nutbean

I said this in another thread. He does need to hold those marks. Aside from Gawn's tapping he has been doing something that Jamar has not done since his AA year - that is getting involved. Jamar for the past seasons has taken centre bounces and boundary throw in's ruckwork and then been completely absent for the balance of the game. Gawn gets busy and involved.

He is not clunking his marks but he is doing something that Jamar has not done in quite a few seasons - that's is get near the ball. Gawn has involved himself the last two weeks and yes, he has dropped too many marks he should be taking. My problem with Jamar since his AA year is if he hasn't been contesting ruck situations he has spent the entire game being no where near where the ball is. If ( and yes it is a big if ) Gawn can start holding marks he will be more than useful.

I hear what you are saying - and of course man on man is going to make it far more difficult for the likes of Oxley to take so many marks. However I did watch the reply again and there was some clever blocking by the Collingwood defenders but I maintain after watching that three players in particular did not physically get to contests that they should have - they did not work hard enough - Howe, Pederson and Hogan. Teams have been playing with an extra forever and a moon and it does not always end the way it did last week. With the spare cutting a forward line to shreds.

Interested to hear the thoughts on Grinter's hit on Terry Wallace and how you would characterize Grinter's career overall.

A few posters mentioned clever positioning by the defenders to give Oxley the spare a clear run at it. I only semi buy that. It is clearly illegal to block a players run at a marking contest. Some of the balls Oxley marked where high balls taking forever to land in the forward line - yet he marked many unopposed. I thought there were some weakness at getting to the contest by some of our forwards on those high balls. I don't advocate acting for frees but go super hard at the contest and if you get taken out - hopefully the umpires will penalise.

I agree with your analysis - however - "David Hales" don't grow on trees - we have a very poor man's version in Pedo - Hales is better around the ground as a ruckman. If we could find one I would be ecstatic. I like Leuey and would take him - but not to play alongside Gawn - but to compete against him for the number one spot - whoever grows and develops better gets the gig.

Can I ask if you know - do the players know at the last training session who will wear the vest or is that decided on the day of the game ? (i.e does ANB know he will starting or subbing ?)

I think Gawn has really good attributes and big men do take longer to come on. His resume to do date -absolute work in progress and to a large degree, an unknown quantity. Leuey is probably in the same boat - but i think has shown just a touch more. I don't see Leuey as an improved Spencer - I see him as genuine competitor for the number one ruck spot - and yes, you cant have both he and Gawn in the same team - both are ruckman - nothing more. I may be proven wrong on Spencer but he hasn't shown enough to suggest he is going to be in the top echelon of ruckman - Leuey and Gawn could be ( that is a very guarded "could")

Further to this - two pure ruckman in the same team rarely work. Steph Martin is in great form relegating Leuy to limited minutes in the position he plays best - he is not a key forward. To a certain extent - that is why I prefer that we don't have Gawn and Spencer in the same team. Both can only really ruck. As opposed to Pedo who can pinch hit in the ruck to give the no 1 ruckman a breather and then has value as a marking forward or a marking back.

We had a bit of laugh when they lined up on each other - White and Fitzy having a talk before the opening bounce " Let's make a deal - neither of us have any impact on the game at all ? ". " OK - deal !" The difference is that a defender can have zero impact but if his opponent has no impact then its consider a win for the defender. Fitz had one poor moment - tunnel ball - and one nice moment - neat mark and goal. I haven't given up on him yet.

Really ?

Certain players have performed acts on the field that may diminish your respect for them but to me it has nothing to do with their output and contribution to their teams success. Leigh Matthews is by far and way the best footballer I have seen play the game - and yes, he did some unsavory acts ( Add Carey, Ablett Snr, Hodge of recent years and in yesteryear - Ted Whitten and Barassi to the list of football greats who would take back certain onfield actions). Judd was a phenomenal footballer. As to his leadership skills - I am not sure about his mentoring and disciplining of players but I vividly remember an article by a Carlton player after 6 months of Judd being at the club - Judd had set a training level that inspired others at the club to follow. He rightly should be and will be remembered as a great of the game.

I almost agree - I don't think our forwards were hard enough at it on the long ball (rather than them being subtly stopped) If we bombed it long and it went to the only person in defense being the Collingwood loose player then I have problem - but Oxley took numerous marks in and around our forwards. They didn't make a contest.

He should sent the runner out and said - "see that long ball that is coming into the forward line that has a hang time of about 5 or so seconds - how about one of you forwards make a contest ?" Roos pointed out - it wasn't like the ball was being drilled to Oxley as a loose player - there were at least 4 marks at least he took where our forwards stood and watched him mark it.

