Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 03/03/2013 in all areas

  1. 6 points
    I think what that means is that anyone who says anything at all positive about the MFC, is referred to in sports journalism circles, as a "Melbourne defender".
  2. 5 points
    Sorry but I can't listen to this garbage any more. I'm watching the cricket.
  3. 4 points
    Took us to a Grand Final. Neeld took us to 4 wins. Get some perspective before bagging the guy out.
  4. 3 points
    Im loving the sound of Dean Kent
  5. 3 points
    "Ollie wines can nearly bench 200kg" Next play "Ollie wines pushed out of the play"
  6. 3 points
    I know. they said Boak and um....um...ah wingard. I hope our team watches out for those "drinkwalkers" They sound dangerous in Adelaide.
  7. 3 points
    As always, I am buoyed by the upcoming footy season. Nothing could ever change that!
  8. 3 points
    Theres a very simple solution to this problem. ALL gate proceeds from EVERY game in the season, apart from the finals(should go to the finals clubs), are taken by the AFL . at the end of the year the AFL divides the total gate receipts by 18 and gives each club its even share. That way the AFL can continue to base fixturing around maximising the number of "blockbuster" games without the less successful clubs missing out financially. The clubs get their cash, the AFL get a more even comp, and the TV gets their "blockbusters". There it is .
  9. 3 points
    If it can't be found I vote the club gives her a brand new one with the entire list signed and throw in a couple of legends like Gary and Ox, and present it to her on the ground round 1.
  10. 3 points
    Geez her latest Age bio article about AD is nothing but p!ssing in his pocket. Pretty clear that he is beyond any real criticism by her. She's certainly not going to bite the hand that feeds her.
  11. 2 points
    I couldn't work out why Neeld tried him as a defensive forward when was doing so well as a mid.
  12. 2 points
    Honestly, the commentary is much better than when we played Adelaide a few years ago.
  13. 2 points
    "We don't know alot of their names" At least they're honest.
  14. 2 points
    Breeze died down apparently....
  15. 2 points
    I lasted a quarter and a half, I'm watching victory smash the jets
  16. 2 points
    Im going to fly to adelaide next week and smack this [censored] in the face swear to god every time they kick a goal its like theyve run from full back untouched kicked a torpedo from the centre square facing backwards over his head.
  17. 2 points
    I just find it amusing. Letting their bias annoy you would do your head in.
  18. 2 points
    I swear you can hear them applauding the Power kicking a goal in the commentary box.
  19. 2 points
    Sellar gets his second goal after 15 Port Adelaide players in a row touch the ball.
  20. 2 points
    I nearly spat my drink out when they were talking about that! They couldn't even name 5 midfielders! Then they threw in Ebert and chad Wingard...
  21. 2 points
    OK so we've got Gardner, the former president talking to the media and throwing the club under a bus over tanking and we've got Mick Coglin going to the media with a complaint about Jimma instead of dealing with it in house. As for some others, you really don't get around much, do you?I would expect former board members to respond better when questioned about an issue like tanking (which has the potential to cause damage to the club in terms of monetary sanctions, loss of jobs to employees and loss of draft picks) comes up with a no comment. People ask why Carlton or Richmond aren't being investigated. Well perhaps it's due to the fact that, at such times you stick fat with the club. Jack Elliott and Ian Collins never said anything publicly about tanking. If he has to say anything, this is how I expect a former club chairman to discuss his club (and I wish him well in his battle with cancer) - Former Essendon chairman Graeme McMahon slams AFL drug policy as 'hypocritical'. And you ask who you should trust?
  22. 2 points
    The problem with only addressing the issues in the fixture with monetary compensation is that it is only a band-aid solution to what is really a long-term problem. You can throw a few million at us, North, Dogs etc and keep giving us home games in poor time slots against teams no-one wants to watch but that will only keep us barely afloat and beholden to those who "compensate" us (as is happening now). The real need is to make the fixture an even draw (many ways this could be done) so that there is transparency in who plays who and when & where they play. The reason being that without an even draw clubs may stay afloat through being compensated but they will never be able to grow their support base which is the bottom line of being able to improve the financial situation. There is also the knock-on effects of less sponsorship revenue, less corporate match-day revenue, less exposure to new supporters etc that the AFL policy on maximising attendances leads to. I've been saying for years that some of the smaller clubs should be forming a bloc within the AFL to challenge the financial heavyweights who dominate the league otherwise in time the big clubs will get sick of "propping up" the small clubs and we will go the way of South and Fitzroy i.e. relocated to new markets. It's all very well and good to say "let them stand on their own two feet" but it doesn't work if you first cut them off at the knees.
  23. 2 points
    Slightly off topic but by way of demonstrating the decline in standards at Fairfax Media is the Real Footy Poll currently running in the Age: There are two options given - yes and no. To date, 53 people have voted and the yes vote is currently trailing the no vote by 26% to 74%. Thankfully, there is a disclaimer which tells us that these "polls are not scientific and reflect the opinion only of visitors who have chosen to participate". Almost on a par with Wilson's opinion that Melbourne had a good legal case against tanking but should be punished heavily anyway.
  24. 2 points
    In his favour is that he's only 22 years old, he's a goer, and he should be able to improve his disposal (probably more so his handballing skills) Every team needs a tagger or 2 and there are no other 'likely' candidates on our list. I read somewhere that Allan Jeans had a philosophy that if you win the tackles, you win the game. A lot on our list can't tackle very well. We shouldn't be at all concerned on whether he's going to 'good' player in a 'good' side yet. You need players to help you get there and we're miles off being a good side right now. If we improve, so might McKenzie. Apart from anything else, he's nowhere near our biggest issue. Right across the board, we need a truckload of improvement to be able to get into contention. I'm not being an apologist for Jordie - he, like many others on our list, needs to get a lot better.
  25. 2 points
    The criticism wasn't directed at the discussion of Tapscott. The criticism was leveled at the highly critical tone of the subject line. If you want a discussion about Tappy, just say "where do you think Tapscott's at?". The present headline is as biased as a Range Rover poll title.
This leaderboard is set to Melbourne/GMT+10:00
×