31. Dustin Fletcher

[DaSawx]

Can't say much more here either

[jnash196]

If we don't play finals this year and Dustin plays every game next year round 22 willl be his 299th, let's hope for him that he plays on in 2009 or we make finals in order to give Dustin a well deserved 300 games

[hulld]

he is veru durable so i would think that he would have at least 2 more years left

[tristo]

How many more seasons does Fletch have left in him? Currently sitting on 276 games he will surely play 2 more seasons to reach 300 games. Assuming he played 44 games over the next 2 seasons that would have him on 320 games... which then brings him close to 350.

To reach 350 however he will need


3 seasons playing every game plus 8 finals.
or 4 seasons playing 74 out of 88 home and away matches.I can see Fletch playing 3 more seasons (assuming he stays relatively injury free), especially with Mal back there with him, however 4 seasons might be pushing it.

If he does play 3 more, it would give time for our young defenders to develop.

Thoughts??

[Schmick]

He'll be 33 next season, i highly doubt he'd have 4 years left let alone 3.
I was expecting another year or 2 out of him, and i'd be pretty happy with that.

[Giggidy Giggidy]

He'll be 33 next season, i highly doubt he'd have 4 years left let alone 3.
I was expecting another year or 2 out of him, and i'd be pretty happy with that.

I think he could manage 3 more seasons, his body is a lot more durable than most his age.

3 seasons for about 55-60 games to end around the 330-340 mark.

[Boris_Bewick]

I think he could manage 3 more seasons, his body is a lot more durable than most his age.

3 seasons for about 55-60 games to end around the 330-340 mark.

I think it's more his mental capacity which has kept him playing so long. His body is starting to struggle I think, as he had problems all this year with it, but he has such a mental strength (and footy smarts) which has enabled to play at a such a high quality for his age.

I see him getting to passing 300 and retiring in the season he does it. So two years I think. Would love more but I think 2 years retiring at 35 will be it

[Giggidy Giggidy]

I think it's more his mental capacity which has kept him playing so long. His body is starting to struggle I think, as he had problems all this year with it, but he has such a mental strength (and footy smarts) which has enabled to play at a such a high quality for his age.

I see him getting to passing 300 and retiring in the season he does it. So two years I think. Would love more but I think 2 years retiring at 35 will be it

Couldn't spur him on for 1 more if our 2010 plan is on track then?

[BABYBOMBERS2007]

I reackon 4/5 years. I mean his form is great, he got AA and the premiership window could be pen in a couple of years.

[Boris_Bewick]

Couldn't spur him on for 1 more if our 2010 plan is on track then?

Definitely more than possible but that's depending on how the team is travelling, and his own form and injuries. Could see it happening though.

[Hislop200]

I think he will finish in 2009 with just over 300 games.
I can see them nursing him through 15 or so games a season whilst giving valuable game time to the youngsters.

[bomberstomake8]

there was an article on the essendon website a few months ago discussing it with him. all he said was he is pumped for 2008 and hopefully more seasons, i would assume he would stay for another 2 years.. that would be the safest bet.. i guess injury's will play a big part, he has never been too injury prone so finishing at 35 is probably realistic

[ALM_30]

If he just continues to sit loose across half back, collecting 30 of the cheapest touches you've ever seen each game, then he could go till he's 40.

Was lucky to get AA in 2007, I don't believe in rewarding defenders who don't defend a man.

[Guss06]

If he just continues to sit loose across half back, collecting 30 of the cheapest touches you've ever seen each game, then he could go till he's 40.

Was lucky to get AA in 2007, I don't believe in rewarding defenders who don't defend a man.

mate u dnt no shit about footy to say that. look who u ****ing barrack for colloinwood just sums up u as a person and your 1 eyed view on football. if you new anything about football n u watched any games beside collingwood u would now how good he is. he deserved that all australian who knows nuthing about footy then u will think that prestigeocomo deservied all australian didnt he. get ur facts rite n stay the *** out of the essendon forum

[Ryder Is God]

If he just continues to sit loose across half back, collecting 30 of the cheapest touches you've ever seen each game, then he could go till he's 40.

Was lucky to get AA in 2007, I don't believe in rewarding defenders who don't defend a man.

Maybe they rewarded him for setting up a lot of goals from his rebound from defence?

[ALM_30]

Maybe they rewarded him for setting up a lot of goals from his rebound from defence?

So did Sam Fisher at St. Kilda, but he actaully played CHB on the CHF, most weeks. Fletcher didn't.

[ALM_30]

mate u dnt no shit about footy to say that. look who u ****ing barrack for colloinwood just sums up u as a person and your 1 eyed view on football. if you new anything about football n u watched any games beside collingwood u would now how good he is. he deserved that all australian who knows nuthing about footy then u will think that prestigeocomo deservied all australian didnt he. get ur facts rite n stay the *** out of the essendon forum

How bout you look at the point at hand, the fact that Fletcher did play loose (or on one of the lesser forwards) for the vast majority of 2007, and that the vast majority of his touches were uncontested.

