Pello

Not a bad call - if we can't snag Malthouse or Roos then a promising coach under the mentoring of Matthews would work. As I said earlier Matthews doesn't have the sharpness of mind anymore to make game day moves and develop meaningful game plans. But he would still be capable of building a team of coaches and mentoring them and players and build a winning culture. However, I suspect Matthews is comfortable in the media and could not be coaxed into such a role. So we really need to put all our eggs into the Malthouse (or Roos but preferably Malthouse) basket. Of course if we recover from where we are now and end up at 10 wins at the end of the year do we keep Bailey? At the beginning of the year 10 wins was considered the minimum number required to save DB and it would show we have progressed somewhat - albeit slowly. Or do we bite the bullet and get rid of him anyway. My view is get rid of him anyway as he has failed to fix two recurring problems that have been evident since round 1 2008: 1. Our lame first quarters. This is a Bailey trademark and continues to cause issues 71 games after his coaching debut. He must have them drinking cups of tea doing meditation under a pyramid prior to the game judging by the way we start games! 2. The differential of inside 50's against our opponents. I know we are all frustrated by this. Am I over simplifying it? Play on at all costs and kick the ball long into the forward line asap and give the opposition little time to set up their structures. I'II back LJ one out against anyone in the league. And I sure Sylvia, Dunn, Wona, Petterd and Bennell will probably do alright in one on one or two on two contests. Which ever way you look at it DB hasn't fixed this problem even though every single supporter knows its an issue for us and has been from DB day 1!

I think Matthews use by date has expired. Listening to his special comments on the box he doesn't offer much of an insite into the game these days and I think the game has past him by. Blight has been there done that and he has proven to be tough and uncomprising (and unorthodox) but I am not sure he would be interested particularly with his GC connections. So the field starts to narrow after this. However, we all agree we "potentially" have a very good list and with Jimmy's power of pursuasion I would be surprised if we could not get MM or Roos over the line. I am totally against G Lyon or Todd becoming coach. They are coming out of the same MFC culture. They are great past players and most definitely should be involved in the club. But a new direction and new culture is needed. One where no matter who we are playing and where we are on the ladder we all know as supporters that the players donning the red and blue are going to have a fair dinkum crack week in week out. Its a tough standard to live up to but one we need to strive for. Malthouse has coached for a long time and up until last year his last premiership was 1994. Notwithstanding that I can't recall a Malthouse coached team putting in too many insipid performances. He demands respect and commands his players to go hard or go home! (Don't you love that cliche!)

You hit the nail on the head Ox. We have no consistency. That insipid performance the other night is just another one that the MFC have consistency put out over the years/decades. It doesn't matter about the playing list, the coach or the administration - these peformances are riddled in our past. Sure every club puts in a bad one from time to time but the MFC do this on a regular basis. I can only put it down to the culture of the club and some "intangible cancerous tumour" that infects the club psyche. We need an outsider to coach the MFC and change the culture but to do that he must have coached AFL premierships in the past (not just played) and be tough and uncompromising and command enormous respect. All paths lead to Malthouse.

Watts clearly has ability but produces it in patches which is not surprising given his age and the positions he plays. Watts often looks laconic and lacking intensity and he even appears slow at times even though he has blizted at the 20m trial at draft camp. Watts is a number 1 draft pick and will always be scrutinised whether we like it or not. My only fear at this stage of his career is that the characteristics I have identified are closely aligned to the last number 1 draft pick we picked!

All of this just goes to show the error the club made by extending Bailey's contract by another year before the year was finished. Who cares about all the endless speculation and media coverage that it would have generated with him being out of contract at the end of the year. We were told we didn't want to be distracted by media speculation? Since when does the media run the club? Geelong seem to be coping with the Ablett speculation OK - where are they again on the ladder? I'm not saying we should not extend DB's contract. I am saying we should have waited until this season is over and we were in a better position to review his performance. No amount of ranting will convince me he is the right bloke for the job if we win a third consecutive wooden spoon. Even an honourable 15th placed at 5 1/2 wins is hardly progress! At the start of the year I thought we'd get 7 wins this year and that would be a pass mark. I'II live with 6 1/2 so 2 more wins for me and DB will scrap through with a pass. However, having said all that his match day coaching does concern me. When clubs have done their homework on us and we are the "hunted" he has no more tricks in his bag. No plan B someone else said and this is true. If a player is being beaten he is too slow to move them! As an example Beamer was tagged out of the Adelaide game and was of no value to the team. Meanwhile down the forward line Goodwin and Johncock were having a competition between themselves as to who could get the most rebounds. DB should have mixed things up and break the tag and get Beamer down on the forward line to tag one of those 2 out of the contest. With his strength and energy he might have also got a goal assist or two. When was the last time you saw Grimes on the forward line, Bate on the backline, Bartram tagging in the midfield? Just mix it up when the game is going pear shape before its too late!

