Macca

Looks like the Shark has got some company after that Jordan Spieth meltdown ... hard to believe his 3rd shot into the water on 12 (Jordan's tee shot into the water on the same hole was bad enough but to hit it fat like that was astonishing) Anyway, Danny Willett played very well and is a worthy champion but this year's tournament is going to be remembered for other reasons ... all the same, Willett is ranked 12 in the World and could quite conceivably go on and become a multiple major winner. Once again the back 9 on the final day at Augusta was filled with high drama. Spieth will no doubt be back in contention soon enough but it will be interesting to see how he fares the next time he confronts 'Amen Corner'. .

Yeah, a thrilling finish too ... Hayman is turning 38 in just over a week so to win the Paris-Roubaix at this late stage of his career is some sort of achievement. Broke his arm six weeks ago as well - he wins at his 16th try at the event. Well done Mathew!

Long ball from Drinkwater through to Vardy (again) and just like that, Leicester score. It's so simple in it's execution, but it's worked all season ... defend, defend, defend and then counter attack. Sunderland have to throw caution to the wind as relegation looms large if they lose this match ... 70 minutes in and it's 1-0 in favour of the Foxes. Edit: Vardy scores again late (what an excellent opportunist he is) and Leicester win 2-0 ... now 10 points clear with Tottenham needing to win vs Man Utd tonight to get within 7 points - all the same, it's a tough ask to catch them now. .

6 - Gawn (got it going our way all day - 63 taps in a dominant rucking performance) 5 - Viney (back to his best) 4 - Vince (extremely solid all day) 3 - Oliver (looks right at home) 2 - Hogan (Roos involving him in the play early gets him going) 1 - Harmes (14 touches and 10 tackles - a good game) Thought Jetta, Lumumba & Salem made solid contributions and Kent finished well.

The Essendon game will be by far our worst performance for the season At least it's out of the way and we can put it behind us ... today was a huge step in the right direction and with a little bit of luck, we would have won the game. Not worthy of congratulations per se (no loss ever is) but the players gave their all ... now, to follow it up - every week. We play like that every week and we'll win our fair share of games. Hope returns. All the same, I hope the players and coaching staff are feeling filthy tonight. Nothing wrong with being hard on yourself even if somewhat satisfied. Gawn was a warrior - our midfielders finally got in the right spots for his taps (unlike last week when they weren't in the right spots) He was so good he was hitting it down their throats.

3-3 at Upton Park ... excellent game too. Neither side deserved to lose. Arsenal needed the win to keep their hopes alive though ... still, both the Hammers and Gunners put on a great show (Carroll scored a hat-trick whilst Arsenal did have a lot of possession and didn't stop attacking) We'll have to wait for tomorrow night to see Leicester (at Sunderland) and Spurs (vs Man Utd) in action.

The 16 playoff teams are nearly settled and once again the Stanley cup race is wide open ... one could make a case for any number of teams to win it. It's up for grabs, that's for sure. The Bruins may even miss out altogether whilst Pittsburgh have won 9 of their last 10 and might be the team to beat (they'll probably play the Rangers or Islanders first up) Nearly all the division seedings are still undecided with only Washington clinching the top seed in their division (so far) ... once again, it promises to be a fascinating post-season. 2 months of playoff hockey - bliss!

Round 2 ... 3 - Zaharakis 2 - McDonald-Tipungwuti 1 - Daniher

Spurs drop 2 vital points at Liverpool but can Leicester take advantage tonight? (their game vs Southampton starts at 10.30pm - AEST) The Foxes have a chance to go 7 points clear and they've got unprecedented support to do so ... I hope they get the win because it would just add to a great story.

You'll need to win out starting with St Louis tomorrow (our time) ... and then hope Minnesota slips up. It's possible but Minnesota would have to drop at least 2 games ... ya never know

I'm assuming it's not too late for round 1 (?) ... just noticed this thread Round 1 ... 3 - Viney 2- T-Mac 1 - Ward

And how do you know that Jones hasn't or isn't already doing those sort of things - you may be selling him short Wyl without knowing the actual facts. The issue is miles bigger than Jones' captaincy anyway Anyway, the list looks to have lots of "potential" and I want to believe that the current list will mature into a list that will play finals but ... that belief system is largely wasted on supporters though. The club sells us the belief but it's up to the club to deliver. What matters is what the club actually does - and all we can really do is watch it unfold. Along with everyone else, I live in the hope that they know what they are doing is the right way. It's one thing having a plan but it has to be the right plan. For instance, with the new rules in place, will the list be equipped to play primarily fast, play-on footy with highly skilled players often through the corridor? ... because that's where the game is heading in my opinion. Like always, time will tell whether we're up to it.

