Jump to content

Discussion on recent allegations about the use of illicit drugs in football is forbidden
  • IMPORTANT: PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING

    Posting unsubstantiated rumours on this website is strictly forbidden.

    Demonland has made the difficult decision to not permit this platform to be used to discuss & debate the off-field issues relating to the Melbourne Football Club including matters currently being litigated between the Club & former Board members, board elections, the issue of illicit drugs in footy, the culture at the club & the personal issues & allegations against some of our players & officials ...

    We do not take these issues & this decision lightly & of course we believe that these serious matters affecting the club we love & are so passionate about are worthy of discussion & debate & I wish we could provide a place where these matters can be discussed in a civil & respectful manner.

    However these discussions unfortunately invariably devolve into areas that may be defamatory, libelous, spread unsubstantiated rumours & can effect the mental health of those involved. Even discussion & debate of known facts or media reports can lead to finger pointing, blame & personal attacks.

    The repercussion is that these discussions can open this website, it’s owners & it’s users to legal action & may result in this website being forced to shutdown.

    Our moderating team are all volunteers & cannot moderate the forum 24/7 & as a consequence problematic content that contravenes our rules & standards may go unnoticed for some time before it can be removed.

    We reserve the right to delete posts that offend against our above policy & indeed, to ban posters who are repeat offenders or who breach our code of conduct.

    WE HAVE BUILT A FANTASTIC ONLINE COMMUNITY AT DEMONLAND OVER THE PAST 23 YEARS & WE WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE TO BE ABLE TO DISCUSS THE CLUB WE LOVE & ARE SO PASSIONATE ABOUT.

    Thank you for your continued support & understanding. Go Dees.


WELCOME TO THE MELBOURNE FOOTBALL CLUB - JACK VINEY


einstein251

Recommended Posts

Yeah. Ok I hear what you are saying. But again dont we go back to the point ...

a/ what you are not considering is the player/s in question.

b/ GWS still need the other clubs to have an interest in those players ... or at least be prepared to declare an interest.

Are GWS not just giving up the right to get a 17YO who if they rate top 10 they will never get the opportunity to play for them?

But thank-you for clarifying your points. Look I'm not disagreeing with you all I'm saying is think its a two way street and we are in the "box seat" because we have already declared an interest in those kids ie Jack Viney who GWS can never get. But I think what you are saying is club x will declare an interest in player y ... then GWS will trade. I'm not so sure its that clear cut .... but I accept the point they in "theory" loss them if they dont.

Sorry for the confusion I should have been much, much clearer about the drafts and draft dates I was talking about ... my fault.

This is a point but an 18yo could just as easily be the best kid, in 2012 i believe they only receive 1 pick, and will as such not miss out on any of the 17yo if an 18yo is the best kid

I am still a little confused weather they trade players or a pick in a draft for these players... im pretty sure its a pick in a mini draft

I would assume all 17yo will not have an option but to accept the offer when it comes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Artie Bucco

Yeah. Ok I hear what you are saying. But again dont we go back to the point ...

a/ what you are not considering is the player/s in question.

b/ GWS still need the other clubs to have an interest in those players ... or at least be prepared to declare an interest.

Are GWS not just giving up the right to get a 17YO who if they rate top 10 they will never get the opportunity to play for them?

But thank-you for clarifying your points. Look I'm not disagreeing with you all I'm saying is think its a two way street and we are in the "box seat" because we have already declared an interest in those kids ie Jack Viney who GWS can never get. But I think what you are saying is club x will declare an interest in player y ... then GWS will trade. I'm not so sure its that clear cut .... but I accept the point they in "theory" loss them if they dont.

Sorry for the confusion I should have been much, much clearer about the drafts and draft dates I was talking about ... my fault.

What?

Jack Watts would have been one of these kids when he was drafted.

O'Meara has been likened to Cotchin as a surefire gun midfielder.

These picks have serious value and every club will be researching options to acquire one, and as a result the cost to acquire one will be high.

So you think that GWS would not trade these picks that they themselves cannot use, and essentially get a very valuable something for no loss, just because they will likely have a single high draft pick in 2012 and they'd like to have a shot at getting one of those players themselves?

