nutbean

great post.

IMO there are a few different schools of thought on JW;

- He's a work in progress, but will be an absolute star in a few year once he has grown and gains confidence

- He's not the power forward we thought we were getting by using the #1 pick for him, but he'll be very good in a few years

- He's no good currently and even in time he wont be a power forward becasue he lacks the desire for the contest, no we wasted a number 1 pick on the type of player you can get later in teh draft.

IMO we as members/supporters were hoping for a once in a generation power forward when we used the #1 selection on a tall. The fact that he quite obviously isnt showing comprable form to the players hannibal listed above at the same ages casues us all to question wheather he'll ever get there.

at the end of the day, if we had used a 2nd round pick on him we wouldnt be scrutinising his every move. Lucas Cook is lucky in that respect - IMO every time he does anything of note it will almost be like a bonus, where as with Watts, everytime he does somthing great we say "so he should, we used a #1 draft pick on this kid!"

I also think that there is something in how football is being played these days - last season and this.

Look at last season and the only big forward to dominate was Jack Riewoldt - thats because he stands on heads. Barry Hall did well ( because the dogs were so good at the 100 mph transition), Buddy had good days but didnt dominate as he has previously done and Nick Riewoldt was ok but not up to his previous standards. Look at the forwards who did perform well - Lecras, Green, Didak, Stevie J, even the tiprat. The smaller more agile forwards - that can mark and lead but also crumb. There has been a marked increase in the number of smaller forwards and goal kicking mid fielders in the goal kickers list with the advent of flooding and forwarding pressing.

With the bottling up of one half of the ground it is so much harder for the bigger boys to find space. Comparing the way Carey, Kernahan and even early Nick R played the game compared to what a forward has to cope with now is most unfair.

I would sincerely hate to be a big forward in the modern game.

Not sure if an established club would hand down this harsh of a penalty, but IMO it is no question a good one for a developing club that is a young group and is trying to set a standard.

good decision, it will probable make him as a player.

Not sure ? Does Stevie J and the holiday he was given by Geelong ring any bells ? I thought it was way harsh at the time - but Geelong was sending a strong message about their expectation of their players and what they needed to do to be successful.

Well done to the MFC.

The way i am reading this Skully situation is i think he is holding back to see what out of contract players GWS can sign, and if the quality of players is of a high level he will sign on, if he is not convinced the players they sign are going to make a move successful he will stay a demon.

Just my views on this

This raises an intersting question.

I think it is a commonly held view that the Scully situation will resolve it towards season end - when the new TV deal and players pay position is known ( what is the timing on this ?) - that is his managements stance.

I may be wrong - but I also think if the season is actually completed without him signing then we should worry a little.

The first player to sign with Suns happened two weeks before seasons end - Bock ? However the balance were after the season was over - Ablett and Harbarrow - after they finished finals.

It is not an unfair assumption to think that players would want to know who else is going to be on the books as stated above - do you think that in "secret and confidential" negotiation that the GWS would reveal to another player they are trying to secure who else they have contracted ?

Beside the obvious two clangers last week I thought Jones had a really good game.

It is interesting to compare him to Sylvia - the difference is obvious to all - Sylvia's "highs" are sublime. That is not to say that Jones oontributions are any less important to the team. We get euphoric over what Sylvia can produce and therefore cut him slack that we dont give to Jonesy. We all say that if Sylvia produces his best every week he is a chance for the Brownlow. The same has never been said about Jones. He is valuable but not considered a matchwinner.

I have privately thought that I am unsure of Jones' future going forward - I think what I should be saying is that knowing Jones limitations, if he keeps the gap between his best and worst games narrow ( and plays more consistently like he did on Sunday) then there is always a place for him.

IMO, no. You are born with toughness/hardness/desire for a contest, or you are not. Hurley has it, Watts doesn't.

Is Brad Green reading this ? Labelled by many in his first 4 or 5 years as soft and now ?

Daisy Thomas - flashy outside player for his first 3 seasons and now tough as nails in and under.

It's how I'm reading it.

My post wasnt aimed at you.

I agree with you 100% - only thing that counts is ink - everything else is exactly as you say - "for what it is worth...."

I posted a comment to that story on the hun site.

Hurley a year older, two preseasons more and almost a season ahead in games - what a fair comparison.

Th thing that gets me is the need to microscope players that are in the embryonic stages of their development. Why not wait until they are 22/23 so you can really make a fair judgement

FYI - I am CEO and my ex wife is a doctor and I am horribly disappointed that the my 4 year old who was 4 months premature is so far behind the others kids at kinder at finger painting. If you are going to be the touted Einstein that the family is dead certain you will be you gotta HARDEN UP STEPHANIE.

Yeah but it's just a rumour ROTA. You are an ostrich with your head in the sand, because that's just a rumour and just because Scully's management have come out and categorically said that he hasn't signed a deal doesn't mean anythink because they are probs tellin lies. He is gone. Eddie would know.