Yep, it's a team/club issue Wyl ... at least we agree on that. We're all waiting for the day when we bring effort, energy, application & a never-say-die attitude most weeks (every week is a stretch but the Hawks rarely fail to deliver in the "switched on" department) So, what's the solution? ... it's fairly obvious what is required and it's up to the coaching staff to instill the fundamentals into all our players - which is entirely possible. As supporters, we can only watch it unfold - we're not empowered to be able to do anything.

The thing that might hold the Doggies back is their experience in big games and big finals ... time will tell but it seems obvious to me that Beveridge is huge on actual kicking skills (he was at the Pies in '09/'10 and then at the Hawks from 2012-2014 - both those clubs exhibited great kicking skills whilst he was there) Apparently the motto at the Hawks was to recruit players with excellent kicking skills and then teach them the "Hawthorn way" ... why not adopt that philosophy and take it elsewhere? We've got a fair way to go at the Demons but to make up for not being super-skilled, we just have to be hard at the ball - in every game ... and yesterday, we got found wanting. We were 2nd to the ball and our players did not fight hard enough for the front position - especially our forwards.

I don't disagree AF, but if you watch the Hawks and Doggies closely, their disposal skills and decision making is a cut above where we're at ... of course, we can get better but the main issue is still the players getting switched on for games. Most of our senior players were found wanting yesterday (with the exception of Vince and Nate Jones) ... Pedersen, Matt Jones, Watts, T-Mac, Garland, Jetta, Lumumba & Garlett just didn't do enough - in fact, nowhere near it. Gawn won in the ruck but our midfielders don't rove to him very well (Jones aside) I'm big on basic fundamentals - if they're not done well, you lose. So, not having a collective manic attack on the ball means that you're making it hard on yourselves to win any game. What we turned up with yesterday has a consequence. Btw, it's always good to sleep on a loss like that

Well, you're going to have to deal with the reality of the situation Wyl ... great captains don't grow on trees and a club usually has to develop their own leaders. Besides which, you mark Jones too harshly anyway ... Viney is probably the next cab off the rank but the truth is that it's a senior player issue - and we've talked about that here for a number of years now. I'd like to think that the senior players that I named in my previous post will all lift their game against North ... and if they don't? ... we can't then blame Jones (or, at least I won't) Every player is responsible for his own actions - especially the senior players. "If it is to be it is up to me" (RDB)

Adam Farr - excellent post highlighting the complexity of the situation. Above all else, I cannot fathom how any AFL player is not switched on - plug in and play should be a pre-requisite. But sometimes it's best to keep things simple - Essendon yesterday were harder at the ball by a long way and that's why we lost. If we don't "bring it", we lose (no matter who we're playing) Surely the players realise that - or maybe they don't? I understand that people want to point the finger at the coaching but the players set the standard - or at least, they should do. Ultimately, our disposal skills are still going to be a drawback for us - we're miles off the standards set by the Hawks and now, the Doggies.

See, I don't see leadership as one player - you seem to. Back in the day we had a Capt., vc and a deputy vice - but, even back then, there were numerous others all vying for one of those 3 spots - in good teams, that is. I see every player on the list as having the potential to be a leader and lead from the front. A player shouldn't ever need an official "position" in order to set a great example and set the trend. By focusing in on Jones, you're letting many others off the hook ... Jones is no RDB nor do I expect him to be - he's the best we've got though and he's doing nowhere near as poor a job as you're making him out to be doing. I reckon if he was a slightly better player he'd be held up by all and sundry. But, like T-Mac, Watts and many others in their prime, he is what he is. The real improvement needs to come from the younger blokes ... but in the meantime, it's up to the other senior players to set the example and lead the way. Lumumba, T-Mac, Watts, Garland, Pedersen, Jetta, Garlett & Matt Jones just didn't do enough yesterday ... Gawn is still learning and did win in the ruck yesterday (31 taps to Leuenberger's 16) ... it's a pity we don't know how to rove to him - Jones did of course but the other midfielders didn't. Another fundamental where we're sadly lacking.

So let's just blame one player - you do realise we're not talking about golf or tennis? Yeah? As has been acknowledged by many on this site, Jones was one of our best players yesterday and without him, we would have lost by a lot more. He by no means played a great game but no one did ... why the focus? You're the same person who wanted to clear Jones out last year ... blaming one player when it's a team sport and a team problem is something I've never subscribed to ... it's all about the team, focusing in on one player is a waste of time and energy. For the record Jones had 29 possessions, 11 of them contested with 8 clearances (the next best was *3*) ... and all players kick the ball short to position when required ... with no movement ahead of him, what was Jones supposed to do yesterday? Bomb it long like the others did? I would suggest that if half a dozen others had played as well as Jones we would have won the game.