So passing up what they would get in return for the rights to 4 extremely talented youngsters, for the chance to maybe draft one of these kids themselves, even though if they are not there, they'll still get a talented kid anyway with more exposed form?

I just don't understand your logic and I'm concerned you still don't properly understand the situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's in the Vic Metro team this Saturday:-

The game is against Queensland at Visy Park at 2:30 pm.

1. Seb Gotch Oakleigh Chargers/Caulfield Grammar

2. Toby Greene Oakleigh Chargers/Wesley College

3. Alex Greenwood Eastern Ranges/Vermont

4. Adam Kennedy Western Jets/Melton

5. Liam Sumner Sandringham Dragons/St Paul's JFC

6. Tim Totevski Northern Knights/Mill Park

7. Jack Viney Oakleigh Chargers/Carey Baptist

12. Alex Brown Oakleigh Chargers/Doncaster Heights JFC

13. Michael Bussey Eastern Ranges/Rowville

15. Hayden Crozier Eastern Ranges/Rowville

16. Tom Curran Oakleigh Chargers/Wesley College

19. Hal Hunter Calder Cannons/Wesley College

21. Daniel Markworth Calder Cannons/Macedon

23. Thomas Sheridan Calder Cannons/Riddells Creek

25. Lachlan Plowman Calder Cannons/Macedon

26. Xavier Richards Sandringham Dragons/Xavier

27. Michael Talia Calder Cannons/Greenvale

28. Adam Tomlinson Oakleigh Chargers/Trinity Grammar

29. Dom Tyson Oakleigh Chargers/Trinity Grammar

32. Brandon Ellis Calder Cannons/West Coburg

35. Sam Frost Sandringham Dragons/Wesley College

37. Ben Darrou Sandringham Dragons/Wesley College

38. Jonathon Patton Eastern Ranges/Scoresby

39. Leif Cope Eastern Ranges/Yarra Valley GS

40. Billy Longer Northern Knights/MacLeod

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest hangon007

What?

Jack Watts would have been one of these kids when he was drafted.

O'Meara has been likened to Cotchin as a surefire gun midfielder.

These picks have serious value and every club will be researching options to acquire one, and as a result the cost to acquire one will be high.

So you think that GWS would not trade these picks that they themselves cannot use, and essentially get a very valuable something for no loss, just because they will likely have a single high draft pick in 2012 and they'd like to have a shot at getting one of those players themselves?

So passing up what they would get in return for the rights to 4 extremely talented youngsters, for the chance to maybe draft one of these kids themselves, even though if they are not there, they'll still get a talented kid anyway with more exposed form?

I just don't understand your logic and I'm concerned you still don't properly understand the situation.

Ok I hear what you are saying.

All I'm trying to say ...rather badly it appears. That a possible option for GWS & us in this upcoming draft is to take advantage of a unintended loophole, GWS get something for a player they had no chance of ever getting ie ... hence the something for nothing quote.

Taking your own example if the trade/exchange for "O'Meara has been likened to Cotchin as a surefire gun midfielder." Can they draft him the following year? No they have lost him. So by your own example they potentially give up an O'Meara & marginally compromise the next draft where you would expect them still to be a important player, especially if they use the GC trick of getting compensation picks back.

Plus look at it from the other side ie the team they would have to deal with, they would have to declare their interest in player x, trying to pick drafts 12 months out is a very tricky little game. However, the eventual winner has to beware of the 12 months clause. Lets take the last two drafts as an example. In 2009 the most probably the cost of "underage 17YO" Jack Darling would have been a pick in the top 3-5 ... yet 12 months later in the 2010 draft when he was fully eligible you get him for pick 23ish. Drafts go both ways.

Why in year 1 would GWS not trade for player x from Melbourne, obtain a compensation pick, give up a player they never had any chance to obtain and leave in yout own words "O'Meara has been likened to Cotchin as a surefire gun midfielder." on the table when they have "more exposed form"?

"So you think that GWS would not trade these picks that they themselves cannot use"

... No! what I'm saying is your first port of call should be with the clubs that already have declared interests and set values on players in the 2012 draft. GWS could win both ways. (Again I was being somewhat factious with my 3rd round offer)

Breaking this down ...

