Essendon lost by 71 points tonight.

They'd find it much harder down at Kardinia Park with almost NO Ess supporters, on the long thin ground.

Oh, but I forgot. Ess, Coll and Carlton don't have to play down there.

No Mooney or Hawkins, either. Great effort Bombers.

Essendon lost by 71 points tonight.

They'd find it much harder down at Kardinia Park with almost NO Ess supporters, on the long thin ground.

Oh, but I forgot. Ess, Coll and Carlton don't have to play down there.

No Mooney or Hawkins, either. Great effort Bombers.

Is the point of this thread the fact that the bombers get huge crowds and therefore deservedly don't have to play in Skilled Stadium which only seats 50,000 or so? If we can get 60,000 plus to games regularly, then we deserve not to play at geelong also. Good on the bombers for getting such consistently huge crowd attendance if you ask me. So don't agree with that call.

If your thread is about the bombers misfortune, then a strange thread.Cats are awesome. We got belted by them as well. I think we have enough of our own worries atm (we are still very much a work in progress), so not sure why your so pleased at the misfortune of the bombers.

Pears, Ryder, Zaka, Melksham, Gumby, Hurly, Hocking... they got a few young guns I wouldn't be too hopeful of them being a basket case.

Bombers are a better team than us atm. However looking forward 2 years i see us streaking past them.

Essendon lost by 71 points tonight.

They'd find it much harder down at Kardinia Park with almost NO Ess supporters, on the long thin ground.

Oh, but I forgot. Ess, Coll and Carlton don't have to play down there.

No Mooney or Hawkins, either. Great effort Bombers.

Scarlett goes ok sometimes too.

Loved watching the supporters getting all excited when they got within a kick.

Scarlett goes ok sometimes too.

Loved watching the supporters getting all excited when they got within a kick.

As do Rooke, Corey and Ottens. Shut the gate, it`s all over.

Is the point of this thread the fact that the bombers get huge crowds and therefore deservedly don't have to play in Skilled Stadium which only seats 50,000 or so? If we can get 60,000 plus to games regularly, then we deserve not to play at geelong also. Good on the bombers for getting such consistently huge crowd attendance if you ask me. So don't agree with that call.

If your thread is about the bombers misfortune, then a strange thread.Cats are awesome. We got belted by them as well. I think we have enough of our own worries atm (we are still very much a work in progress), so not sure why your so pleased at the misfortune of the bombers.

Pears, Ryder, Zaka, Melksham, Gumby, Hurly, Hocking... they got a few young guns I wouldn't be too hopeful of them being a basket case.

Bombers are a better team than us atm. However looking forward 2 years i see us streaking past them.

Agree with your points regarding bigger crowds and bombers current performance being better than us, but I still take joy in watching the bombers get thumped (Still getting over the 2000 grand final pathetic I know). I think what I envy about the bombers is their ability to regularly win games they are expected to lose (more than us at least) and perform well in the so called blockbusters regardless of their position on the ladder. I was [censored] they beat the bulldogs last round when the Dees just got pipped at the line but they led from the start so got to hand it to them. It will be interesting to see how things pan out for the bombers compared to us and Richmond perhaps given than the reason why they chose Matthew Knights over Hardwick was supposedly because Hardwick predicted a longer period of restructuring before finals success would be achieved while we have bottomed out completely and gone the full turnover of player while they have held on to some for longer that surely won't be part of their next genuine flag tilt (e.g. Fletcher)

It will be interesting to see how things pan out for the bombers compared to us and Richmond perhaps given than the reason why they chose Matthew Knights over Hardwick was supposedly because Hardwick predicted a longer period of restructuring before finals success would be achieved while we have bottomed out completely and gone the full turnover of player while they have held on to some for longer that surely won't be part of their next genuine flag tilt (e.g. Fletcher)

Which as a result won't see them win a premiership for a while until they bottom out again IMO

Essen who?

Is the point of this thread the fact that the bombers get huge crowds and therefore deservedly don't have to play in Skilled Stadium which only seats 50,000 or so?

That's always bothered me...

So the good teams get to play in the grounds they WANT to play in, solely because they're bigger and richer? The Collingwoods and Essendons therefore don't travel as much and are, in general, more likely to win more games...

It may be the way it is, but it's not the way it SHOULD be. Given we have to sell a game interstate to remain in the hunt financially, I reckon we have to win two more games than a similarly placed Essendon team to get into the 8... or 4... or 2.