We can get to 8-10 wins but that's not much of an ambition - somehow, I feel the players and club would be somewhat satisfied with 8-10 wins too - and there lies the problem. 8-10 wins is a mediocre year in my eyes no matter where we've come from or how other clubs are faring. The first minute of yesterday's game told us what we were going to get for the rest of the afternoon - forget the mistakes, we just did not come to play - in round 2. Unacceptable. It's above the shoulders with this playing group and with the club in general. They all need to stop talking and start getting the job done. I just wonder about our capabilities in that area though - they can all kick and mark to a certain extent but as for the rest of it, I'm not so sure.

What are you on about? ... my post points the finger at most of the senior players on the list. We get it, you've got a problem with Jones - it's you who is not seeing what the real issue is. And Jones was one of better players yesterday - you obviously didn't watch the game. He didn't play a great game but no one played a "great" game - Kennedy was quite good but not great. Get off Jones' back - he is not the issue.

Blaming the captain is ignoring the bigger issue ... each and every player is accountable for their own effort, energy, application and a never-say-die attitude. Do people here want the captain to hold their collective hands? Jones can only do so much - who captains in his place? It's a rhetorical question because there isn't anyone else who is equipped to handle the job. Maybe Viney in a few years but that's it. Again, we're getting distracted from the main issue - collectively, many of our players lack drive and ambition and too many are not self-starters. Again, Nate Jones seems to be the only player who can consistently be 'up' for games. And it's been that way for a long time ... the best leaders are those who don't need to be spoken to or ever given a rev up - they just get on with the business with a minimum of fuss - Jones does that but most of the rest of our players don't. We could list most of our players with a 3 word analysis - *lacks leadership skills* ... Jones alone can't fix things. The reality is that we just don't come to play on a regular basis - it's above the shoulders for most of our players. Game plans and structures are pointless if the players aren't switched on.

The issue is above the shoulders ... many of our players lack drive and ambition and too many are not self-starters. Again, Nate Jones seems to be the only player who can consistently be 'up' for games. And it's been that way for a long time ... the best leaders are those who don't need to be spoken to or ever given a rev up - they just get on with the business with a minimum of fuss - and it has to happen in real games, training and practice matches can often portray false hope. Fix the above issue and we'll be a proper footy team and a proper footy club ... drafting and trading in talent is only step 1 of the process - and the coaches can only do so much. Yesterday's result was on the players. The team is doomed to repeat what we saw yesterday until the players take it upon themselves to collectively put their hands up - they shouldn't have a need to "buy-in" to a coach's philosophy or game plan - that stuff should be inbuilt for a league footballer ... and there lies the problem. These blokes know how to play footy but they have to realise that effort, application, energy and a never-say-die attitude is also required - every week. We might be switched on next week and we might even win against North - but what happens after that?

Absolutely love all the new rules ... especially the boundary line one. Just don't kick it towards the boundary unless you've got a target - fairly simple really. The new rule promotes corridor footy and continual play and that can't be a bad thing. Same for an opposition player not being able to be within 10 metres of a player disposing of the ball after a free kick or mark ... another way of promoting "open football" I also like that a ball needs to now travel at least 15 metres for a legal mark to be claimed - erring on the side of the greater distance also promotes continual play/motion. The AFL have got this right but I'd still reduce the rotations in a gradual way ... the footy has been great (finally) and we're going to see more and more players starting to primarily play in their positions? (as the season progresses with the players needing more and more rest) The days of constantly seeing the majority of players on the ball is going to become a thing of the past. We saw Dangerfield "resting" forward today and wasn't that a highlight? So Petracca, Brayshaw & Oliver may "rest" forward? (occasionally) Yes please. Make no mistake, what we saw on the weekend is not an aberration - new/old footy is here to stay. But the AFL needs to be diligent and continue to oversee the actual sport as true custodians. As for the rest of it (fair competition, equalisation, fair fixturing etc etc) ... I'm not holding my breath.

We just had to have had at least one of our midfielders in a position to win the ball if Gawn had won the tap - to not do so was asking for trouble. Gawn had an edge in the previous rucking duels anyway so him winning the tap came as no surprise - and it should have come as no surprise to our midfielders. But, we can't just assume that Gawn knew that he was going to win the tap and then therefore tap it at his own feet ... easier said than done in the moment. A ruckman can only do so much when facing a ruckman of Mumford's ability. The percentage play when you're own ruckman wins the tap is that you "should" win the clearance - not always of course, but more often than not.