So passing up what they would get in return for the rights to 4 extremely talented youngsters, for the chance to maybe draft one of these kids themselves, even though if they are not there,

First you deal with the known they you start dealing with the "gamblers & the risk takers" IMHO risk goes both ways.

"they'll still get a talented kid anyway with more exposed form?" Very good point. Why would I also not wait?

Plus are they in theory not just very marginally compromising the next draft?

I just don't understand your logic and I'm concerned you still don't properly understand the situation.

No problems. I accept my "logic" is hard to explain. I'm trying to look at it from both sides of the fence. Look I agree its a good little extra but both parties have to enter into risk.

Thank-you for your time. I honestly have just tried to put an alternative way of thinking ... I'm not trying to be difficult. I accept I could be wrong ... GWS might just do as others say. IMHO you have a very good understanding of what you are talking about & I did not mean to offend or frustrate you ... I'm just trying to learn.

Please sincerely ... Again thank-you for your time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Artie Bucco

I really don't understand the logic of what you're saying.

Either it's rubbish, or it's way over my head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't understand the logic of what you're saying.

Either it's rubbish, or it's way over my head.

I think that he is saying that GWS "may" be inclined to trade the 17yo picks with MFC because:

-They cannot get Jack Viney under any circumstances

-And this means that the 2012 draft where they will most likely have the first or second pick will be stronger

-Keeping an extra 17yo in that draft while still receiving compensation from MFC

If they trade other wise it draws 17yo talent out of the next draft where they will have 1 high pick, could O'Meara be that pick will the extra player picked be that pick?

They would effectively trade one less 17yo if the trade Viney to MFC

is this the point?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest hangon007

I really don't understand the logic of what you're saying.

Either it's rubbish, or it's way over my head.

Ok ... Its somewhat based on a more mature drafting system ... the NFL. IMHO the Australian system is very immature & overvalues "perceived" early draft picks.

Its very, very counter intuitive. Yet results suggest when you actually trade early draft picks or players, cost very, very rarely equates to return. IMHO "immature" systems lack the history hence the data to draw good quality selections. So in practice the more immature the system the more the system is based somewhat on luck. So hence you are more likely to have a winner & a loser.

... How do you propose it will work? How much information would you want clubs to divulge to one another 12 months in advance. Us on the other hand have declared our intention 12-24 months in advance because of the father & son rule.

Now even more importantly ... you are basically asking team x to make GWS an offer 12 months in advance of knowing more of the facts ie exposed form. Its hard enough to get AFL clubs to do that 3-4 weeks in advance because of the "unkown rogue" pick which upsets the expected order. The best recent example of that "unkown rogue" pick is ... the Tigers taking the "rogue" pick of Conca last year. Plus many many more unknowns. Top that all off with the added difficulty they must wait 12 months to place the player on their list, hence forgo the opportunity to develop another player.

I'm suggesting GWS may be better considering dealing with the known. Because we have set our value on a player that they never can get, we have declared an interest and set our price. Hence its far easier for GWS to create a win-win scenario. Plus they still leave a player on the table that they then can access. However, you are right about one thing ...if they trade the player away they will never have the ability to access them.

So IMHO GWS then must find a player that they have no interest in, yet another club does and they must then both be prepared to divulge that information 12 months in advance.

You are also asking for both them and their trading partner to determine an order order in advance, which they then must both agree is correct and deliver one another fair compensation. However, thats very, very risky. Sure they can take a risk and win big ... but hey they could lose big. As they say the more you bet the more you win!

IMHO GWS are better stock piling picks to use on as many kids as possible ala Gold Coast did last year which some clubs picked up on and some missed an opportunity .... Than giving up quality kids in advance that they may want to access. So in practice they are having more cracks at 17YO or 16YO maybe even 15YO. Unless the kid was never accessible in the first place.

Again looking at Gold Coast they where very smart trading away experienced players. They traded experience players to get more picks in upcoming drafts not reducing their number of choices in fact increasing them.

Many, will pooh pooh its all rubbish. I have no problems with that. I'm sorry I'm just crap at explaining things on paper.