That's always bothered me...

So the good teams get to play in the grounds they WANT to play in, solely because they're bigger and richer?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Exactly right, Dappa.

While the AFL try to maintain an even comp with the sal cap and the draft, the fixturing is totally unfair, making it harder for clubs like Melbourne.

While Kardinia Park can only hold 25000 and Geelong has more than 35000 members, it's not fair for ANY Vic Club to play there. Sure, if you put Essendon there, only 25000 can attend cf 45000 at Docklands or probably 65000 at the MCG. If we played Geelong at Docklands, there would probably be 35000, and perhaps 40000 at the MCG.(if we were having a good season, you'd probably get 55000 v. Geelong at the MCG.)

So the difference in attendance isn't really great, while the difference in degree of difficulty to become a successful side is huge.

The AFL MUST avoid the EPL situation, where only 3 or 4 sides have a chance.

Meanwhile, it's no coincidence that Geelong have won 2 out of the last 3 (should be 3), and will probably win 3 out of 4. Their home ground advantage is too great, with only Geelong supporters present, on a uniquely shaped ground. Sure, their players are great, but it must be a big advantage having interstate sides playing there. In their defence, they never get to play Coll, Carl or Ess on their own ground, but their advantages far outweigh the cons, and the results are highly suggestive of this.

As another addendum to my post, I LOVE watching Essendon(Coll and Carl) lose.

I think our 54 point loss at "Skilled Stadium" was a much better effort than their 71 point loss on Essendon's home ground. (Scarlett missed both matches, but we had to contend with Mooney and an in-form Hawkins,as well.)

Essendon seems to be the hovering potato club again this year. Not a contender, not down, just meh.

I'm looking forward to our game against them, with a little luck it'll still be the proverbial '8 point game' and a look at the fixture and injury lists would suggest that Jurrah will be back right on time for the big home game at the 'G against them, too.

That's always bothered me...

So the good teams get to play in the grounds they WANT to play in, solely because they're bigger and richer?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Exactly right, Dappa.

While the AFL try to maintain an even comp with the sal cap and the draft, the fixturing is totally unfair, making it harder for clubs like Melbourne.

While Kardinia Park can only hold 25000 and Geelong has more than 35000 members, it's not fair for ANY Vic Club to play there. Sure, if you put Essendon there, only 25000 can attend cf 45000 at Docklands or probably 65000 at the MCG. If we played Geelong at Docklands, there would probably be 35000, and perhaps 40000 at the MCG.(if we were having a good season, you'd probably get 55000 v. Geelong at the MCG.)

So the difference in attendance isn't really great, while the difference in degree of difficulty to become a successful side is huge.

The AFL MUST avoid the EPL situation, where only 3 or 4 sides have a chance.

Meanwhile, it's no coincidence that Geelong have won 2 out of the last 3 (should be 3), and will probably win 3 out of 4. Their home ground advantage is too great, with only Geelong supporters present, on a uniquely shaped ground. Sure, their players are great, but it must be a big advantage having interstate sides playing there. In their defence, they never get to play Coll, Carl or Ess on their own ground, but their advantages far outweigh the cons, and the results are highly suggestive of this.

As another addendum to my post, I LOVE watching Essendon(Coll and Carl) lose.

I think our 54 point loss at "Skilled Stadium" was a much better effort than their 71 point loss on Essendon's home ground. (Scarlett missed both matches, but we had to contend with Mooney and an in-form Hawkins,as well.)

I agree with that we have had some big crowds at the G when we play them and it's ridiculous to think that any club should be given the opportunity to get richer at the expense of another club.

There should be some sort of rotation system where all clubs are given the opportunity of playing at Skilled, why should we be the lucky ones every year. I can't remember the last year we didn't play there, yet Coach Thompson said he had never gone to Skilled as a player?

Anyway the State Government, realising this is an election year and needing to hold on to the marginal seat down there is going to spend $MSSSSS upgrading the ground so it can hold more. Perhaps in 6 or 7 years we will be able to go there and actually get a seat and watch the game.

That's always bothered me...

So the good teams get to play in the grounds they WANT to play in, solely because they're bigger and richer? The Collingwoods and Essendons therefore don't travel as much and are, in general, more likely to win more games...

Well, it's more about where Geelong want to play, not Essendon or Collingwood.

We played Geelong Round 1 at the MCG, it was Geelongs home game and drew 58,000 odd.

