Search results for query: *

* this shambles of a club and incompetent, immoral disgrace of a board. I've never been less enthused to support this club. And yes, that includes the saga.

Everyone is just chasing the ball again, no structure around the footy or running off half back.

Really poor again today. We've played like two decent games all year. Structure really bad again.

That or 50m. Idiot play really, but the ump missed it. Good finish though.

Gee he was good today.

Yep I don't get it, that's 50m every time.

Isn't that 50m? Ump hadn't called play on and the defender moved off the mark to smother?

There's a rivalry, but it doesn't really extend beyond bigfooty - despite some marketing team attempts to do so at times. We have both been pretty s**t for a while, they used to always beat us, now we always beat them. Because we started our run of beating them around the time of the ASADA...

Got some promise but gets done far far too often not using his teammates and taking guys on or getting run down.

5. Merrett 4. Parish 3. Hind 2. Langford 1. Wright

Calling Saad a running back is really off the mark. He's a great defender also. Very sad to see him go. Carlton are probably paying a little higher given Saad wasn't contracted, but it's fair value for Saad's skill. He will make them a better team easily.

Redman still made the choice to try and take a guy on rather than kick it.

Heppell is nearly as big a liability as Redman. But at least you know he will get better.

We are still trying to tackle one guy with four, and losing. And then getting outnumbered everywhere.

One good half against Hawks dont show thisngame plan isnt ******* awful.

Why is Redman getting a game?

Don't know the last time I posted on here, but when your gameplan involves passing the ball forward by hand to guys facing the wrong direction, under pressure from behind, then you've ****ed it up. Can't put it on the players trying to make this s**t sandwich work. They're either massively...

5. Zerrett 4. Langford 3. Saad 2. McGrath 1. McKernan

It's not that they aren't able to. It's that they don't want to, and have other options available to them - so they don't have to

Gleeson will be making fools of you all every game.next season.

You don't know how de is calculated, do you?

Lose by around 130, North win by around 130.

Dea? Dea? Proving what? Oh, just checked who the poster was... Gleeson is about 3000 times better than Dea. Dea is hard and a good mark, but he is a terrible ball watcher and sells his defensive mates into trouble. Dea is likely to get moved on or get a one year deal.

5. Smith 4. Langford 3. Brown 2. Francis 1. Zerrett

Unfortunately Dea was at fault for almost half the goals Richmond scored. He tends to ball watch a lot, and while he does some stuff well and had some good games for us I don't think he is ever going to lose that habit.

You haven't looked at the fixture, have you?

We struggled to hold shape once he went off. Took us a while to adjust I reckon. He is a leader.

Got us going tonight when the game looked in the balance. Would be in my votes for sure.

No.

This whole sorry event shows the flaws of a tribunal system the focuses primarily on outcome and not action. Outcome should be an extra penalty on top, not the basic determining factor.