Edited by hangon007
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest hangon007

I think that he is saying that GWS "may" be inclined to trade the 17yo picks with MFC because:

-They cannot get Jack Viney under any circumstances

-And this means that the 2012 draft where they will most likely have the first or second pick will be stronger

-Keeping an extra 17yo in that draft while still receiving compensation from MFC

If they trade other wise it draws 17yo talent out of the next draft where they will have 1 high pick, could O'Meara be that pick will the extra player picked be that pick?

They would effectively trade one less 17yo if the trade Viney to MFC

is this the point?

Yes. But I should add two points I made badly above.

1/ Its only an "additional" pick IMHO if GWS have no interest in the player. If they do have an interest in them they would be mad to trade them because they are gone. As I said above IMHO they should be leaving or trying to gain access to as many 17YO as possible not reducing the number available. Especially 12 months out.

2/ IMHO your points are good. I'm trying to say ... think we have an unique opportunity in an un-intended loop hole.

Drafts go both ways ... risks go both ways. In fact its not out of the question that they could end up trading two players they could get the next year as per my Darling example. or Inversely the trading partner could in theory over pay for a player they could also get next year for a lessor price. Its risky. IMHO we over value "perceived" early draft picks.

However, we have declared our price. We are prepared to pay a first round draft pick for a kid they can never access. Gives them a strong starting position. However, as I said above there also has to be something in it for us ... because we can get him anyway. Essentially we are biding against ourselves.

Edited by hangon007
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Guest Artie Bucco

Ok, so you're saying...

GWS should trade one of the picks to us, cheaper than what the other teams may offer, because they would be making the assumption we'd use the pick on Viney, who they can't get anyway.

Thereby not reducing the prospective pool to choose from in the 2012 draft.

If that's right, then ok, I do get it now.

But that's based on the assumption we'd use the pick on Viney.

Personally I'd much rather we bluff them to get a pick, then not use it on Viney.

Use it on another kid like O'Meara, because we'll still be able to take Viney F/S the following year, and both Viney and another 17 year old kid are likely to be more valuable than either of those 1st round picks (here I've made the assumption we'd trade our 1st round pick in 2011 to get the under-age pick).

Edited by Artie Bucco
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest hangon007

But that's based on the assumption we'd use the pick on Viney.

Personally I'd much rather we bluff them to get a pick, then not use it on Viney.

Use it on another kid like O'Meara, because we'll still be able to take Viney F/S the following year, and both Viney and another 17 year old kid are likely to be more valuable than either of those 1st round picks (here I've made the assumption we'd trade our 1st round pick in 2011 to get the under-age pick).

Ok ... my understanding is you cant "bluff" so to speak. You must declare your interest in player x. GWS then access that player and on-trade them to you, assuming they have no intention of taking him in the following years draft. I thought the pick was not transferable or "bluffable" ... but if they are "half-smart" they will leak the deal to get a bidding war going. But in our case they dont have to leak its common knowledge plus we are the only club that has access to Viney ... Hence, we are bidding against ourself.

Bit similar, but not exactly the same as to what you had to do with GC17 last year except the player had to have previously been on an AFL list or nominated for a draft. IMHO GC17 only used that "trick" to allow other clubs to take players they GC17 had no interest in or extract a player who was already on another list they where interested in. Then they had the upper hand to ask for the "compensation" pick back. Nice information to have prior to a draft.

Except the "additional" process GWS have is the kid is "one draft in advance so to speak". If they dont use them this year they can reapply. Essentially they have the ability to on trade kids from a draft 1 year out who would other words be not eligible for that draft ... I'm making the assumption they would have no interest in the kid. Which IMHO is fair because why would you trade a kid you could access later ... ? But again the downside is they are taking a risk as is their trading partner. But in our case we have already declared our interest and our price.

But my point is GWS want more picks and increase the pool of available choices not reduce them.

However, IMHO its only useable if they have no interest in the mentioned player, or they are trying to gain leverage to a player in advance who they want from another sides list. But again I reckon the really value is for them to try to obtain 5 year bankable picks or gain/ improve their picks in this draft.