Saw him in Darwin and thought he was carrying a little around the midrift.

It is hardly self serving to identify a couple of key errors that resulted in goals. It was done merely to support my opinion - if that's self serving then your condemnation will need to spread across every thread as many posters use examples to illustrate their points. And its hardly "nitpicking" when the errors identified resulted in goals at crucial times in the game. I hope you are right about Bartram because it will mean we have a quality back pocket/tagger for many years to come which means we can focus our recruiting in other areas. But at the moment we agree to disagree and time will tell who will right.

I'II stand by my comment that the two critical errors he made against Collingwood and Bulldogs came at crucial times late in the game that resulted in goals that lost us the lead and ultimately the game. In all likelihood had those errors not occurred we would have won. Its tough to single him out and I wasn't calling for his head after those errors. I am just realistically assessing the situation that we need a small, quick, tough, smart back and skilful back pocket in the future. There is a lot to like about Bartram - I love his intensity and courage. He is a good honest player who gives his all. But he's not our future - his skills (or lack thereof) will let us down even though he has improved as you point out (to which I agree). And I still don't get the "self serving" reference.

Thanks for your critique of my post Rhino. I thought I did say he deserves his spot in the team based on his performances to date! Nevertheless the point I was trying to make that somehow escaped you is that I don't think Batram will be in the MFC long term plans - (3 - 5 yrs) because he makes crucial errors at crucial times. All players make them from time to time - he just makes them too often. But he will stay on our list until we can recruit a better option or mould someone like a Bail or Strauss into the player that we need to replace him. There are a lot of smart small forwards going around at the moment and we need to build our list so we have a number of options that can match up on them. And for the time being one of those options is Bartram. But as I said before the stakes aren't as high on the errors that he makes today. But as we climb the ladder there will be big games and in those games there will be game changing moments and I have serious doubts whether Bartram is capable of meeting those challenges. And as for your comment about "self serving dribble" - what are you on? I have an opinion and I shared it. I fail to see how you link sharing a view on this site with it being "self serving." Maybe you should stick to sharing your views and engage in healthy debate and leave the insults at the keyboard!

I know this isn't the topic of this thread but seeing Batram has been mentioned I will add my two cents. He has definitely improved this year and has been playing his role each week and does not deserve to be dropped. His disposal has improved a lot. Yes there is a BUT! But I can't see him being part of our long term plans. As hard and as tough and dedicated as he is to the role he plays in the team he will let us down at crucial times during a game. He will always give 100% - no question. But in those crucial tight moments of a pressurised last quarter his skill errors create turnovers and have cost us two games this year. Let's not forget the errant handball against Collingwood. Of course there is a 100+ minutes in a game and it may seem unfair to focus on those two errors in the context of all other mistakes that are made in a game. Maybe so but the fact remains that throughout his career Bartram has consistently made crucial mistakes that wind up hurting us. As I say his form warrants he gets picked each week - for now. But as we start to creep into finals and then premiership contention Bartram won't be part of our plans because players like Clint that lack skill will continually hurt you at crucial times as he has done before. Only then though the stakes will be much higher.

Positives: 1. Joel Mac - looks like he will be solid down back and provides much needed experience. 2. Morton - Very good and showed glimpses he has taken his game to the next level. 3. Scully and JT - Showed glimpses as to why they were taken 1 & 2. 4. Rivers - showed signs he will have a big season. 5. It is only round 1 of NAB cup so no need to panic just yet! 6. Bailey's contract hasn't been extended as yet. Need to see marked improvement before that happens!

Congratulation YM - you once again achieved what you set out to do!

I think you've got this one wrong Kegs. As others have pointed out Stef is quick and very agile for his size. Players with height and mobility are sought after in the modern game. Add to that his flexibility in being able to fill holes, ie forward, back or ruck then he has all the markings of a player that all clubs love to have on their list. Yes he needs to improve his disposal and improve his reading of the game but these are fixable. Contrary to what has already been said though in the future I can see him as a solid second ruck option that will occassionally play down forward. Another of his attributes is that he takes a decent contested mark as well and has a good leap.