I'm not saying he doesn't create play well, but so does Sam Fisher and Matty Scarlett except they play on the best forwards every week, or at least the second best forward.

The fact you just see that Collingwood emblem under my profile and just cast it off as rubbish immedietely is typical. What I'm saying is correct, so pretend for a second that, I'm a fellow Essendon a fan saying that, what would your reaction be?

I imagine if I'd have said the Bombers will win the flag within the next 5 years, you'd still call me a ****wit because I'm a Collingwood supporter, focus on the issue not who the other bloke goes for, you people say you hate Collingwood so much, then don't bring them up in conversation I didn't.

PS: Presti is the last bloke who should have been AA, because although you may not think so I have the capacity to support the game.

[Ryder Is God]

So did Sam Fisher at St. Kilda, but he actaully played CHB on the CHF, most weeks. Fletcher didn't.

No he didn't. He played mainly as a loose defender.

Go cry about it somewhere else, we don't want to hear it.

[GoDons]

I don't think Dustin will go on for too much longer to tell you the truth.

It's not a matter of ability, as Dustin could still be playing reasonable football in 4 years, I just don't think he desires to be a journey man.

I think we'll see play for 2 more years and retire the same way that Wellman and Hird did, on top. He could go for longer, I just don't think he will.

So did Sam Fisher at St. Kilda, but he actaully played CHB on the CHF, most weeks. Fletcher didn't.

Fisher didn't play on the CHF most weeks, that's a load of rubbish.

Fisher played on CHFs when Maguire or Hudghton was injured, that's the extent of it. He played his best footy as a loose man. He said it himself.

Whilst ww're on the topic of loose defenders, I assume you're against the inclusion of Andrew McLeod in the team?

[tristo]

So did Sam Fisher at St. Kilda, but he actaully played CHB on the CHF, most weeks. Fletcher didn't.

I think you will find that S.Fisher played loose across half back as well, and when he did play CHB on a CHF (only because of injuries at St Kilda) he got towelled up. Fisher has no defensive aspect to his game at all, Fletcher can go back onto a defender and hold his own, if not win, however the Essendon game plan had Fletcher playing as a loose defender in 2007, and he was by far the best at it in the league!!!

Collingwood dont use loose defenders at all do they........

[Giggidy Giggidy]

So did Sam Fisher at St. Kilda, but he actaully played CHB on the CHF, most weeks. Fletcher didn't.

Fletcher wasn't named at CHB, in fact he wasn't even named in the backline, so how is that even relevant?

[ALM_30]

Fisher admitted he played loose for one game when he was being interviewed and he said it's not hard to play well when your a loose man.

You'll find that he played on and beat/contained the likes of Matty Richardson, Matthew Pavlich, Travis Cloke, Buddy Franklin, Drew Petrie, Warren Tredrea just to name a few throughout the year.

So no he didn't get towelled up at all, and yes he did play on the bigger, better forwards when McGuire and Hudghton were out, which, in case you hadn't realised, was for the majority of the year.

Fletcher has lost the ability to contain not just the best but even the better forwards in the game.

Collingwood do utilise loose men, I never said I was in favour of it though, and yes I do put Andrew McLeod in that bracket, because although he is a very good player I don't respect the role he plays.

Although, McLeod doesn't have the cpacity to play as a key defender, Fletcher does and it's where he should have played more often particularly considering how badly beaten Michael got on a regular basis, but Sheedy just gave Fletch the easy run, and I don't like that.

[kelvin_sheedy]

If he just continues to sit loose across half back, collecting 30 of the cheapest touches you've ever seen each game, then he could go till he's 40.

Was lucky to get AA in 2007, I don't believe in rewarding defenders who don't defend a man.

I guess you don't rate Heath Shaw then.

[ALM_30]

Fletcher wasn't named at CHB, in fact he wasn't even named in the backline, so how is that even relevant?

Fletcher was in the team as the interchange defender, and I don't believe he should have been because I thought there were players more worthy, and I thought his 2nd half to 2007 was patchy. The likes of Fisher, Bolton, Rutten I would have had ahead of him.

[ALM_30]

I guess you don't rate Heath Shaw then.

Heath Shaw isn't a key defender, he wasn't hidden and handed his success in 2007 on a silver platter like Fletcher was, who just floated loose, all the while watching Mal Michael get flogged most games getting his 30 cheap ones a match.

There is no reason why Fletcher couldn't have created play whilst playing on a quality opponent, like he should have, and if Sheedy wasn't concerned about Fletcher's waning ability to take a decent opponent he wouldn't have brought in Mal Michael.

Shaw wins a hard ball too, but like I've said I'm not the one concerned about turning this into a Collingwood v. The Rest debate, you people obviously are.

[GoDons]

Fisher admitted he played loose for one game when he was being interviewed and he said it's not hard to play well when your a loose man.