So Geelong get bigger crowds playing Essendon at the MCG than it would at Geelong.

Plus, as someone has said, hardly any Essendon supporters would get in at Geelong, so most of their crowd will be made up of Geelong members who are already paid up. Home games at the MCG give them more of the opposition supporters dollar.

Get to a stage where you can guarantee drawing 60,000 to a home Geelong game at the MCG, and you'll stop having to go to Geelong.

I think our 54 point loss at "Skilled Stadium" was a much better effort than their 71 point loss on Essendon's home ground. (Scarlett missed both matches, but we had to contend with Mooney and an in-form Hawkins,as well.)

An in-form Hawkins??? Very amusing.

Most Geelong supporters I know wanted him dropped for most of the season. Melbourne may well have played him back into form.

But back to the main point, quite possibly Melbournes effort at Geelong was better. Hard to measure.

Ottens, Scarlett, Corey & Rooke missed both games, with Mooney and Hawkins missing the other night.

No big deal there IMO.

I would have liked Hille to play for us, as it may have helped us exploit the only thing we have over Geelong which is in the ruck. It's obvious that Geelongs depth is greater than ours, so outs like Hille, Monfries and Hooker probably hurt us more than Geelong missing players, the same way resting Scully and Trengove against the Cats, and Jurrah, Pettard etc being out hurt you against them.

Yes, 54 is a smaller number than 71, but from memory I don't think at any stage Melbourne were ever "in the game" against the Cats. There were times in that 2nd quarter where Essendon were well and truly in the match. Obviously it blew out after half time, but like I said, who was better performed against the Cats is hard to measure.

All I know is Geelong should win the flag this year, no questions asked. So everyone else is playing for second. Very reminiscent of 2000.

Exactly right, Dappa.

While the AFL try to maintain an even comp with the sal cap and the draft, the fixturing is totally unfair, making it harder for clubs like Melbourne.

While Kardinia Park can only hold 25000 and Geelong has more than 35000 members, it's not fair for ANY Vic Club to play there.

So the difference in attendance isn't really great, while the difference in degree of difficulty to become a successful side is huge.

The AFL MUST avoid the EPL situation, where only 3 or 4 sides have a chance.

Meanwhile, it's no coincidence that Geelong have won 2 out of the last 3 (should be 3), and will probably win 3 out of 4. Their home ground advantage is too great, with only Geelong supporters present, on a uniquely shaped ground. Sure, their players are great, but it must be a big advantage having interstate sides playing there. In their defence, they never get to play Coll, Carl or Ess on their own ground, but their advantages far outweigh the cons, and the results are highly suggestive of this.

Hang on.

For starters we are nowhere near anything remotely resembling an EPL situation. In a single decade of 2000-2009 every single club played in a Preliminary Final. The evenness of our competition over a pretty small time sample is sensational.

As far as saying it's unfair for any VIC club to have to play at Skilled. How ridiculous. Geelong are not a Melbourne club, as their name should suggest. Geelong is where they are from, frankly they should get to play all of their home games there.

Do you apply the same reasoning that it's unfair for clubs to have to play Sydney at the SCG or WC/Fre at Subi?? Both of those grounds have unique dimensions and overwhelming crowd support differences.

Yes, 54 is a smaller number than 71, but from memory I don't think at any stage Melbourne were ever "in the game" against the Cats. There were times in that 2nd quarter where Essendon were well and truly in the match. Obviously it blew out after half time, but like I said, who was better performed against the Cats is hard to measure.

All I know is Geelong should win the flag this year, no questions asked. So everyone else is playing for second. Very reminiscent of 2000.

I doubt many would agree with you, 54 Points down at Skilled as opposed to 71 Points up here. I think less than a minutes thought would give you that answer.

I doubt many would agree with you, 54 Points down at Skilled as opposed to 71 Points up here. I think less than a minutes thought would give you that answer.

So you are happy with a game where you were never any threat to Geelong, but escape with a 9 goal loss?

What was the 1/4 time score in your game? 5.5 to 2.1. 10 shots to 3.

1/2 time it was 9.6 to 4.4. Melbourne never challenged Geelong, which I think would have been disappointing for a team on the rise.

Essendon, in both of our games against the Cats, have had chucks of the game where we were able to match it with Geelong, and in Round 1, be 4 goals up against them.