I don't agree that Jamar is the only competitive ruckman we have. Martin is coming along in leaps and bounds in that department and with his leap and mobility he is very competitive in the ruck. He may not be a 200cm plus giant but he showed us last year how far he has come in this role and he will continue to improve and be more than competitive in 2010.

I have lost track of what is going on with this guy? Last I heard he was training with us with a view to picking him up in the PSD. Now I understand we are going with Joel McDonald. What happened? Did he fail the medical?

And he has shown some upside - it hasn't all been bad news. He did stand up during the year (for a couple of games anyway) when all our other ruckman were down - we soon forget. He has shown glimpses of form around the ground (a great run down and tackle) - we soon forget. He has kicked a few goals (a beauty on a bleak night at the MCG against Geelong) - we soon forget. He is 25 and has played 60 games and the next 3 or 4 years will be his best. All I am saying is that he struggles as a ruckman (nothwithstanding the odd good performance) but he knows how to play FF and would be a distraction for the opposition due to his size, his leading and mark capabilities. Also I said that Jurrah could play the "Robbo" ROLE, ie not the key forward but one capable of taking a spectacular mark or kicking the unpredictable goal. There is no doubt Robbo did that for years and I fully expect Jurrah to do it as well and much much more for years to come.

I'd say we are waiting for the final decision from Ball. No point inviting someone down and then a week later saying "sorry - no more room on the list."

I think there is some potential for PJ to play FF. Whilst he has spent some time forward he has never been allowed to settle. The longest consecutive amount time he has played FF is a quarter and given the number of times we notoriously get the ball inside 50 he's had few opportunities. What I have noticed however, is that he leads well, his timing is good and the positioning of his leads are fine. He plays the position like he knows what he needs to do - present. And he is quick off the mark. Steph Martin has showed some promise down forward but he just hasn't got the understanding of the position (atm) that PJ has. I agree PJ is at best a back up ruckman. I agree he can't take a pack mark and I agree that his field kicking has been poor although his goal kicking is a little better. Give him a few full games at full forward and see how he goes. Jurrah can play the "Robbo" role and PJ can be the focal point. At the very least having such a mountain of a man up forward gets the opposition thinking about match ups and takes some of the focus away from Jurrah (which will inevitably come).

Maybe Tassie and New Zealand? It's time the Kiwi's learnt a decent game! If the competition number gets to 20 I reckon the fixture will be split into two divisions of 10 teams with each team playing each other twice and each division having a seperate ladder. The top 4 teams of each division will play out the finals series. How the remaining 4 games are played out to get to 22 rounds would be interesting. Each year the composition of the teams in the division changes based on where each team finished the year before. Should this eventuate I think the AFL will be at pains to ensure that no one division is overall stronger than the other because if they go down the VFL Div 1 & Div 2 road it will end the same way - bankruptcy and tears! Whatever does happen though - it won't be good news for the existing teams who will again lose draft picks and have their list exposed to poachers. Everytime a new team comes in that premiership dream gets further and further away!

I care. I want the opportunity to see us play after waiting over 5 months. I want to see our new recruits up close and the development of the rest of the list. If we lose the first match we have over a month to wait until round 1 of the real stuff. I know there are practice matches but the NAB cup is a level above that which gives us a little better indication on how these players are tracking.

Thanks D3 for sharing the information you came across. There's a few precious people on this forum. I'm tipping your information is good but if not - so what! We all know the deal with information shared on here. What I wouldn't like to happen is that the next time you come across information about the MFC you hesitate to post it in case you cop another whack. Keep up the good work!

Terrible news. If any one can fight through this Jimmy is the one. We are all thinking of you Jimmy.

We don't know if he can coach as yet! He hasn't been judged on the past 2 years performances. But no more free hits next year. If there is not a reasonable amount of improvement next year (say 7 wins) then you have to ask - should he coach on?

A good point. We are a club that is fast developing a reputation of prematurely moving on players that have been loyal servants of our club. You could not blame Flash if he was thinking that he may be in a similar position when next out of contract at the age of 29. You reap what you sow and the clean out over the past few years has had consequences I don't think anyone has given much thought about.

Brock was not fast from day one. With all his injuries I am concerned that with the increased speed of the game that it may have passed him by. It's OK to be our in an under guy but opponents will exploit his lack of pace and that can hurt us. If this part of his game can't improve then we may be forced to make a tough call in 12 months.