Ok I hear the argument from others. But if the dont trade the kids they lose access to them. Yes, but if they do trade them they also lose access to them so you would think they would only deal on kids they a dont want or b/ deal with the gamblers and risk takers .. but they then have a chance of shooting themselves in the foot.

Edited by hangon007
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Artie Bucco

...

Except the "additional" process GWS have is the kid is "one draft in advance so to speak". If they dont use them this year they can reapply. Essentially they have the ability to on trade kids from a draft 1 year out who would other words be not eligible for that draft ... I'm making the assumption they would have no interest in the kid. Which IMHO is fair because why would you trade a kid you could access later ... ? But again the downside is they are taking a risk as is their trading partner. But in our case we have already declared our interest and our price.

But my point is GWS want more picks and increase the pool of available choices not reduce them.

However, IMHO its only useable if they have no interest in the mentioned player, or they are trying to gain leverage to a player in advance who they want from another sides list. But again I reckon the really value is for them to try to obtain 5 year bankable picks or gain/ improve their picks in this draft.

Ok I hear the argument from others. But if the dont trade the kids they lose access to them. Yes, but if they do trade them they also lose access to them so you would think they would only deal on kids they a dont want or b/ deal with the gamblers and risk takers .. but they then have a chance of shooting themselves in the foot.

I don't understand what you're talking about from here onwards.

This is where I think you have the rules confused (or maybe I do...)

Edited by Artie Bucco
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest hangon007

What?

Jack Watts would have been one of these kids when he was drafted.

So passing up what they would get in return for the rights to 4 extremely talented youngsters, for the chance to maybe draft one of these kids themselves, even though if they are not there, they'll still get a talented kid anyway with more exposed form?

I just don't understand your logic and I'm concerned you still don't properly understand the situation.

I've thought about this a little more maybe this would explain my position better.

Taking your Watts example - 18 months prior to that "Watts" draft in theory the position we are in now, say just around championships time.

Who was the higher rated player a/ Jack Watts? or b/ Daniel Rich?

Then we move to trade period 3 months later, neither are eligible for this draft so you are trading for the next draft. Who do you trade for?

or lets go back 18 months prior to the last draft, say around championships time.?

Who was the higher rated player a/ Jack Darling? or b/ 1 off Andrew Gaff, Reece Conca Or Dyson Heppell ... Atley maybe?

Then we move to trade period 3 months later, none are eligible for this draft so you are trading for the next draft. Who do you trade for?

Do 18YO championships ever change the rankings?

Plus ... Do my needs as a club ever change? Ie Are players ever taken on a needs basis over best available? Do players taken in previous drafts grow and fill a hole I no longer need filled?

But wait their is an alternative. Club M has declared an interest in kid y that I can never get. They have set their price or the market is smart enough to set it for them. I can somewhat manipulate the deal & set it that I take player x from them they receive a compensation pick which in turn returns to me. Player x maybe somewhat lessor but I got holes all over the ground does it really matter which one I fill first? OK Club M may not be as motivated as others, but will the others want to hedge their bets? Depends how much of a gambler they want to be.

Then you move forward.

Are all the then 17 YO now eligible for the draft still available? Yes. Ok what else do I have ... another accumulated draft pick that now I have more knowledge I can put to better use. What have I lost ... nothing?

Edited by hangon007
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Artie Bucco

Under the current rules we wouldnt have been able to draft Watts.

He would have had to wait til the next draft.

One of these under-age picks would have been able to secure Watts at the same time as when we selected him, deeming him to be better than all the other kids in the draft.

So effectively one of these picks could be equal to a number 1 pick.

Darling's rating fell mainly due to perceived off-field issues, but his current form would indicate he shouldnt have, that the early signs were correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Artie Bucco

We don't know that Gaff, Conca, Heppell, etc weren't as highly rated as Darling.

They could have been, by recruiters.

They just didn't get the press that he did.

As a whole, players ineligible to be drafted are generally out of the spotlight.

You're going on hype and a perception created by the football media.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Artie Bucco

Needs change, but this is largely irrelevant.

These picks are at least equivalent to a first round pick - in the first round you should always choose best available.