The end results haven't been great for us, and the obvious thing to say would be 54 points is better than 71 points, but I have actually taken something out of our games against Geelong. Not sure Melbourne could this year, other than Gysberts first game.

But while Geelong are the yardstick, I'm not sure why everyone thinks how teams perform against them is the big indicator. If this was the case, Carlton would be second favourite for the flag.

So you are happy with a game where you were never any threat to Geelong, but escape with a 9 goal loss?

No I'm just happy it wasn't 71, yourself?

I've seen games over the years where we have started off like a train and finished up like a train wreck; I recall one year where we kicked 10 goals in the first quarter against Collingwood and finished up getting beaten by 10 goals. Needless to say I didn't take much out of that game. But if it makes you happy to be competetive for a while good luck to you.

No I'm just happy it wasn't 71, yourself?

I've seen games over the years where we have started off like a train and finished up like a train wreck; I recall one year where we kicked 10 goals in the first quarter against Collingwood and finished up getting beaten by 10 goals. Needless to say I didn't take much out of that game. But if it makes you happy to be competetive for a while good luck to you.

No, I wasn't happy it ended up at a 71 point margin.

But I hate the games more when we don't compete at all.

No, I wasn't happy it ended up at a 71 point margin.

But I hate the games more when we don't compete at all.

Perhaps you should learn to differentiate between compete and competetive, I'm sure our boys put in 100% effort but they weren't good enough. We understand where we are and at times, try as we might, we may be uncompetetive but that's due to our young side and lack of game time at senior level.

I would rather our team and our supporters be fully aware of where we are than be under some illusion that we are further advanced and better that we are, yourself?

We are trying to build a team that will win a flag not just enough games to get us in the finals.

Perhaps you should learn to differentiate between compete and competetive, I'm sure our boys put in 100% effort but they weren't good enough. We understand where we are and at times, try as we might, we may be uncompetetive but that's due to our young side and lack of game time at senior level.

I would rather our team and our supporters be fully aware of where we are than be under some illusion that we are further advanced and better that we are, yourself?

We are trying to build a team that will win a flag not just enough games to get us in the finals.

I pretty much know where Essendon is at. I see them every single week.

Middle of the road team at best. In 12 rounds we've so far played every team in the 8, including Geelong twice.

Have yet to play winnable games against teams like Brisbane, Melbourne, North Melbourne and Adelaide.

We get another crack at West Coast and Richmond as well. Doubt we'll make finals as we aren't good enough and don't have much depth. But I see signs for the future.

I really doubt any team in the AFL is just floating around only trying to make finals and not genuinely trying to win a flag.

It's pretty hard to deliberately bottom out. You are either crap enough to finish bottom or not. A by product of Essendon having champions like Hird, Lloyd, Fletcher and Lucas etc means we have never really been bad enough to bottom out or tank to get high draft picks. Melbourne have been fortunate enough to be so bad for a few years, you have been able to stock pile young talent, and now it is paying dividends. People bag Neale Daniher, but his poor list management has probably got you in the position you are in today.

The issue for the likes of Richmond, Essendon and West Coast is that getting quality young talent onto their lists in the coming seasons is going to be very difficult. Melbourne have timed the whole thing perfectly.

But I'm sure Melbourne will win a flag before Essendon, so I'm probably not going to win this debate.

Edited June 15, 201015 yr by Ash35

so I'm probably not going to win this debate.

No you're not are you.

I know you are a friend of the owner but I don't your thinly veiled bagging of the Demons is a way to win friends on here.

No you're not are you.

I know you are a friend of the owner but I don't your thinly veiled bagging of the Demons is a way to win friends on here.

Bagging Melbourne?

Have I said anything not factual?

Bagging Melbourne?

Have I said anything not factual?

I'll leave that up to you and others to decide, I think I've made my point and there's no need to labour it.

I'll leave that up to you and others to decide, I think I've made my point and there's no need to labour it.

Ok, well I've decided.

I don't know you, but those on here that do know me personally will know that I don't get on Demonland to "bag" Melbourne.

All of what I said was just my opinion. Didn't think I was too far offthe mark with much of it.

Melbourne are on the rise with lots of young talent. Melbourne have timed their stock piling very well, whether through design or accident. I feel more through Danihers poor list management, but that's another topic in it's itself. Tanking was probably involved.

Anyway, I truly believe Melbourne will win a flag before alot of teams, which includes Essendon.

Sorry you think I'm having a dig.