He did win a brownlow at Carlton - that aside - his game did change. He started to pick up injuries late in the piece at WCE and although didnt miss huge amounts of game time - he did indeed lose that electric dash and became a more contested ball animal. He was one of the greats - but yes, he did do some unsavoury things on the field as have others. I dont think he has ever made noises about coaching post on field career and dont think it will happen.

RPFC - the importance of UP is as obvious as the nose on anyone's face. I suggested at the end of Neeld's tenure - our overall disposal count was well down but our Contested possession vs Uncontested possession count was way too high. It meant we were almost playing schoolyard footy. All the players chasing the ball in the contest and then when we got possession there was no one on the outside to give it to. That oft quoted word "spreading" is the key. We talk about how hard players work in the contest but it is almost more important to work hard to make space to take the ball - the uncontested possession. We looked our best on Monday with Brayshaw being on the end of the handball in space - kicking his uncontested possession long and quickly to a running Gartlett. I am impressed with Brayshaw's work in the contest - I am more impressed with his work ethic to work in the contest and then keep working to get uncontested footy as well. Obviously one of the keys to getting uncontested footy is the ability to deliver it.

So he marks the ball and goes back behind the mark and does a drop kick ? Hadn't noticed that. It's the good with the bad. I think he has been fair - He is coming into a team that doesn't spread as well as his previous team and make room and space for him to run into. Yeah there has been some heart in mouth stuff and some complete stuff ups - but I like that he doesn't change the way he plays ( not sure he knows how). The easiest way ( as shown by Brayshaw) is playing on and quick breaks into our forward half. HL plays that way.

Gawn absolutely has the skill set to be a top ruckman - can mark - can tap - not too bad below his knees - in the main makes good decisions The main issue to date is he has shown in fits and bursts and he still doesn't look like he has a tank. Shout me down but the general rule is that ruckman don't come into their own until 23ish and Gawn is just hitting that age now where he should be stepping up ( yes - the are exceptions to this)

HH is right in what he says... Racism has always existed and does to this day and the realist in me says it will continue into the future. However if you don't challenge it's existence now, if you don't try and eradicate the causes, then it will definitely continue and under the right circumstances flourish into the future. I am pessimistic about our ability to solve many issues, racism being one of them however that should never deter us from endeavoring to do just that.

That is part of the solution - bringing in players from the outside. But this further illustrates my point. GWS youngster obviously have more intestinal fortitude that many of our mob. Although they are still rollercoastering a bit. I have suggested that some players are scarred from the past - but not all. Therefore I stress again - the scars of the past are not an excuse for a player, they are an indictment on players that they lack mental toughness to not only move past what has transpired in the past but also perform at consistent level irrespective of the opposition or the scoreboard. I will point to a retired player - your namesake - James McDonald - never a world beater - but winning or losing his output was consistent. Whether he was playing against a top of the ladder team or a cellar dweller. Even when we were 10 goals down he would still have a dip. With lack of respect to most on our list - the only player who you can say has experienced the lows but still continues to have a dip irrespective of the opposition or the scoreboard is Nat Jones.

What's your secret ? I have these pigs chasing me screaming "truffles".

To me it is one in the same. Scarring is a real issue. Constantly being smashed will absolutely have a lasting affect on some. Are the players intellectually capable or strong enough to move past it ? Resilience to me is the main question. I won't use scarring and it's outcomes as an excuse - I use it as a reality. And a further reality is simple. If you keep going into your shell at the first sign of danger, allow your intensity and effort to disappear when the tide turns for the worse and retreat into selfish football when put under pressure then all good. You need to be playing footy elsewhere. Mental toughness, fighting on against adversity to me is equally as important as being high skilled. Many of our players who have been onboard before Roos lack mental toughness and resilience. To me Roos job on these players is to decide who can and who can't display mental toughness on an ongoing basis and remove those who can't.

hmmm...too close to call for mine..

You should have quoted in full " love thy neighbor, but give him a sly elbow in the ribs as long as the umpire isn't watching" - he was a nuggety back pocket for the Jerusalem 2nd 18 - they were a pretty good team until the then ruling body allowed the expansion team "Roman Power" into the league. I think the Jerusalem 2nd 18 first coined the phrase " umpires..come on ..we are being crucified".. ( I think I need a bex and a good lie down)

It didn't need a vote in parliament to establish that....