La Dee-vina Comedia

What we should remember is that Neeld has a better understanding of Collingwood than any other opposition team. I'm convinced players like Sellar and Magner were added to the list last year after Neeld saw our team monstered by the bigger Collingwood bodies last QB. On that basis, and given his form last Saturday night, I would have thought Sellar is a certainty to play. The only real 'problem' (and it's a nice one to have) is what to do with Frawley, Bail and Bartram if each is fit. If Blease goes out, I would have thought Bail would come in on a like for like basis. But if Blease is OK, it becomes tougher.

At the beginning of the night it seemed like the crowd was 80% Essendon and 20% Melbourne. The level of cheering as the teams ran out seemed to indicate that, anyway. By the end of the night the electricity magnified the sounds of the Demons so it became more like a 50/50 crowd. I'm sure, in fact, that the proportion of 80/20 was correct - but the excitement of the Melbourne supporters combined with the probable disappointment of the Bomber fans meant our 20% sounded equal to their 80%.

I need to apologise. I've criticised his performance (but not his effort) on this site previously so it's only right that I now praise him for his excellent game last night. Right from the start of the game he looked a different player to the one we've seen the rest of the year. Who would have predicted before the game that a Melbourne backline without Frawley, Garland, Grimes and Bartram could keep the Bombers to only 6 goals. Reason for edit: typos

6. Jones 5. Rivers 4. Watts 3. Grimes 2. Garland 1. Jamar (I thought he was the best ruckman out there against two who have done pretty well all year. We won the clearances. It can't just have been luck)

The most astounding thing to me is that Dunn and Bate will be unrestricted free agents at the end of the year. It's hard to believe both those players have been persisted with for so long given that neither has ever solidified their spot in the seniors. Perhaps if they had been the victims of serious injuries, such as ACLs, along the way there might have been some justification. But to my mind the fact that both are still on the list is extraordinary.

I know what you mean - but I doubt you meant that you only want them to perform up until half time. I'd like to see heart and soul for the full 2 hours (or 7,200 seconds)

Harsh, I would have thought. He's not endowed with pace or skill, but I do believe he's trying his hardest.

Mind you, as Kevin Rudd can attest, she can get away with putting her hand in someone else's back and getting away with it.

Agree with everything you've said (even about Dunn) except the line about Jamar. I thought he'd played quite well in some earlier games. But I didn't see anything in his game on Sunday which was in any way meritorious. Where did you think he'd improved?

Touche, good pick up and I'm suitably embarrassed. (And I know there should be an accent on the e in 'touche'. I just don't know how to do it.)

You need a new keyboard. You're 'shift' key isn't working most of the time. Which is my way of saying I believe posters should take the time to write properly. But then, maybe I'm just old fashioned...or just old.

Neeld. Let me repeat what I've written elsewhere. For the first time that I can remember (and I've been going to the footy for over 40 years) we appear to have an holistic approach to fixing the problems rather than the cut and paste approach. The latter approach is not entirely the fault of the former coaches as they weren't provided with adequate resources to do the job properly. As much as I hate the current on-field performance I'm more than happy to see a plan being developed and acted upon which should produce long term benefits.

Bail might have butchered the ball a bit. But the reason we were in the game at half time was because of him. 6. McKenzie 5. Bail 4. Rivers 3. McDonald 2. Jones 1. Frawley And -5 to the docs/physios if they really believe Trengove is fully fit. (Though he did play much better in the third quarter.)

Because for the first three quarters we played the best we have all year, I'd make minimal changes as follows: If injured, Green goes out along with Sellar. If fit, Martin and Bartram come in. If these two are not fit, bring in Spencer for Sellar and Morton/Bate for Green. Although I wouldn't be disappointed if Dunn was left out. Bennell gets another week and should play the full game next week. We're going to need his pace against Essendon. But he does need to do more.

Collingwood may not use him. But they can stop us using him with a non-compete clause.

Really hard to see how the team will line up. Three forwards and a mid dropped and the ins include two defenders (MacDonald and Davis) plus Nicholson and Tappscott who could play there. Maybe Grimes goes to the midfield where he is better placed to be a leader. I'm not convinced Bail can play the small or defensive forward role, so maybe Bail goes to the midfield too. Personally, I'd like Davis to the backline for Grimes to midfield. And I'd like to see Bail running around rather than being locked inside the forward line. I think Sellar has to play so Clark can stay forward. And Tapscott should play. In summary, the ins should end up being Sellar, Bail, Davis and Tapscott (sub).

So, this means Nicholson has been upgraded from the rookie list. Who for?

Moloney: "What! I still have to play in the seniors? Why can't I go to Casey and taste some success?"

If he's suspended can we replace him with a fat lady singing? Or is it more like a red card and we have to play one short?

"Pretty ordinary" should still be enough to beat woeful.

Or Dante's 'La Divina Comedia'. Right now the MFC is in that chapter about the inferno otherwise known as hell. And I blame Jack Watts for that, too.

Nicely said.

The defence, particularly Rivers, has done pretty well given the amount of pressure it's been under.

So perhaps we've been poor at player development for the last 15 years, not just the last four.

Definitely the wrong call...by Mark Neeld. he would have been happier if he'd stayed at Collingwood. Seriously, none of us nor Caroline Wilson were involved in Neeld's selection and therefore have no idea what the club was looking for and how it went about it. We do know that Neeld had strong, public support from Mick Malthouse and I would have thought that endorsement would count for something. I firmly believe that the problems haven't arisen in the last 8 months. Rather they are the result of poor player development over the last 4 years so that when attempting to go from downhill skiers without a defensive mindset (aka the Bailey game plan) to a style of play where defence becomes the key, the playing list is not made up of players of the appropriate physical type (strength, fitness) or psychological makeup (maintaining structure, preparedness to gut run) to deliver. Neeld should have the club's and supporters' complete, rock solid, 100% support.