Fair dinkum, sometimes I want to break the internet.

Please tell me that there is a huge dose of sarcasm with this post or else I don't not where to start.

The sentence written in the article by journalist posted by ROTA is rumour and Scully's management (and Scully as he also stated categorically) are liars but Eddie who is also a journalist (and very conflicted) speaks the truth and facts. Oh my lord....

Happy to respect any opinion that says Scully will go because he will not be able to resist the huge money.( I disagree)

But also happy to lambast any opinion that is not so much head in the sand or head up the bum but not using the head at all.

Did two'sies in my pants when I read the subject line and then did one'sies in my pants laughing when I opened the thread

I think the right decision has been made. Brent did the wrong thing (very wrong) But is still part of the team.

If he works hard at winning games for us, he may one day get back his captaincy role.

Now, at least he knows how hard it will be to earn it Back, & players on the list will also take on board what happens.

BOYS, if you want to have some drinks after a win....do it at home if you must do it.

We need Beamer in the centre, working hard.

I am tipping Beamer will play a Blinder up in Brisbane next week, He loves this Club and i know he will be kicking himself right now.

But he has the chance to redeem himself & become even better.

a thumbs up like facebook thingee

Strip him of VC for 1 incident in his entire career.... give it a rest.

He was out late, so what? Players are not allowed out late?

Peeing on/in a bar is not acceptable at all but gee wizz lets not go overboard!

No players are not allowed out late before a recovery session (not the way to prepare). Players are not allowed to get themselves legless and pee on a bar.

Sends a very strong message.

Very harsh penalty and well done to the leadership group for setting a standard.

I emailed the club and suggest others do likewise.

I am completely meh about the trumpeter but as someone as said - all clubs play to win the "flag". Do we not all ask " how many FLAGS have you won ?".

There is only one flag that we should make a song and dance about each season and thats the premiership flag

BACKS: Strauss (2) Martin (32) Bail (13)

H-BACKS: Grimes (29) Garland (43) Blease (0)

CENTRES: Bennell (38) Gysberts (4) Scully (21)

H-FWDS: Morton (51*) Cook (0) Trengove (21)

FWDS: Wonaeamirri (27) Jurrah (20) Watts (21)

FOLL: Spencer (8) Tapscott (3) McKenzie (22)

Pine: Petterd (37), Maric (14), Howe (0), Jetta (23)

Emerg: Gawn (0), McDonald (0), Davis (0)

I have to sort of slap myself into reality that Petterd, Garland, Wona, Grimes and Martin have all played so few games - havent they been around for ever. Yes - all affected by injury but they havent play many games have they. ( you don't get experience and game time sitting in the stands - no matter how long you have been around for)

I'd say just fine him $5k and get on with it.

To kick him out of the leadership group would be a bit far fetched, because he has shown more leadership on the field this year than most of the other members of the group combined. I'm not condoning urinating over a public bar while your captain and vice captain are asleep, but he also urinated over the Brisbane midfield yesterday whilst the same players were sleeping. If you're going to kick players out of the leadership group then kick out those who are letting you down week after week and not those who make 1 mistake.

If somebody is going to make a decision on the punishment to Beamer then let Dean Bailey do it himself, as there aren't many players within the 'leadership group' who deserve to be able to make a decision such as this.

I can't understand why it is so hard to understand that what is done off the field dictates so often what happens on the field. It is not just a matter of "geez he can really play". How players train, how they are there to lend advice off the field, the extra hours put in, the younger players seeing how the leaders prepare themselves and conduct themselves dictates leadership as much as what we see on the field. If that wasnt the case then the Brad Millers and Rivers would not have been elected to that group. Even Aaron Davey is not an inspirational leader on the ground but we have seen signs and heard inklings of what he does away from the 120 minutes on the ground that makes him a leader at the club.

It is a leadership group decision - the leadership group dictated that Colin Sylvia's behaviour was inappropriate - the leadership group decides on how the players should act/behave. The players elect the leadership on the basis of them being the best at the club to make those calls.

I am suggesting Moloney will be suspended ( as he should be) and I am tipping he will also show great remorse for what he has done as I believe he sees himself as a leader and will know that in no way shape or form has he acted like one.

Yes, but the fans didn't want Hale.

And the fans know best...

The only other KPI I would love to see is the tackle differential.

Time in possession rarely moves 5% off the 50% mark for each team.

How many tackles you have in my mind is great indicator of how hard you are prepared to work ( along with contested possessions).

It is rare you see a team with 80 tackles lose a game

I'm sure 90% of us on here have a drink after work on fridays right?

Hands up the 90% on this site who are professional footballers who are trying to get the best out of the bodies and prepare in the best possible manner for the upcoming game(s) which is what they are paid large sums of money to do. Anyone ? Anyone ?