It might be personal choice, but I find there's a general consensus on that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Artie Bucco

I think you're assuming I can't see things from GWS' perspective, but that is the only perspective I am considering in this.

You're raising a strange cryptic hypothetical in which we lose a player, then send our compensation pick to GWS (not back to) in return for the right to select Viney a year early.

Doesn't work for me.

Where does anyone hedging their bets come into it?

How is anyone a gambler?

Gambling just as much as we did drafting Watts and Blease as underage players?

That's just recruiting, not gambling.

MFC are hedging their bets in selecting Viney, but even moreso, using logic.

Seriously, I'm being kind in saying that maybe I dont understand.

You're living in a fantasy land.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest hangon007

I don't understand what you're talking about from here onwards.

This is where I think you have the rules confused (or maybe I do...)

Sorry I'm crap at explaining this on paper. IMHO GC17 were very smart last year and gave us a "road map" to this year, some clubs picked up on it some clubs didnt. Over value "perceived" early draft picks at your own peril.

IMHO the Brennan deal is a stroke of genius. (IMHO this is a win - loss trade - with GC17 winning ... However, the real value is in the detail)

IMHO the Krakouer/Ceglar deal is a stroke of two genius. Who both IMHO understand that principle that its not what you do with your early picks that counts its how you can improve your late picks that will make the real difference ... then how & when you use those late picks. (IMHO this is a win - win trade)

However, in Australia some clubs over value early picks. Just a thought.

Edited by hangon007
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Guest hangon007

Needs change, but this is largely irrelevant.

These picks are at least equivalent to a first round pick - in the first round you should always choose best available.

It might be personal choice, but I find there's a general consensus on that.

General consensus in Australia ... yes I agree. Elsewhere hummmmm! I'm not so sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Artie Bucco

The Brennan deal of course, because Brisbane only really upgraded their first pick by 5 places, and from memory got another pick around 25.

That's a loss.

Then again, Brennan is not the greatest player.

Not really sure what this has to do with anything though.

Your previous posts are still riddled with gibberish and the logic is flawed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Artie Bucco

General consensus in Australia ... yes I agree. Elsewhere hummmmm! I'm not so sure.

You're talking about completely different games, so where is the relevance?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Artie Bucco

I just can't see where you're going with all this...

There doesn't seem to be a clear point that you are making.

If there is, please just sum it up in a sentence or 2?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest hangon007

The Brennan deal of course, because Brisbane only really upgraded their first pick by 5 places, and from memory got another pick around 25.

That's a loss.

Then again, Brennan is not the greatest player.

Brennan is just the icing on the cake. Look I hate rating trades after 6 months something I would normally never do.

However, who would you rather have Polec or Lynch? I have a feeling the longer this trade goes the more pear shape it goes for Brisbane.

But, as you say I just talking "jibberish" sorry about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Demonland Forums  

  • Match Previews, Reports & Articles  

    DEPTH CHARGE by Whispering Jack

    The jubilation on the coach’s face as he danced a celebratory jig by the playing bench after the final siren sounded to record his team’s four-point victory over the Demons when the teams last met, said it all.    On that rainy Friday night at the Adelaide Oval, Ken Hinkley’s young midfield secured much more than four points on offer. The victory over one of the big dogs of the competition after a succession of wins over some of its lesser lights gave his team respect and validation fo

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 5

    TRAINING: Monday 25th March 2024

    Demonland Trackwatchers Demon Dynasty & Kev Martin were trackside at Gosch's Paddock today to bring you their observations from training. DEMON DYNASTY'S TRAINING OBSERVATIONS Kade Chandler's left knee heavily strapped. BBB, Spargs & Jake Lever also in rehab group. Jake Bowey solo running separate kicking/sprint/agility drills. Super fine morning / early arvo at Gosch's for the boys to blow out some cobwebs. Choco initially had the light duties / rehab group

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Training Reports

    HIBERNATING by KC from Casey

    When they locked up the rooms for summer at the end of last year’s football season, the rooms gathered cobwebs, the atmosphere became dense and the place developed a sleepy feel. They opened up the rooms to let Casey out to play on Sunday but the team was still hibernating and they missed the bulk of the opening quarter. By the time they worked out it was game on, their opponents from Box Hill had accumulated five goals and, if the game wasn’t over, it might as well have been. For a se

