Hmm. I'm thinking if we had delisted all those "list clogger" last season for example, we would not be in the 8 now and there would be even more wolves howling for blood.

Oh yeah

Melv how about giving us some of your brilliant insight on another subject. We know you dont want Ratts. It's getting rather boring here...

brilliant insight

If Ratten is the man (which i think he's not) than this is what i think needs to happen....................

1. Review of the football department and beef it up
Its a worry that our most experienced coach is Mark Riley. Brett Ratten is learning on the job, Craig Bradley hasn't had much experience either (2 games at at the Saints) and Montgomery is an ex premiership player. The club could gain so much if they added the likes of a Brenton Sanderson, Damien Hardwick, Todd Viney or Dean Laidley (which Synbad said no chance) These guys are smart, have experience and all on top of the modern game and will add more to the football department than what we currently have.


2. Rid the list cloggers
The list needs to be turned over. We have become so predictable because of some the senior players we have on our list, which I honestly believe don't add nothing more than we already know to our side. Players Houlihan, Bannister, Cloke, Scottland, Stevens and Fisher must be cut or told they are not part of the plan and nor should they be. There best is no good, the game has passed them and been around long enough that opposition teams know they are no good and expose there weaknesses.

The starting 22 for next year for me would be

FB: Thornton - Jammo - Jospeh
HB: Grigg - Bower - Johnson
C: Walker - Muprh - Simpson
HF: Waite - Krooze - Yarran/Wiggins
FF: Betts - Fevola - Gartlett/Robinson
FOL: Warnock - Judd - Gibbs
INT: Hampson - Carrazzo - Browne - Armfield

EM: Hartlett - Anderson - Wiggins (think he has something to add)

Maybe a simplistic view but at the moment i feel as if we are a little directionless and have no vision. For example The hawks identified that the likes of Thompson, Hay, Vandenberg, Dixon and Rawlings were not going to take them further. They were not part of there plans, they were not persisted with and moved on.

Part of my frustration is seeing the same names pop up again and again. Many of us know that some of these guys are just no good but are persisted with as Ratten is desperate to make finals. Last year Ratten should have identified that the likes of Fisher, Cloke, Bannister and Houlihan are just no good but played them, played them this year and just like last year, this one has become another wasted one that these 'cloggers' have taken spots away from other untried players. We've become so predictable, we have to many players that there weaknesses outweigh the strengths and opposition coaches love seeing the names of Fisher, Cloke, Bannister, Houlihan and Stevens on the team sheets.

Every team has injuries......

Or should expect injuries.

Sure it has stiffled us... but that doesnt stop us doing alot of things on the field.

Waite was CHB..... when we played with 4 or 5 talls in defence.

Defence was always covered but we persist in bolstering it up needlessly with talls..at the expense of runners and forward options.

He should have been up the ground causing missmatches in the midfield or helping create another forward option ....

And its how well your player development is going which determines your ability to cover injuries affectively.

I really wish people would stop leaning on the 'we're improving' crutch in this thread.

I really wish people would stop leaning on the 'we're improving' crutch in this thread.

OF COURSE we're improving. We're what... the 2nd? 3rd? youngest list in the comp. With probably the most 1st round draft picks (although St Kilda and Hawthorn may run us close). Improvement is inevitable - there's too much basic talent on this list for there not to be improvement.

Now - I'm as sick as everyone of the endless Hawthorn comparisons. But if we DO look at them for a second. If (like me) you believe they won a flag a year or two earlier than they had rights to, it should be asked... why? Lightning in a bottle? Or a list manager and coach working brilliantly together, drafting (and trading) to a very specific game style and then coaching that young talent set suffciently well the team executed said game plan to the point where they knocked off one of the best teams in league history?

The question which we should ask is... have we the confidence that the club has a single minded vision in the football department, and that what we are putting in palce week in week out are foundation blocks to that plan? To be honest I don't - I see us a bit wishy washy and changing from week to week. Take Hawthorn the year before they won the flag... roaring out of the blocks, hit the skids mid season and then came roaring again. I could be off base, but that says to me they had a plan, enjoyed it early, got a bit tired, lost track as young teams are wont to do, then got refocused, won games, tasted some finals and truly bought into the 'system'.

I'm no expert, far from, but what I see with Carlton is not talent maximised and channeled into a specfic plan. I don't see these players on autopilot at any stage. I see plenty of individual brilliance and weight of talent and effort winning games.

And one last point... three times THREE TIMES.. last week. Denis Armfield was the loose man hanging 40m off the contest. Now if that's how you're lining up, then I have serious doubts that we are maximising talent on the field during the game. And that IS coaching.

If your player development is going well those players are in the team on merit, not on injury.

Its your depth which determines how you cover injuries.

We've covered Warnock with a depth of ruckmen, Jacobs, Kreuzer and Hampson

Walker and Waite are always going to be difficult to cover, regardless of development or depth.

Walkers absence has seen Russell and Armfield see regular games. Russell has been ok, getting games into Armfield is good. He has the same prepardness to run the lines and take the opposition on. Similar questions over his disposal at the same stage of Walkers career.

Waite's injury has seen us use 3 tall defenders rather than 4 and Setanta has taken the role up forward that Waite was starting to be used in. Austin has also been given some games he may not otherwise have got. Hopefully we've learned something for next season from this.

Outside those 3 I don't think injuries have really hurt us this year, although this doesn't take into consideration the inujuries that Fev, Betts, Gibbs and Jamo have carried into games.

Bump

That's a bit like saying a Commodore has similar handling to a Bentley (no not Greg). You have to admit that the total package isn't comparable. Every aspect of Walker's game apart from pace and kicking on the run is far superior to Army's.