ignition.

It's not just the backline, but the whole structure or rather lack of. Far too often our entire team, plus theirs, congested themselves down a wing (~1/6th of the ground). We had no one in the forward 50, no one out wide, just all down a wing. So the ball was regularly kicked to a 50/50 contest and if it went to ground we were under pressure. Hawks just spread and as they have for years under Clarkson used the short and mid range kicks to hit targets and open the game up. Our movement is typically to a contest, under pressure, and inefficient.

The hype surrounding Lever last year was rife. It was at a similar level to pre-Toumpas. Was it the right move to target him? Yes, I think so as he showed some impressive traits. But as many of us argued, we paid far too much during trade week. Unfortunately now his wage also looks to be far too much. I'm not going to sit back and bash him. I think he can succeed here based on what I've seen him do at Adelaide. I just hope to not see extravagant levels of hype again in the not too distant future. However, history has a tendency to repeat itself.

6 - Hogan (How is a full forward, our second highest possession getter?) 5 - O.Mc (Worked Roughy well) 4 - Kent (His early game gets him here) 3 - Oliver (Good, but definitely can be better). 2 - Fritsch (Didn't get a lot, but didn't stop having a crack at the hard stuff). 1 - Neil-Bullen (One of the few to not stop running, covered a lot of ground). That was a hard one.

YEP, he's nothing but a liability. He'll never be a premiership quality forward, let alone midfielder. He's only supported when the team plays well around him. He just plods along.

Goodwin - Outclassed by Clarkson Tyson - Was hardly seen

Yet again a complete inability to spread. When we have it there are 36 players in 1/6th of the ground, so it's kicked to a contest time and time again. This game plan is utterly inefficient and useless.

I think I was at the end of the third quarter just after the non-paid Fritsch mark commentators Jono Brown said "it's really not the umpires day", whereas Eddie said "I better not say anything, in case I same something" (along those lines anyway). Roosy was also frustrated, but he of course was biased. I felt the umpires screwed us over severely. It seemed to ease up in the final 10 min when the game was no longer in the balance.

Convince the wife you'll spend quality time with the boy at the MCG. I'm sure she'll be fine at the rock climbing centre by herself. Also it may make your conversations that little bit more diverse

I've been meaning to write this since the weekend as I had previously given the game plan a bit of a bashing. I must say, the first half and especially first quarter was sensational to watch. It was good to see the team spread and subsequently use the ball well off the back of their highly contested style. I hope we see that more often. It was also refreshing to hear Roosy mentioned how Goodwin had put an emphasis on it after reviewing their last game (after speaking to him).

Hello all, As stated above, how do we stop Ben Brown this coming weekend? I'm sure the thought has crossed the minds of club staff this week. Last year Brown kicked 4 and 5 goals in the two games he played against us. He's also in fine form of late, so nullifying his influence will be beneficial. Aside from winning more out of the midfield, I'd like to see three tall defenders (O.Mc, Frost, and Lever) face he and Waite. Ideally I'd like to see Lever used as the loose to cut off the ball early, or block his ability to lead up forward. What are your thoughts?

The game plan is too inefficient and tiring. The team doesn't spread. It's always about a contest. Every goal is made difficult. Thus, some players get tired, structures fall apart, and a fade-out occurs.

Why did we fail to make the finals last season? Many attribute it to the last round loss to Collingwood, and/or the poor performance against Brisbane the week prior. I also recall three narrow losses near the start of the season that were faulted at selection, such as the naming’s JKH and a premature Weideman. We’ve also argued the regular overuse of the handball, as well as single quarter fadeouts. I guess there’s no right or wrong answer and it’s in the past. However, it was clear we all wanted improvements in these areas, so the question is now, have they been made? Let’s start with selection. Many of us were gobsmacked with the naming’s of Wagner and Maynard over Brayshaw and Tyson. Additional, some of us questioned the omission of Frost when facing the well-built Hawkins and Taylor. Consequently, Wagner’s first half was atrocious, where on three separate occasions he made foolish errors, including a missed tackle, a failed pick-up, and arguably a failed spoil, which cost us goals. His second half was better, although, I still consider him a liability. Next were our tall backs. On too many occasions O.McDonald got man-handled by Hawkins. Granted, he and Lever did a good job curbing his influence, although, things may have been different if Taylor didn’t go off early. Thus, I still can’t fathom the omission of Frost. Additionally, did we or did we not target Lever for his innate ability to leave his man to spoil or intercept a mark for a defensive rebound (we saw very little of this yesterday)? If so, why is Lever playing as the second tall? At Adelaide he played as the third behind Talia and Keath/Hartigan so he could do what he does best. The coaching panel have and tendency to create non-beneficial miss-matches (before and during game day). I hope the basic concepts of opposition analysis and player selection improve by next week. Now the game plan. Time and time again we’re reminded we’re to play a contested brand of football. That’s great, but what about the other half of non-contested football and efficient transitions from one end of the ground to the other? Yesterday, we won the contested possession and tackling pressure counts, yet Geelong destroyed us on the spread where they continually hit one-another lace out on the chest. Conversely, we continually, instead of overusing the handball like last year, opted to flood an end or side and bomb it to a contest (out of fifty, down the wing, inside fifty). How do we expect to make a tilt for finals if we can’t spread and hit lead up targets by foot (this was also an issue last year)? We’ve got that very large MCG to call our own, and yet we don’t use it appropriately. Instead every goal is made difficult. If given the space we’ll see far more from the less contested players such as Hunt, Melksham, Hannan, and Garlett. Dare I say it will be interesting to watch Watts with more space at Port Adelaide. If what we saw yesterday was the game plan it is far too one-dimensional, far too inefficient and tiring, and needs to be supplemented. If not I expect more single quarter fadeouts and subsequent losses. What are your thoughts and arguments? For me these need to improve above all else as I genuinely believe we have a list that on its day can beat any other to a flag.