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Casey Articles

    A FORK IN THE HAWK by George on the Outer

    For too long in the past, Demon fans became habitually sick and tired of watching the Hawks hand out thrashings to their side. But Melbourne’s empahtic 55-point win at the MCG on Saturday has truly put a fork in the Hawk and turned that history well and truly on its head. The Demons have now won nine of their last ten encounters with the other result, a draw.     And like a fork, it was the multi-pronged options that Melbourne had all across the ground.  It certainly helped that Hawthorn

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Reports 8

    PREGAME: Rd 03 vs Port Adelaide

    The Demons head on the road for the next 2 weeks as they travel to Adelaide to play Port on Saturday and then have a 5 Day break before facing the Crows in the Gather Round. With injuries to May and Lever who comes in and who goes out?

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 262

    PODCAST: Rd 02 vs Hawthorn

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 25th March @ 8:30pm. Join George, Binman & I as we analyse the Demons victory at the MCG against the Hawks in the Round 02. You questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show. If you would like to leave us a voicemail please call 03 9016 3666 and don't worry no body answers so you don't have to talk to a human. Listen & Chat

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 46

    VOTES: Rd 02 vs Hawthorn

    Last week Steven May took the lead in the Demonland Player of the Year Award from Jack Viney. Clayton Oliver & Max Gawn round out the Top 4. Your votes for the win/loss against/to the Hawks. 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 50

    POSTGAME: Rd 02 vs Hawthorn

    The Demons cruised to an easy 55 point win over the Hawks at the MCG but but paid a heavy toll on the injury front with Steven May & Jake Lever possibly sidelined for a number of weeks.

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 357

    GAMEDAY: Rd 02 vs Hawthorn

    It's Game Day and after mixed results in the first two weeks of the season the Demons have the opportunity to capitalise on their good form last week when they take on the Hawks at the MCG today.

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 437
  • Tell a friend

    Love Demonland? Tell a friend!

  • Podcast 

  • Podcast 

  • Podcast Stream 


    Open Stream in
    New Window
        TuneIn    Opens in New Tab
  • Support Demonland  



  • 2021 Premiership  

  • Social Media 

  • Non MFC Games  

    NON-MFC: Round 03

    Discussion of all the other games that don't involve the Demons in Round 03 ... READ MORE

    Demonland | Round 03

  • Match Preview      

    DEPTH CHARGE by Whispering Jack

    The jubilation on the coach’s face as he danced a celebratory jig by the playing bench after the final siren sounded to record his team’s four-point victory over the Demons when the teams last met, said it all ... READ MORE

    Demonland | March 27

  • Latest Podcast      

    PODCAST: Rd 02 vs Hawthorn

    The boys dissected the clinical thrashing of Hawks praising the immense performance of Christian Petracca whilst lamenting the injury toll to our defensive unit ... LISTEN

    Demonland | March 26

  • Training  

    Monday, 25th March 2024

    Demonland Trackwatchers Demon Dynasty & Kev Martin were trackside at Gosch's Paddock today to bring you their observations from training ... READ MORE

    Demonland | March 25

  • Casey Report      

    HIBERNATING by KC from Casey

    When they locked up the rooms for summer at the end of last year’s football season, the rooms gathered cobwebs, the atmosphere became dense and the place developed a sleepy feel. They opened up the rooms to let Casey out to play on Sunday but the team was still hibernating and they missed the bulk of the opening quarter ... READ MORE

    Demonland | March 25

  • PreGame      

    PREGAME: Rd 03 vs Port Adelaide

    The Demons head out on the road for the next 2 weeks as they travel to Adelaide to play Port on Saturday and then have a 5 Day break before facing the Crows in Gather Round. With injuries to May and Lever who comes in and who goes out? ...READ MORE

    Demonland | March 28

  • Match Report      

    A FORK IN THE HAWK by George on the Outer

    For too long in the past, Demon fans became habitually sick and tired of watching the Hawks hand out thrashings to their side. But Melbourne’s empahtic 55-point win at the MCG on Saturday has truly put a fork in the Hawk and turned that history well and truly on its head ... READ MORE

