Yes, Murph took a big step forward in the leadership stakes tonight.
No doubt...both he and Gibbs were challenged by the coach and delivered. Murphy looked better down forward and his finishing was important. Credit also to Yarran who played very well and his work was very classy at times....
Credit must go to Malthouse who really put the onus on the leaders and even Duigan I thought was a valuable player...
Big question is can this same group of players who won the game for us tonight led by Murphy deliver again next week....
Come on EB, I don't expect sycophantic comments from you.
Hopefully Malthouse now realises that playing Yarran off halfback is critical to our success, as is having Duigan put his big frame into the contest.
If Malthouse is as good a coach as some would have us believe, he will throw his pre-conceived ideas about structures and favourites out the window and build on what worked in previous seasons.
We're still a way off a genuine finals contender but there is huge potential if we can retain Betts, play Yarran and Walker in their best positions, pick up a genuine KPP and get at least one of our rucks to win the ball around the ground. Encouraging risk taking football as Hawthorn plays wouldn't go astray but that may be a 'bridge too far' or our rather conservative coach.
Finally, I'm leading my former workplace's footy tipping by 3 coming in to this round . . . and I tipped Port Adelaide It could cost me dollars but I don't mind
the former vic labor govt blamed the kennett government for 11 years...
With good reason LR . . . most of everything that is wrong with Victoria, including Carlton's failure to challenge for another flag, is down to Kennett's mismanagement.
I wish they would stop naming Walker at CHF. It was funny for the first couple of rounds but it's getting a little tired now.
That is probably the best balanced and most flexible line-ups we have named all season. I can't see Henderson spending a lot of time in the back half but, if he has to, we can cover that. The only real question mark is over how Kreuzer and Warnock work together. If that pans out well, Ryder will be in for a torrid time.
Good on ya pot stirrer. Now we will lose our avatars and our names. Next I will be a gender symbol 0-> or 0+ and my name will be 16237. I still wonder why our post count was scrapped.
LR didn't like Karma and got it removed and that's fair enough as it was never a part of the original CSC. As for post counts if the mods want to scrap them then that's cool but also scrap any new progressive tally eg the current faux player elevation model. Personally I like the idea of post counts from the original site which I believe pre dates the 2004 model.
I'm not that fussed about post counts and the faux player elevation model is not something I take seriously. Quality of posts rather than quantity is more important to me.
I guess Karma measures populism and those who contribute well-reasoned but unpopular posts could be shafted. Still, it created a bit of additional interest and it was an improvement on the original CSC.
Hard to make a judgement on what someone can and cannot do if you dont give them the chance to show you. The reason he might be getting a game might be a variety of reasons including setting standards of what will get you a game in the ones when you are not particularly playing well, and it may be for the benefit of finding out where he needs to improve, or what his limitations might be.
Good points Thry, but Boots has been given ample opportunity to show that he's not yet up to senior footy, let alone matching up on the opposition's best forward.
He may well have a great attitude, high standards or whatever criteria may be applied but that doesn't mean he should get a game if he's not yet up to it.
Let him string together games in the NBs and show that he is ready to play at the highest level.
Bootsma has struggled all season and I don't understand Malthouse's perseverance with him while others are dropped and/or not given an opportunity. It may be help with development if younger players are given an opportunity and I think the sub provides the best way to do that. Starting Bootsma on Riewoldt was folly, not to mention not giving any respect to one of the premier key forwards.
I'm not sure where Bootsma's career is going; he is not big enough for a key defensive role and, while he is not bad at spoiling, he lacks the judgement and ability to spoil effectively; how many times do his spoils end up with an opposition shot at goal?
I don't really get the comparison with Walls either. I played against Walls at high school and he was too strong for us even though we had a couple of blokes who were his equal in height and weight. Walls was hollow-chested but was big in the thighs and hips while Bootsma is just a skinny kid. Walls was an incredibly courageous player who always took marks under pressure and gave as good as he got.
I'd like to see Bootsma work on his game in the NBs and earn another shot.
I think he lacks a yard of pace but has the smarts to make up for it, and is a clever player.....also think he is the type of player like Dane Swan that you dont expect too much defensive work from but as Ron Barrassi once said just give me possessions....
I hope so EB, but if he lacks a yard of pace at VFL level (and that seems to be the case), he is going to need an awful lot of smarts. I guess we'll soon find out
It could cost me dollars but I don't mind 
For the first half of the season a significant number of posters wanted him banished to the NBs.