You'll find that he played on and beat/contained the likes of Matty Richardson, Matthew Pavlich, Travis Cloke, Buddy Franklin, Drew Petrie, Warren Tredrea just to name a few throughout the year.

So no he didn't get towelled up at all, and yes he did play on the bigger, better forwards when McGuire and Hudghton were out, which, in case you hadn't realised, was for the majority of the year.

He played loose for one game, please.

Fisher played the vast majority of the second half of the year as a loose defender.

And I think it might be more the case of your ignorance not mine, Hudghton and Maguire were only both missing in Round 3-9. Not only is that representative of each of them not being missing for the majority of the season, but it also reflects that Fisher was freed up for the second half the season.

Fletcher has lost the ability to contain not just the best but even the better forwards in the game.

Interesting, first he never plays on key forwards and now that he can't. If he nevers plays on key forwards, how would you know if he's lost the ability?

Collingwood do utilise loose men, I never said I was in favour of it though, and yes I do put Andrew McLeod in that bracket, because although he is a very good player I don't respect the role he plays.

Although, McLeod doesn't have the cpacity to play as a key defender, Fletcher does and it's where he should have played more often particularly considering how badly beaten Michael got on a regular basis, but Sheedy just gave Fletch the easy run, and I don't like that.

I think your missing the point of Fletcher's role, and badly.

Essendon rely on quick movement of the ball to our forwards. That's the area that our game plan has been based around. In effect, it works to our strenghts.

Fletcher's rebounding role enables this to happen. Fletcher can direct long and accurate kicks to players who break from the middle to the wings. It is from this that we are able to deliver to Lloyd and Lucas before the opposition are able to crowd our forward 50. This is what drives our scoring. Fletcher has just about the most important role on the ground.

Mal Michael got badly beaten on a regular basis did he? Pure ignorance. Mal not only did the job on the likes of Barry Hall and Jonathan Brown, but provided a great contest for us. Yep, he had a shocker against Carlton, but aside from that, he was a good, consistent performer. Mal did as good a job as anyone could've given some of the midfield collapses we had last season.

[kelvin_sheedy]

Heath Shaw isn't a key defender, he wasn't hidden and handed his success in 2007 on a silver platter like Fletcher was, who just floated loose, all the while watching Mal Michael get flogged most games getting his 30 cheap ones a match.

There is no reason why Fletcher couldn't have created play whilst playing on a quality opponent, like he should have, and if Sheedy wasn't concerned about Fletcher's waning ability to take a decent opponent he wouldn't have brought in Mal Michael.

Shaw wins a hard ball too, but like I've said I'm not the one concerned about turning this into a Collingwood v. The Rest debate, you people obviously are.

Maybe you should take up your argument with the AA selectors seeing you know much more than them and the rest of us.

I guess you've seen a lot of Essendon games this year and who Fletcher has and hasn't played on.

Why are all you Pies supporters so hateful and jealous of Dustin Fletcher's standing in the game.

He will go down as on the of the greatest defenders in the history of the game with two premierships(maybe more), 2+AA's and a B&F in the best and most successful side of all time.

Anyone that argues against his ability and standing in the game knows nothing about football.

Welcome aboard. :thumbsu:

[ALM_30]

He played loose for one game, please.

Fisher played the vast majority of the second half of the year as a loose defender.

And I think it might be more the case of your ignorance not mine, Hudghton and Maguire were only both missing in Round 3-9. Not only is that representative of each of them not being missing for the majority of the season, but it also reflects that Fisher was freed up for the second half the season.



Interesting, first he never plays on key forwards and now that he can't. If he nevers plays on key forwards, how would you know if he's lost the ability?



I think your missing the point of Fletcher's role, and badly.

Essendon rely on quick movement of the ball to our forwards. That's the area that our game plan has been based around. In effect, it works to our strenghts.

Fletcher's rebounding role enables this to happen. Fletcher can direct long and accurate kicks to players who break from the middle to the wings. It is from this that we are able to deliver to Lloyd and Lucas before the opposition are able to crowd our forward 50. This is what drives our scoring. Fletcher has just about the most important role on the ground.

Mal Michael got badly beaten on a regular basis did he? Pure ignorance. Mal not only did the job on the likes of Barry Hall and Jonathan Brown, but provided a great contest for us. Yep, he had a shocker against Carlton, but aside from that, he was a good, consistent performer. Mal did as good a job as anyone could've given some of the midfield collapses we had last season.

I know that is Fletcher's role, what I'm saying is there is no reason Flether can't play that role whilst manning a decent opponent, there are several players in the league who do it, and do it just as effectively as Fletcher playing loose. Particularly considering the pounding your team took from key forwards week, week out throughout 2007.

Would you like me to pull out the numbers from some of Mal's showings this year? Because I've don't on the Essendon board before and I'll happily do it again.

Then we will see who is ignorant and why Mal was pretty much a poor investment!

AND if you could list those games Fisher played loose it would be much appreciated, particulartly considering the opponents I mentioned he beat throughout the year, came from my better memory of the 2nd half of the year.