Reminds me of the start of last season where we lost games at the selection table. Wagner is a liability. He misses tackles and turns it over too often. I also question how we're going to curb the strength of Hawkins. I don't think O.Mc can take him, and Lever will be best when given more opportunity to leave his man to intercept. Frost over Wagner would have been a much better option. Maynard over Brayshaw and Tyson is question. But so are the selections of Lewis and Vince. Those two need to be accountable for their actions and be placed under the microscope this year; I'm sick of their instant and free selection.

Agreed and well said.

In hindsight there have been a lot of draftees I wish the club had taken, but I don't see Weideman as a mistake. As others have said, on draft night Weideman was deemed the potential steal of the draft. That year he endured injury-induced setback after setback, but when he played he was spectacular. For example, he convincingly beat the number one defender of his cohort, Aaron Francis (went pick #6), when they went head-to-head. He also was one of the best on ground players when he played a half of football against a VFL side. Finally, he had premiership captain next to his name from the year prior. Yes, Curnow looked sensational last night, and yes, I would like him at the Dees. But at the time of the draft he had just been arrested for drink driving and subsequently refusing to perform a breath test. He came across as a bad-boy, a meat-head, whatever you want to call him. The club obviously questioned his ability to commit to being a full-time professional athlete. Yes, we chose the "nice guy" who had, and still has, great potential. Sure, we could have selected the "mongrel", however, based on the facts available at the time that "mongrel" may potentially damage the culture of the club or have off-field issues such as Dayle Garlett or Jake Stringer.

I wish this was the case but unfortunately it is not. For Scully we received two first round picks, which equated to #4 (directly after our #3) and #13 (pushed to #14 due to W.B compensation for the loss of Ward). Pick #4 (Scully compensation) was used to draft Toumpas. Picks #3 (our initial draft pick) & #14 (Scully compensation) was used for the 2012 Mini-draft Pick #2 (Hogan) plus Dom Barry and Pick #20. Pick #20 was then on-traded for Dawes and Pick #61 (which was then used as part of the Gysberts for Pedersen trade). So I'd say it's more easy to argue that the Scully compensation was used to acquire Toumpas, Barry, and Dawes (yuk!). If, however, Todd Viney had his way over Neeld and used Pick #4 to select Wines it would have been a better outcome. But, if that would have occurred we probably would have never got the likes of Petracca, Brayshaw, Oliver, and Weidemen (from presumably higher ladder positions). So it has appeared to even out nicely.

Let's hope the best thing to come from Jack Watts was Pick 31 of the 2017 draft, which we used to select Bayley Fritsch.

I'd like to see games put into the new kids and those fighting for spots (I don't think they should be named as emergencies). These include the likes of Spargo, Baker, Fritsch, Balic, Maynard, JKH, Wagner (off the top of my head). We've also heard that some will be getting more midfield and on-ball time this year. So I'd like to see the likes of Petracca, Brayshaw, ANB, and Salem spend next to all their time there. Likewise, let's see some veterans, such as Lewis and Vince etc. (if named), spend all their time down back or forward. Of course we want to see our club go out and win every game possible, but the JLT offers players an opportunity to shake off nerves (new players) and show what they are capable off.

In action, I thought the clash strip looked sensational (of course prefer our traditional red and blue). I agree it was not needed against the Hawks, but as others have said, I hope the club sold a few extra pieces as a result.

Merry Christmas everyone. Thank you all for another great year of news and discussion. Stay safe over the holidays, particularly if you're one of the many that does a long road trip on Boxing Day. Cheers

Am I the only one concerned that we picked a bloke the drinks a lot and goes out partying with Jaime Elliot? On a serious note, a great pick up and a credit to everyone involved at Casey.

Shame to see him go directly before our third. This is why people get frustrated during trade week when better deals can be struck if Mahoney learnt to negotiate better (e.g. Watts for 31, when Watts and 36 for 31 and 34 should have been pushed). With that said I'm stoked to see us claim Fritsch, also recall Spargo being touted as a high draft prospect (at the start of the year) before injury.

I would buy merchandise if it was unique to the MFC (not the same rubbish every other club has with their brand and colours).

I use to highly value Cal Twomey's opinion until I saw his 2008 draft recap the other day (he did it with such confidence, but it was shocking). I also found out he is an Essendon supporter...

I respectfully disagree. Children grow and will be getting replacement jumpers regardless. I can't see every parent replacing a perfectly fitting jumper when they're to grow out of it within a year or two (As I grew I had the likes of Viney, Stynes and Lyon on my back). For that reason I'd rather see Lever in #4 than it be shelved resulting in some MFC kids having to wear a number with no name to it. EDIT: Alternatively we may see a few off centre #14's