothin Deestroy all

good get !

I like that he doesn't bounce players in and out the team. ( for the record - I have never been an advocate of dropping a player after a couple of quiet games. Nor have i ever been an advocate of calling any player in the AFL a spud)

Like anything - confidence brings improvement - I rated his hardness and shutting down ability but didn't believe he provided enough offense. With confidence ( I guess from not being bounced in and out of the team) he is now not only doing a great defensive job but also offering some offensive rebound. I think as we improve this will also become more a feature of the game. I loved the little run in the 4th Quarter when he gathered the ball and both Pies forwards around him though he would dish off laterally but instead he charged straight down the middle leaving both Pies forwards flat footed.

You know this how ? Roos confirmed we would not have taken Kelly but I haven't seen any reporting that we would have taken Salem at number 2 ?

Murphy has always had class on and off the field.

I have "slade" tattoed on my knuckles (not really)

In come the dollars and in come the cents to replace the pounds and the shillings and the pence. Be prepared folks when the coins begin to mix on the 14th of February 1966. Clink go the cents folks clink, clink, clink. Changeover day is closer than you think. Learn the value of the coins and the way that they appear and things will be much smoother when the decimal point is here. In come the dollars and in come the cents to replace the pounds and the shillings and the pence. Be prepared folks when the coins begin to mix on the 14th of February 1966.

In come the dollars and the cents Out go the pounds and the shillings and the pence......

In come the dollars and the cents Out go the pounds and the shillings and the pence......

I read it on here. ( must be the truth then...)

I also asked about his best position. He said a bit more engine and muscle needed and he is a genuine mid. I said he may not have genuine speed but has all the moves. he nodded and said "of course he has the moves - at his size, if he didn't he would be dead by now"

Someone on thread mentioned JKH as being a loner and stand apart from the group (can't find the actual post). I live in oakleigh and was walking the dawgs tonight past the Oleigh chargers ground. They were training and I got talking to a trainer about the next gun from the chargers. What he told me I found very interesting. Even though they are two years apart JKH and Dom Tyson went to Trintity and both captained the chargers (did not know that). He said they knew each other both before and after Tyson went to GWS and were friends and JKH was over the moon to come to the demons because "his friend Dom was at the MFC. My first bit of inside gossip - make it of it what you may.