[cAsEy_18]

Have to remember you have to take off about 5 games over a 2 year period for fletch getting suspended :p

[ALM_30]

Mal Michael got badly beaten on a regular basis did he? Pure ignorance. Mal not only did the job on the likes of Barry Hall and Jonathan Brown, but provided a great contest for us. Yep, he had a shocker against Carlton, but aside from that, he was a good, consistent performer. Mal did as good a job as anyone could've given some of the midfield collapses we had last season.

Rnd 3: Fevola 17 touches, 11 marks, 8 goals (BOG)
Rnd 2: Pavlich 19 touches, 9 marks, 4 goals (BOG)
Rnd 19: Pavlich 30 touches, 16 marks, 6.3 (BOG)
Rnd 9: Richardson 15 touches, 11 marks, 4 goals (BOG)
Rnd 21: Richardson 25 touches, 15 marks, 1.4 (BOG)
Rnd 5: Rocca 14 touches, 8 marks, 3.4
Rnd 16: Rocca 9 touches, 6 marks, 4 goals (even Cloke ragdolled him that day)
Rnd 6: Franklin 19 touches, 8 marks, 9 goals (BOG)
Rnd 12: Tredrea 15 touches, 6 marks, 4 goals (whilst couldn't get a kick)
Rnd 13: Neitz 11 touches, 6 marks, 3 goals (on one leg)
Rnd 14: Mooney 15 touches, 11 marks, 3.6 (BOG)
Rnd 17: Welsh 12 touches, 4 marks, 3 goals

There you have it...

[BabyBomber]

I must say that while it isn't getting toweled up, the forwards you mentioned averaged over 3 goals a game against St Kilda (Im just assuming you're right and he played on them). Buddy snatched 9 goals in their two games, a poor performing start of the year Tredrea managed 3 goals 2, and an over-rated Drew Petrie kicked 4.

Regardless, a team full of people with a main focus on accountability would be an extremely negative and boring game in my opinion, which is what you seem to be after considering you obviously don't like the idea of loose men at all. There were alot of players who got shafted in AA, largely due to the success of Geelong, but Fletcher was not less deserving than most of them. With the year he had as an attacking backman with Mal in place down back (who I don't think had nearly the atrocious year you seem to think he did), he was a second defender on all the major forwards, and some of the lesser ones at the same time. He helped all over the backline with regards to spoils and helping out our backline with their accountability. Those gadget arms are never out of use.

Anyway, woo Fletch our All Australian player :p

[GoDons]

I know that is Fletcher's role, what I'm saying is there is no reason Flether can't play that role whilst manning a decent opponent, there are several players in the league who do it, and do it just as effectively as Fletcher playing loose. Particularly considering the pounding your team took from key forwards week, week out throughout 2007.

Why should Fletcher man an opponent when he doesn't need to? Michael and Ryder were sufficient against a number of sides. When required Fletcher did man an opponent, examples would be Welsh and Pavlich in rounds 1 and 2 respectively.

Would you like me to pull out the numbers from some of Mal's showings this year? Because I've don't on the Essendon board before and I'll happily do it again.

Then we will see who is ignorant and why Mal was pretty much a poor investment!

You really are a shallow judge. Since when did statistics define a good performance? Mal got pantsed against Fremantle in round 19 and Carlton in round 3, aside from that, the job he did was just fine.

You can pull out as many stats as you like, you'll be wrong. I saw every game Essendon played in 2007, I saw Mal every week. I know when he got beaten, I know when he did the job.

I find it hard to belive you could claim the same.

AND if you could list those games Fisher played loose it would be much appreciated, particulartly considering the opponents I mentioned he beat throughout the year, came from my better memory of the 2nd half of the year.

I'm not going to claim having seen him every week, but I certainly remember 3 games in succession where Fisher played loose, St. Kilda vs. Adelaide, St. Kilda vs. Hawthorn and St. Kilda vs. Carlton. All of which were in the second half of the season. Furthermore, Hudghton and Maguire both played for th most part of the second half of the season, and I'd assume that their inclusions surely meant that Fisher was no where near the opposition's best key forwards.

[ALM_30]

I must say that while it isn't getting toweled up, the forwards you mentioned averaged over 3 goals a game against St Kilda (Im just assuming you're right and he played on them). Buddy snatched 9 goals in their two games, a poor performing start of the year Tredrea managed 3 goals 2, and an over-rated Drew Petrie kicked 4.

Regardless, a team full of people with a main focus on accountability would be an extremely negative and boring game in my opinion, which is what you seem to be after considering you obviously don't like the idea of loose men at all. There were alot of players who got shafted in AA, largely due to the success of Geelong, but Fletcher was not less deserving than most of them. With the year he had as an attacking backman with Mal in place down back (who I don't think had nearly the atrocious year you seem to think he did), he was a second defender on all the major forwards, and some of the lesser ones at the same time. He helped all over the backline with regards to spoils and helping out our backline with their accountability. Those gadget arms are never out of use.