    Demonland | March 23

  • Post Game      

    POSTGAME: Rd 02 vs Hawthorn

    The Demons cruised to an easy 55 point win over the Hawks at the MCG but but paid a heavy toll on the injury front with Steven May & Jake Lever possibly sidelined for a number of weeks ...READ MORE

    Demonland | March 23

  • Votes      

    VOTES: Rd 02 vs Hawthorn

    Last week Steven May took the lead in the Demonland Player of the Year Award from Jack Viney. Clayton Oliver & Max Gawn round out the Top 4. Your votes for the win/loss against/to the Hawks. 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 ...READ MORE

    Demonland | March 23

  • Game Day      

    GAMEDAY: Round 02 vs Hawthorn

    It's Game Day and after mixed results in the first two weeks of the season the Demons have the opportunity to capitalise on their good form last week when they take on the Hawks at the MCG today ... READ MORE

    Demonland | March 23

  • Training  

    Friday, 22nd March 2024

    Demonland Trackwatcher Kev Martin and I attended the Captain's Run at Gosch's Paddock on this lovely sunny morning to bring you the following observations from the training session ... READ MORE

    Demonland | March 22

  • Training  

    Tuesday, 19th March 2024

    Demonland Trackwatchers Kev Martin & Walking Civil War attended Tuesday morning's training session at Gosch's Paddock to bring you the following observations ... READ MORE

    Demonland | March 19

  • Training  

    Saturday, 16th March 2024

    Demonland Trackwatchers Kev Martin and Dee Zephyr wandered down to Gosch's Paddock on Saturday morning to bring you their observations from the Captain's Run in the lead up to Sunday's Round One match against the Bulldogs ... READ MORE

    Demonland | March 16

  • Farewell  

    Angus Brayshaw Retires

    After 167 games including the drought breaking Premiership Angus Brayshaw has made the heart breaking decision to medically retire from football as a result of a series of serious head knocks over his nearly decade of footy. We wish Gus all the best and he'll always be a hero at Demonland ... READ MORE

    Demonland | February 22

  • Latest Podcast  

    PODCAST: Koltyn Tholstrup Interview

    I interview the Melbourne Football Club’s newest recruit Koltyn Tholstrup to have a chat about his journey from the farm to the Demons, his first few weeks of preseason training, which Dees have impressed him on the track and his aspirations of playing Round 1 ... LISTEN

    Demonland | December 14

  • Latest Podcast  

    PODCAST: Jason Taylor Interview

    I interview the Melbourne Football Club's National Recruitment Manager Jason Taylor to have a chat about our Trade and Draft period, our newest recruits, our recent recruits who have yet to debut as well as those father son prospects on the horizon ... LISTEN

    Demonland | November 27

  • Next Match 

    .

    Round 03

       vs   

    Saturday 30th March 2024
    @ 07:30pm (AO)

  • MFC Forum  

  • Match Previews & Reports  

  • Training Forum  

  • AFLW Forum  

  • 2024 Player Sponsorship

  • Topics

  • Injury List  


      PLAYER INJURY LENGTH
    Jake Lever Knee Test
    Clayton Oliver Hand Test
    Oliver Sestan Concussion Test
    Steven May Ribs 1 Week
    Lachie Hunter Calf 1 Week
    Daniel Turner Hip 2-3 Weeks
    Charlie Spargo Achilles 2-4 Weeks
    Shane McAdam Hamstring 3-5 Weeks
    Jake Bowey Shoulder 7 Weeks
    Jake Melksham ACL 12-14 Weeks
    Joel Smith Suspension TBA

  • Player of the Year  


        PLAYER VOTES
    1 Christian Petracca 27
    2 Steven May 25
    3 Max Gawn 21
    4 Jack Viney 20
    5 Bayley Fritsch 19
    6 Clayton Oliver 18
    7 Christian Salem 12
    8 Blake Howes 11
    9 Jack Billings 10
    9 Alex Neal-Bullen 10

        FULL TABLE
  • Demonland Interviews 



  • Upcoming Events 

×
×
  • Create New...