Good Times Grimes

Wasn't too impressed with the game, but glad we were able to show a bit of character and find a way to win it. Oliver was very impressive again. Same goes for Watts and I quite liked Bugg and Salem's games as well. Anyway, take the positives and move on to next week and try to continue the momentum as we head to round one.

Why do we have to be different for the sake of being different? The point I was making is that no sports leagues (that I know of) have any incentives for winning preseason matches, and I hope that AFL stays the same way. I'm all for preseason games happening as I think they're valuable for shaking off the cobwebs and giving new players a look in, but I couldn't give a stuff where the preseason games are played and while wins are enjoyable the results are meaningless, like they should be and should remain.

Very disappointed in the side the Dogs have named. I know it doesn't mean anything or count for anything, but I expect to see a 10+ goal win today.

Are there any major sport codes where preseason games count for anything? Nothing I can think of, and I'm familiar with all of the North American sports. No need to make preseason games count for anything, as their purpose is solely for practice and preparation for the season ahead.

West Coast Hawthorn Bulldogs GWS Geelong Collingwood Sydney Fremantle Premiers: West Coast Runners Up: Sydney Spoon: Carlton Brownlow: Callan Ward Coleman: Josh Kennedy Rising Star: Christian Petracca

If you start introducing premiership point "bonuses" or finals berths to teams for practice games, then teams will quickly start having practice games to prepare for the practice games, which will lead for calls to award incentives for the winners of the practice practice games, leading to practice practice practice games, and the whole world will go up in flames.

I'm not concerned. If it was anything serious the club wouldn't have let him participate in training.

It's only contracted until 2017.

No arguments from me

OD, there's something about your confidence that makes me feel more optimistic about the season ahead than I was a few weeks ago. I sure hope that you're right.

I think that Dees supporters should be getting to as many games as we possibly can. While I'm sure that some disagree, I strongly believe that the crowd can make a difference in the result of a game.

What really irks me is that when Peter Wright signs a one year extension with the Suns to stay until the end of 2017, the media spins it as "Wright Stays Loyal". When Hogan, a player who extended last season for TWO years and also comes out of contract post-2017, delays negotiations until the end of 2016, the media spins it as if he's ready to jump ship.

I suspect that we'll be seeing a lot more goals from our midfielders this year due to the interchange cap as well as having an improved (hopefully!) group that is better able to balance attack and defence. While the tall targets will hopefully kick some more goals as we improve and gain more inside 50s, we'll also likely see more goals from the likes of Kent, Kennedy, Garlett, Harmes, Tyson, etc as they rotate through the forward line. If we can't kick goals without Hogan then we have a serious problem, but I predict that won't be the case.

BY that logic, there's not much point having a forum at all.

It's better to have people making excuses about why we won rather than why we lost.

How could anybody pick anyone other than Richmond?

Yes, but if traffic is lighter than you expected and you catch only green lights, could you not arrive earlier than 4pm? Why do injuries regularly seem to fall under the broken down car scenario as opposed to the light traffic scenario? When I read 4-6, I expect the player to be back playing between four and six weeks from the time of injury, barring any setbacks, much like I'd expect you to arrive at my place between 4 and 5pm if you were 2.5 hours away at 2pm. Having two times in an injury timeframe (4 and 6) implies that one is the lower limit while the other is the upper limit. It would make more sense to just have one (the lower limit) and for it to be read as just that: the minimum amount of time the club expects the player to miss.

But in saying 4-6 weeks, it implies that 4 weeks will be the minimum amount of time the player will miss, while 6 weeks is the maximum amount of time they expect them to miss. In actual fact, it seems that that the timeframe given is the minimum amount of time the player is expected to miss, despite being advertised as being the total amount of time the player is expected to miss barring setbacks.

You raise good points. Personally, I'd rather know what the club expects the maximum time a player might miss to be, or alternatively the degree of confidence that they have in the timeframe that they provide. It frustrates me seeing players listed as 4-6 for 10 weeks in a row despite not having any setbacks, and I'd much rather see the initial report read 4-10.

While that seems to be the case, it also seems to differ a fair bit from injury to injury. Sometimes the timeframe is accurate to when the player returns to matches, other times it's accurate to when the player returns to full training, while most times it seems that it's completely inaccurate.

There aren't too many names on that list that I'd be interested in signing that would also be willing to leave their clubs. I'm also not concerned about our ability to re-sign Jetta, while the jury is still out on the other three.

Not sure that his opinion on Petracca's ability has anything to do with his sources, though I sure hope that he's right!

What I'm curious about is why do players very rarely recover faster than the club's initial prognosis? I understand the difficulty of pinpointing exactly how long it will take for an injury to heal, but I don't understand why the club's prognosis always seems to be the minimum amount of time that the player will be out. Maybe they should start saying as such? I.e. injury list: Petracca- at least 3 weeks Trengove- at least 2 weeks etc.

It was even more innocuous than that; he injured it leading for a mark in a training drill. Injuries can happen at any time, and there's no point putting players in cotton wool until round one. I'd rather see us prepare by playing our strongest team possible so that we can make winning a habit. Source: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/melbournes-christian-petracca-out-for-season-after-rupturing-his-acl-20150216-13g291.html#ixzz41n1j441q

I hope they play their best available squad. I'd rather see us be competitive and lose against their best team than thump their reserves and get nothing out of it.