Anyway, woo Fletch our All Australian player :p

I love defenders with a flair for attack, it's just the key word is DEFEND, and I don't think it's boring to expect defenders to defend. And Fletcher's apparent defensive work around the back half certainly didn't do your backline any favours in 2007, if it wasn't so shotty in all areas except getting cheap touches and banging the ball forward, you probably would have made the finals.

And If you think Mal Michael had a good year.. then... all I can say is WOW :eek:!!!!!

[ALM_30]

Why should Fletcher man an opponent when he doesn't need to? Michael and Ryder were sufficient against a number of sides. When required Fletcher did man an opponent, examples would be Welsh and Pavlich in rounds 1 and 2 respectively.



You really are a shallow judge. Since when did statistics define a good performance? Mal got pantsed against Fremantle in round 19 and Carlton in round 3, aside from that, the job he did was just fine.

You can pull out as many stats as you like, you'll be wrong. I saw every game Essendon played in 2007, I saw Mal every week. I know when he got beaten, I know when he did the job.

I find it hard to belive you could claim the same.



I'm not going to claim having seen him every week, but I certainly remember 3 games in succession where Fisher played loose, St. Kilda vs. Adelaide, St. Kilda vs. Hawthorn and St. Kilda vs. Carlton. All of which were in the second half of the season. Furthermore, Hudghton and Maguire both played for th most part of the second half of the season, and I'd assume that their inclusions surely meant that Fisher was no where near the opposition's best key forwards.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH...:D:p;)

I think those goals against numbers prove when he did and didn't get beaten, and according to them he got beaten pretty often.

Did you actaully look at those numbers? Mal was terrible! Your obviously a very soft judge.

Mate, please! Close to 60 odd goals going against your FB on the year is pathetic.

[Giggidy Giggidy]

Rnd 3: Fevola 17 touches, 11 marks, 8 goals (BOG) 3 Votes
Rnd 2: Pavlich 19 touches, 9 marks, 4 goals (BOG) No Votes
Rnd 19: Pavlich 30 touches, 16 marks, 6.3 (BOG) 1 vote
Rnd 9: Richardson 15 touches, 11 marks, 4 goals (BOG) No Votes
Rnd 21: Richardson 25 touches, 15 marks, 1.4 (BOG) 3 votes
Rnd 5: Rocca 14 touches, 8 marks, 3.4 No Votes
Rnd 16: Rocca 9 touches, 6 marks, 4 goals (even Cloke ragdolled him that day) No Votes
Rnd 6: Franklin 19 touches, 8 marks, 9 goals (BOG) 3 Votes
Rnd 12: Tredrea 15 touches, 6 marks, 4 goals (whilst couldn't get a kick) No Votes
Rnd 13: Neitz 11 touches, 6 marks, 3 goals (on one leg) No Votes
Rnd 14: Mooney 15 touches, 11 marks, 3.6 (BOG) No Votes
Rnd 17: Welsh 12 touches, 4 marks, 3 goals No Votes

There you have it...

Franklin, Fevola & Pavlich each had a big game vs Essendon, and Mal spent time on each of them, but did not spend the whole match on any of them, so could hardly be solely to blame.

Richo had a lot of the ball but only kicked one goal in the match that he got 3 votes, so unless you can provide goal assist stats for him I don't think it could be deemed a dominant performance.

I'm sure most teams had a few power forwards rip them apart this season, although in Collingwood's case its moreso the mid-size forwards that had your measure this year in Brennan, Robertson, Deledio, Davey.

The other 8 you list are merely trying to force a point through quantity, not quality, as there wasn't a brownlow vote between them.

[GoDons]

Rnd 3: Fevola 17 touches, 11 marks, 8 goals (BOG)
Rnd 2: Pavlich 19 touches, 9 marks, 4 goals (BOG)
Rnd 19: Pavlich 30 touches, 16 marks, 6.3 (BOG)
Rnd 9: Richardson 15 touches, 11 marks, 4 goals (BOG)
Rnd 21: Richardson 25 touches, 15 marks, 1.4 (BOG)
Rnd 5: Rocca 14 touches, 8 marks, 3.4
Rnd 16: Rocca 9 touches, 6 marks, 4 goals (even Cloke ragdolled him that day)
Rnd 6: Franklin 19 touches, 8 marks, 9 goals (BOG)
Rnd 12: Tredrea 15 touches, 6 marks, 4 goals (whilst couldn't get a kick)
Rnd 13: Neitz 11 touches, 6 marks, 3 goals (on one leg)
Rnd 14: Mooney 15 touches, 11 marks, 3.6 (BOG)
Rnd 17: Welsh 12 touches, 4 marks, 3 goals

There you have it...

Mal was not the direct opponent to Pavlich in round 2, Franklin in round 6, Mooney in round 14, or Welsh in round 17. Also, he didn't play the full game on Pavlich in round 18 or Fevola in round 3. In Round 16, Mal kept Rocca to 9 touches, he kicked 4 cheap goals.