What part of "Moloney was intoxicated" is hard to grasp ?

I have no problem with anyone going out getting blasted as often as they like ( yes i do) but if thats what you want to do don't choose a career in a team enviroment that requires discipline and self retstraint for the team to achieve the highest goal.

Footballers can do what the F%^k they like,I couldn't care less, however, footballers who are serious about success and maximising performances would not have done what Beamer is alledged to have done, they would have been firmly focused on recovery in an effort to give them the best opportunity to win next week.

You say I have no idea what i'm talking, good on ya legend, I guess all the sports scientists are wrong about the negative impact alcohol has on the body.

It's really not a difficult concept to understand is it ?

There are team rules governing what you do and how you act as professional footballer and 17 clubs would not condone what Moloney has done.

C&B, you've got to be kidding if you think taking a slash on a bar is "harmless". What would you do if you were standing at the bar ordering a drink and the bloke next to you flopped it out and starting having a [censored] right in front of you? I know, you'd pat him on the back and say "no worries mate, no harm done", right?

I used the same argument with Fevola and "accepting" what he did/does by dismissing it with "whats the harm ?".

C&B - taking the urinating out of the picture - if you accept what Moloney did - going out and getting gassed because it isnt illegal. Then how would you feel if next week - Moloney and Jones did it...? how about Moloney, Jones, Sylvia, Jamar and 5 others ? How about Moloney taking Scully, Trengove, Tapscott and Cook with him to get blasted after a match ? If it is ok for one then surely it is ok for all ?

Do you think it is coincidence that NO team condones going out and getting intoxicated at 2:30am after a game ? Being a professional footballer comes with certain expectations - clearly not getting intoxicated after a match is one of them.

As to urinating on a bar (if true) - that is not even an expectation that a professional footballer wouldnt do that - it is an expectation of anyone that is civilised.

I have noticed 3 things about Gys.....

1/ Gets to the right places

2/ Finds space

3/ Always looks like he has time

4/ Clean with his hands

5/ Disposes nicely

ummm I have noticed 5 things

6 - Moloney

5- Jamar

4 - Jones

3- Gysberts

2 - Jurrah

1 - Rivers

sorry when was it decreed that footballers are not even allowed to drink anymore, or do you have no idea what you're talking about but made the comment anyway. Of course they can hit the gas the night after a game, it is not illegal.

I can't believe that in these days of the totally professional football player, players that are paid extremely good money to perform athletic feats, players that have training and diet regimes planned with meticulous care to get the best performance - that you can say that is in any way shape or form acceptable ??? ( because it's not illegal !!! - please)

Leaving aside whether or not he urinated on a bar - being out at 2:30 am and intoxicated is the best way to recover from a game and get yourself right for the next week ?????

You have set sports science back 20 years.

No, I do get it. Both ways are a risk. Both ways are a potential wasted pick.

But it's risk versus reward. And to make a blanket judgement on a kid because he has "priors" is a tad simplistic and, to my mind, more than a bit precious.

What exactly were Darling's offences anyway? He got kicked out of a private school for having a sex romp at school camp and got into a stoush outside a nightclub.

Blow me down ... Chuck him in jail and throw away the key!

I am all for blanket judgement.

Clubs recruiters not only look at talent on the field but also do psychological work ups on players. It is no surprise he slipped so far down the draft. The clubs have been doing this for years. I recall as far back as TJ's drafting a Hawthorn official i know said there was giant knock on TJ's attitude and they were quite happy to pick up Croad (wasnt much better really !)

All I am saying ( and most clubs by their decision to ignore this talent) is clubs do not want to take a risk with players of suspect attitude. There is a giant different in the risks. A miss on playing ability affects the player and a waste of a pick. A miss on attitude has the potential to affect others in the club and worst case scenario, the fabric of the group.

What if that 18yo di@khead! has the potential to be reigned in and become a game-breaking champion who can help win you a flag?

Seems a policy a bit on the precious side to me.

I don't think you get it. We turn up our noses at Fev and say what a cancer he is on his clubs. There are hundred of footballers in the draft - there was a large question mark over Darlings attitude and "history". Why would you take a risk with a footballer who may or may not turn out to be trouble at your club. I would rather work on "potential" ability than an attitude that has "potential" to be reigned in. If ability fails to reach potential - you have wasted a pick . If attitude cannot be reigned in - damage to the club and its players.

For every Barry Hall story of a football who can be reigned in there is a Fevola/Aker story of players who can harm your club. Even born again Cousins caused untold damage at the eagles.

Darling - comes with priors - move on - nothing to see here

I got another article up

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/110896/default.aspx

After reading this thread and seeing sarcasm going unrealised with no emoticon I think that all sarcasm should be followed by (TPFIC)

Tongue - placed - firmly - in - cheek