Undeeterred

Surely they jest...

Good to see Grimes and Trenners getting a lot of it.

Sylvia has 6 tackles to half time. Get off his back.

That's actually a really good point - always good to remember that players are people and the club isn't just swapping footy cards or something.

Having said that, Mods, is there any reason my thread was deleted?

Didn't see this thread when I posted mine - sorry.

I do - wonder how he feels about it. I reckon they're probably giving him 6 weeks off his ankle, and making him lift weights and eat lots of chicken. He'll be abit more built, and his ankle will be right in October and he'll be ready to run... Makes sense, I suppose.

Fair enough. We disagree entirely. Watching our absolutely shite team in the last few years, Rivers is one of the few who (1) consistenty beats his player and (2) busts his chops, no matter what, against a constant stream of I-50s. He is a touch slow, I'll admit, but he is probably the best reader of the play in our team, and far better than a below average player who deserves to be swept out this year, as you are suggesting.

You are like that annoying kid in primary school who says 'I know you are, I said you are, but what am I' every time anybody opens their mouth.

Ouch.

But being a quality long serving footballer makes you worth signing. Rivers is above the bar.

It's an interesting question. I hadn't thought as far as the team v individual angle of that question. I'm certainly not saying there is evidence that alcohol helps your performance. But, I guess what I'm probably saying is that there is an excessive focus on 'rules'. I think that employers generally should have no say and no input into what you do in your private time, provided it doesn't harm your ability to do your job, and isn't illegal. Football clubs are no different to banks or building companies or retailers or anything else in that sense, they are just employers in the end. If players turn up drunk, or so fat they can't run, then clearly their performance is being hindered and, in a football context, they will be lining up to get sacked pretty smartly. That argument doesn't hold for Swan. What better performance could Collingwood possibly ask for? Does anybody really think he'd get 50 touches every week instead of 40 if he went to bed at 10pm every night?

I think its irrelevant that these guys are paid to be professional athletes, when considering their after hours activities. Firstly, he's not our player, so why do we care what he does? And if he was, then it is the same thing as in any other job - if you perform, then you keep your job. Clearly, getting on the pi55 doesn't make a pinch of [censored] difference to Swan's 'on-the-job' performance, so who cares what he gets up to??? And to those who say footballers are role models and shouldn't behave like this, I say (1) we probably need to look elsewhere for role models anyway and (2) how many of you can say you never go out for drinks after work?

At least he isn't holding on to his nuts like Jurrah is.

I don't think whether or not they consider it a blessing to play for Melbourne has anything to do with it, RR. The issue is whether they should have been tossed. Not whether those players have a sense of entitlement, which to my knowledge has never been seriously suggested by anybody.

Reckon he'll go around again. Honestly, if you take a view that we cut, say, 13-14 players over 2 years, what difference does it make to cut him next year not this? The outcome in the end will be the same, in that the 13-14 players will be gone in 2 years regardless of which ones go when. Why nail Green this year when there are enough that can go before him?

This: sounds very much like backpedalling, when one goes in with this: and everybody reacts like most normal people would.

And I was wondering why Dean Bailey was calling him about coming to the Dees...

Who racks up 22 more touches per week than Presti ever did...

You are a clown.

Don't think they'll let Blease go if they can help it. Too much upside.

I think they'll probably start with delisting Bate, Dunn, Petterd, Bartam, Bennell and Jetta, although I can understand that they might stick with Bartram and Bennell as rookies (if they can). Green might get the push to take it up to 7. I don't think they'll get rid of Moloney, Blease, Strauss, Cook, Jurrah, Davis, Spencer, Bail or Fitzpatrick. MacDonald might be the extra one. It seems unlikely they'll go higher than 8 - that's a hell of a lot of upgrades/draft picks... Davey will probably go as well, so that gets up towards 9. And if you were poor old Cale, you'd want to have a good year next year. Still, I think anybody cheering him getting subbed off (whether they thought he was being dragged or knew he was injured) should take a pretty good look at themselves.

I agree - also think there will be a bias towards giving the big blokes more time, given we are likely to be mid-heavy in the draft.

I know how you're going to feel about this, but I reckon we should sign Moloney over Bennell. Also, as much as JMac makes me cringe, I think they'll give him another one and see how he goes. More likely than someone like Petterd I reckon.

As much as it gives me the screaming sh!ts, that isn't being called holding the ball this season. The umpires have taken the view that they would rather the game keep moving, than pay a free kick. Watch how often these absolutely blatant holding the balls aren't called in the next few weeks. It has been bugging me all year.