You can keep acting like you know your stuff, but you're absolutely clueless. You're making your opinions by picking through a stats sheet, not by watching games.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH...:D:p;)

I think those goals against numbers prove when he did and didn't get beaten, and according to them he got beaten pretty often.

Did you actaully look at those numbers? Mal was terrible! Your obviously a very soft judge.

Mate, please! Close to 60 odd goals going against your FB on the year is pathetic.

As mentioned before, those numbers are largely irrelevant.

I would've thought you'd have learnt the first time you posted those figures that you were well and truly incorrect, and yet, you still decided to chuck the same crap up.

Then again, you know what they say about idiots...

[ALM_30]

Franklin, Fevola & Pavlich each had a big game vs Essendon, and Mal spent time on each of them, but did not spend the whole match on any of them, so could hardly be solely to blame.

Richo had a lot of the ball but only kicked one goal in the match that he got 3 votes, so unless you can provide goal assist stats for him I don't think it could be deemed a dominant performance.

I'm sure most teams had a few power forwards rip them apart this season, although in Collingwood's case its moreso the mid-size forwards that had your measure this year in Brennan, Robertson, Deledio, Davey.

The other 8 you list are merely trying to force a point through quantity, not quality, as there wasn't a brownlow vote between them.

First of all I culminated these stats before the Brownlow and the BOG's were according to what the football media said.

Second of all I hardly think that a forward not getting a Brownlow vote means the backman didn't get beaten on the day. There were plenty of times I saw Dunstall, Lockett, Ablett etc kicks 6-7 and not get votes, does that mean their opponent had the better of them? Those other games were put in to show that Mal got beaten with monotonous regularity.

Finally, all I said to begin with was Fletcher could play till he's 40 in the role he is now as a loose man across half back, collecting uncontested ball, I never disputed his standing in the game.

[ALM_30]

[quote=GoDons;9391926]
Regardless of whether or not he played on them, again, if you are happy with your full back conceding close to 60 goals for the season, which it is a statistical fact that he did, then you have very, very low standards.

[GoDons]

My friend I watch nearly every team every week, Michael started on then rotated with Fletcher on Pav in round 2, was on Franklin for a large portion of the round 6 game. I went to Geelong v. Essendon game and he was the direct opponent of Mooney all night, and played the vast majority of the Adelaide game on Welsh, Rocca still kicked 4 goals (and I'm being lienient because Cloke beat him for 1-2 as well), and he got moved off Fev and Pav because he was getting so badly destroyed.

Maybe you should stop assuming you know your stuff, because you are wrong.

And again, if you are happy with your full back conceding close to 60 goals for the season, which is a statistical fact, then you have very, very low standards.

Michael definately did NOT start on Matthew Pavlich in round 2. Dustin Fletcher played the whole game on him.

Michael definately did NOT spend a large portion of the game on Franklin. McPhee started on him and then Fletcher went on to him. It would've been no more than momentarily.

I am not wrong, you are.

But keep making up facts, keep making a fool of yourself.

I would've thought that the following thread from a few months ago would've taught you that you were wrong. You've even changed your mind yourself since you posted in this thread as to who Michael played on.

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=367767&highlight=Mal+Michael&page=2

[Longy413]

First of all I culminated these stats before the Brownlow and the BOG's were according to what the football media said.


So not by watching footy?

Perhaps that's where you went wrong...

[ALM_30]

So not by watching footy?

Perhaps that's where you went wrong...

No, wrong...

As I've mentioned I watched the games, and referred back to the newspapers to see if that player that Mal played on got BOG.

Well done sir.

[GoDons]

No, wrong...

As I've mentioned I watched the games, and referred back to the newspapers to see if that player that Mal played on got BOG.

Well done sir.

And yet you still can't seem to work out who he played on...

[Longy413]

No, wrong...

As I've mentioned I watched the games, and referred back to the newspapers to see if that player that Mal played on got BOG.

Well done sir.

But that is someone else's opinion.

You've already dismissed the umpires, so why not use your own.

If you had of watched these games, as you say you have, you could provide your own opinion as who was the best player on the ground, not some one else's.

[ALM_30]

But that is someone else's opinion.

You've already dismissed the umpires, so why not use your own.

If you had of watched these games, as you say you have, you could provide your own opinion as who was the best player on the ground, not some one else's.

In the context of the argument it makes no difference who he did or didn't play on, the fact is Mal conceded over 50 goals for the year, almost 3 a game, which are career worst figures. No matter how he conceded them or who to the fact is they came in agaisnt him thick and fast.

At times, like in Brisbane the year before, he looked lucklustre and disinterested, he's clearly put on weight and is heavier and slower than he's ever been, indicating a delpeting work rate.

If you Bomber fans think he was a worthwhile investment then so be it, but the fact is, your major weakness this year was getting pummelled by opposing key forwards week after week, largely on the back of Mal's performances who took the best forward every game.

Hey, all I can say is enjoy, he's yours now.

[GoDons]

In the context of the argument it makes no difference who he did or didn't play on, the fact is Mal conceded over 50 goals for the year, almost 3 a game, which are career worst figures. No matter how he conceded them or who to the fact is they came in agaisnt him thick and fast.

At times, like in Brisbane the year before, he looked lucklustre and disinterested, he's clearly put on weight and is heavier and slower than he's ever been, indicating a delpeting work rate.

If you Bomber fans think he was a worthwhile investment then so be it, but the fact is, your major weakness this year was getting pummelled by opposing key forwards week after week, largely on the back of Mal's performances who took the best forward every game.

Hey, all I can say is enjoy, he's yours now.

So it's over 50 goals he conceded now, not over 60. If you know your facts, why do you keep changing them?

Also, where are you getting these figures?

I know for a fact that Mal conceded 54 goals last season, so maybe it wasn't a career worst season either.

Also, give me one example of him looking disinterested.

Finally, I also know for a fact that Mal's weight reduced significantly as the season went on. So, on your logic, Mal's workrate is increasing.

[Longy413]

the fact is Mal conceded over 50 goals for the year

That's not a fact, you have admitted you don't know who he played on.

Mal Michael made Paddy Ryder a better footballer.

That's a fact.

[ALM_30]

That's not a fact, you have admitted you don't know who he played on.

Mal Michael made Paddy Ryder a better footballer.

That's a fact.

It is a statistical fact that was proven toward the end of the year in a newspaper article about Ben Rutten. They gave the details about the best and worst records for goals conceded by full- backs in 2007 Scarlett was best, Rutten 2nd, and Mal was 2nd or 3rd worst behind, Firrito at least.

If you keep your eyes and ears peeled you can always find these things out, you just have to know where to look.

So, like I said, it doesn't matter who you think he played on, or who I think he played on, the statistics say that he conceded over 50 goals on the year, which as history has proven is a very, very poor record for a supposedly top notch full- back, and a supposed leader amongst the senior players.

He made Paddy Ryder a better player, is the guy even going to be a CHB? Because from what I've read on other Essendon boards they seem adamant he will and should be a mobile ruckman.

Would you like to debate this unwinnable debate anymore?

[GoDons]

It is a statistical fact that was proven toward the end of the year in a newspaper article about Ben Rutten. They gave the details about the best and worst records for goals conceded by full- backs in 2007 Scarlett was best, Rutten 2nd, and Mal was 2nd or 3rd worst behind, Firrito at least.

If you keep your eyes and ears peeled you can always find these things out, you just have to know where to look.

So, like I said, it doesn't matter who you think he played on, or who I think he played on, the statistics say that he conceded over 50 goals on the year, which as history has proven is a very, very poor record for a supposedly top notch full- back, and a supposed leader amongst the senior players.

He made Paddy Ryder a better player, is the guy even going to be a CHB? Because from what I've read on other Essendon boards they seem adamant he will and should be a mobile ruckman.

Would you like to debate this unwinnable debate anymore?

What are statements without evidence? Conjecture.

Prove your sources, which newspaper was it?

Is Paddy Ryder going to be a CHB? Given you watch all our games, wouldn't you be in a position to make a comment about that? Or don't they put future player positions in the newspaper?

[kelvin_sheedy]

It is a statistical fact that was proven toward the end of the year in a newspaper article about Ben Rutten. They gave the details about the best and worst records for goals conceded by full- backs in 2007 Scarlett was best, Rutten 2nd, and Mal was 2nd or 3rd worst behind, Firrito at least.

Would you like to debate this unwinnable debate anymore?

Surprise surprise.

The best team and the low scoring flooding teams have the lowest conceding full backs. Who would have guessed it. :confused:

I would expect our defence to have a high number of scores against them as we give up the most inside 50's of any team.

This debate is definitely unwinnable against a genius like yourself. ;)

[ALM_30]

Surprise surprise.

The best team and the low scoring flooding teams have the lowest conceding full backs. Who would have guessed it. :confused:

I would expect our defence to have a high number of scores against them as we give up the most inside 50's of any team.

This debate is definitely unwinnable against a genius like yourself. ;)

Firrito was the worst in the league's third best side? Harris was the worst the year before when the Dogs were flying? Scarlett was Top 2 in 2006 when his team was crap?

Good full- backs don't concede 50 goals, and if you think that the quality of the full- back has nothing to do with the amount of goals he concedes, just the team he plays in, then you have no clue.

[kelvin_sheedy]

Firrito was the worst in the league's third best side? Harris was the worst the year before when the Dogs were flying? Scarlett was Top 2 in 2006 when his team was crap?

Good full- backs don't concede 50 goals, and if you think that the quality of the full- back has nothing to do with the amount of goals he concedes, just the team he plays in, then you have no clue.

You can keep on plucking out one or two cases to prove whatever point you are trying to but the bigger picture is the better teams and the defensive teams more often than not lead those stats.

I guess you can keep on going round in circles but you have indicated you have no idea who played where and when and no idea about what value Mal has added to our team.

It just makes you a poor troll with no idea about footy. ;)

[ALM_30]

You can keep on plucking out one or two cases to prove whatever point you are trying to but the bigger picture is the better teams and the defensive teams more often than not lead those stats.

I guess you can keep on going round in circles but you have indicated you have no idea who played where and when and no idea about what value Mal has added to our team.

It just makes you a poor troll with no idea about footy. ;)

Once again hey all I can say is enjoy, he's yours. Great franchises are built around strong defences, and if you think your defence now is what is going to help lead you to the top 4 within 3 years, you are kidding yourself.

Keep giving away big tallies to key forwards, see where it gets you, it ain't my problem.

Best of luck though.

[GoDons]

What are statements without evidence? Conjecture.

Prove your sources, which newspaper was it?

Is Paddy Ryder going to be a CHB? Given you watch all our games, wouldn't you be in a position to make a comment about that? Or don't they put future player positions in the newspaper?

I'm still waiting...

[ALM_30]

I'm still waiting...

It was in the Adelaide Advertiser.

[GoDons]

It was in the Adelaide Advertiser.

Can you link it or provide the title of the article?

[ALM_30]

Can you link it or provide the title of the article?

"In Truck we Trust" or something like that. I haven't been able to find the link, it was nearly 3 months ago it's probably been deleted.
BUT
You can find these details out for yourself in the AFL Prospectus when it is released later this year/ early next year.

You don't even have to buy it, just pick it up in the newsagent and flick briefly to Mal and see I'm right. Rest assured.

[Longy413]

I reckon you'd be really good at riding a bike in reverse...

[Ryder Is God]

"In Truck we Trust" or something like that. I haven't been able to find the link, it was nearly 3 months ago it's probably been deleted.
BUT
You can find these details out for yourself in the AFL Prospectus when it is released later this year/ early next year.

You don't even have to buy it, just pick it up in the newsagent and flick briefly to Mal and see I'm right. Rest assured.

The Adelaide Advertiser doesn't have it on their site, and they have articles from 2005, so it couldn't have been deleted. I think you're making it up.

[ALM_30]

The Adelaide Advertiser doesn't have it on their site, and they have articles from 2005, so it couldn't have been deleted. I think you're making it up.
Like I said, I couldn't find it, and to be honest I didn't look to bloody hard (in fact at all) because I have better things to do than carry out reseacrh about dud Essendon players.

If you want stone cold proof check out the AFL Prospectus for 2008, I can assure you I am right.

[Ryder Is God]

Like I said, I couldn't find it, and to be honest I didn't look to bloody hard (in fact at all)

So you lied about that, and you probably lied about everything else

because I have better things to do than carry out reseacrh about dud Essendon players.

But you have time to attempt at discrediting our "duds" for the past month?

If you want stone cold proof check out the AFL Prospectus for 2008, I can assure you I am right.

I'd rather be given the proof now when I mildly care than in a few months when I have forgotten and wouldn't give a shit.

[Margim]

Great to see him kick a goal yesterday. Anyone see him used down that end of the ground a bit more with Scotty out?

[DaSawx]

Great to see him kick a goal yesterday. Anyone see him used down that end of the ground a bit more with Scotty out?

Nah not really, won't be many games we'll be winning by 9-10 goals

[Pawtucket Patriot]

Was he injured today? He went off the ground in the 3rd quarter.

[Santoz]

Absolutely. It was obvious he wasn't a hundred percent and just keeps on playing week to week injured. An absolute champ.

[Pawtucket Patriot]

Absolutely. It was obvious he wasn't a hundred percent and just keeps on playing week to week injured. An absolute champ.

Definitely one of the all time greats. He is a very courageous player in that he seems to also be carrying an injury, but seems to never drop his playing standard.

[hulld]

one of few who chased hard

[B-Bomber]

How good is this guy?

Such a unique player, really ahead of his time when he came to the AFL in the early 90s. Great rebound ability. Can play on both smalls and talls. Superb ability to leave his man and go 3rd man up at a contest. All very important for the modern game.

Will miss him a lot when he retires, surely he'll make it to 300+ games though. Will continue to contribute into his careers twilight as (hopefully) we continue to develop key backmen the amount of responsibility he will have will taper off allowing him to continue.

Anyways, thought he was too good of a player for his thread to be relegated to cobwebs!

[hugorune]

How good is this guy?

Such a unique player, really ahead of his time when he came to the AFL in the early 90s. Great rebound ability. Can play on both smalls and talls. Superb ability to leave his man and go 3rd man up at a contest. All very important for the modern game.


Playing him on Medhurst was genius, Medhurst is the slippiest forward in the AFL but Fletcher kept him very quiet in relative terms.

[loopy_cam]

Playing him on Medhurst was genius, Medhurst is the slippiest forward in the AFL but Fletcher kept him very quiet in relative terms.

Agreed. Well done Knights.

Reminded me of Sheeds playing him on Matera a few years ago. He won that day to IIRC.