Jump to content

Featured Replies

Out of interest i wonder where Edmunds industry sources think Tyson would go if he was available in this years draft.

It's quite clear, that the recruiting manager who wished to go unnamed was Barry Prendergast.

 

Would Roos trade Tyson and Salem for pick 2 or for Kelly?

No way, he wouldn't even trade one of those players for Kelly.

Kelly has a long way to go to even match Tyson and there's no guarantee that it will happen.

Has composure and class, doesn't mind getting his hands dirty, has a big kick on him, straight-lines the ball.

Have we ever had a midfielder at Melbourne do what this kid is doing in his first few games for the club? Don't forget, he was barely a player for GWS - 15 games over two years, with his second season ruined by injury.

I can't quite fathom how impressive he looks.

Loved Mitch Clark's tweet yesterday saying he reminded him of Simon Black and Luke Hodge.

Yes, please!!

 

Not sure if it's mentioned anywhere but Dom was on the Sunday Footy Show.

Very impressive kid, on and off the field.

His old mate Damo Barrett was sitting 2 seats away and never said a [censored] word for the whole segment, the gutless piece of [censored] [censored] [censored] rat bastard.

Not sure if it's mentioned anywhere but Dom was on the Sunday Footy Show.

Very impressive kid, on and off the field.

His old mate Damo Barrett was sitting 2 seats away and never said a [censored] word for the whole segment, the gutless piece of [censored] [censored] [censored] rat [censored].

Wrong Barrett was already off the show once Tyson came.


Wrong Barrett was already off the show once Tyson came.

Oh, well my apologies to the fleeing cat then.

Guys, it wasn't just Damian Barrett who made a clown of himself about this trade. What about the Herald-Sun's Mr Smug, Sam Edmund? Remember this belter of an article after Round 3? I just tweeted "Slammin Sam" to go and talk to his dumb recruiter mates now and see what they think.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/if-youre-a-melbourne-supporter-look-away-now-demons-draft-bungles-aplenty/story-fni5f91a-1226881324821

Did anyone notice Sam Edmund gave Tyson the 3 votes in the Sunday H-Sun????

I'm looking forward to watching Tyson's game develop more and more.

We have picked up an excellent recruit (not to mention Salem) who at the age of nearly 21 is showing all the signs of a future star.

 

Not sure if it's mentioned anywhere but Dom was on the Sunday Footy Show.

Very impressive kid, on and off the field.

His old mate Damo Barrett was sitting 2 seats away and never said a [censored] word for the whole segment, the gutless piece of [censored] [censored] [censored] rat [censored].

The highlight with this post is trying to work out what the "censored" words are. I've tried to fill in the blanks, but I want to see if the poster and I are on the same page.

Surely the mods can make it that any post that is having a go at Barrett escapes the censorship rules?

Would Roos trade Tyson and Salem for pick 2 or for Kelly?

No way, he wouldn't even trade one of those players for Kelly.

Kelly has a long way to go to even match Tyson and there's no guarantee that it will happen.

Pick 20 was also part of that trade, a lot of people seem to have forgotten that.

I do believe we won that trade and was happy it happened but it's worth mentioning that pick 2 wasn't a straight swap for Tyson and pick 9 (Salem).


Pick 20 was also part of that trade, a lot of people seem to have forgotten that.

I do believe we won that trade and was happy it happened but it's worth mentioning that pick 2 wasn't a straight swap for Tyson and pick 9 (Salem).

Yes that's why I'd go back and not do that whole trade if I could.

Tyson is ok, but he's no A Maric, Strauss, Blease or Tapscott.

  • Author

Pick 20 was also part of that trade, a lot of people seem to have forgotten that.

I do believe we won that trade and was happy it happened but it's worth mentioning that pick 2 wasn't a straight swap for Tyson and pick 9 (Salem).

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAH

Speechless at your comment

Yes that's why I'd go back and not do that whole trade if I could.

Tyson is ok, but he's no A Maric, Strauss, Blease or Tapscott.

I'm not suggesting that at all.

I just don't like seeing the trade being construed as "Tyson/pick 9 (Salem) for pick 2". That would have been trade of the century but that's not what happened, pick 20 was also involved.

I'm not suggesting that at all.

I just don't like seeing the trade being construed as "Tyson/pick 9 (Salem) for pick 2". That would have been trade of the century but that's not what happened, pick 20 was also involved.

Yeah I wasn't having a go at you, was having a laugh. And a go at the club for p!ssing away pick 20ish on numerous occasions.

At least it was involved in something useful this time.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAH

Speechless at your comment

Look it up.

Pick 2, pick 20 and pick 72 for Tyson, pick 9 and pick 53.

That's the trade that happened.

As I said before I believe we won the trade and I'm very very happy to have Tyson on the list but I get annoyed when people insinuate we outright got Tyson/Salem for Kelly.

Pick 20 could have been Crouch, it wasn't a nothing pick.


Look it up.

Pick 2, pick 20 and pick 72 for Tyson, pick 9 and pick 53.

That's the trade that happened.

As I said before I believe we won the trade and I'm very very happy to have Tyson on the list but I get annoyed when people insinuate we outright got Tyson/Salem for Kelly.

Pick 20 could have been Crouch, it wasn't a nothing pick.

Didn't we take JHK with pick 53?

#winning

I thought it was 40? But yes it was a great get, very fortunate Hawthorn took the punt on Garlett instead.

Ok we are both wrong. We got pick 57 not 53 and with that we picked Hunt.

  • Author

Look it up.

Pick 2, pick 20 and pick 72 for Tyson, pick 9 and pick 53.

That's the trade that happened.

As I said before I believe we won the trade and I'm very very happy to have Tyson on the list but I get annoyed when people insinuate we outright got Tyson/Salem for Kelly.

Pick 20 could have been Crouch, it wasn't a nothing pick.

But we got Salem and Tyson.

It was basically:

Salem- Kelly

Tyson- pick 20

Hunt- Pass

now that combo, i'm happy.

I cant even begin to tell you how silly your comment sounded to me


But we got Salem and Tyson.

It was basically:

Salem- Kelly

Tyson- pick 20

Hunt- Pass

now that combo, i'm happy.

I cant even begin to tell you how silly your comment sounded to me

I think of it more as

#2 for Dom

#20 for Salem

Hunt for #72

On that basis I am still happy.

All in all we just need good footballers at the club - their actual draft number (as we have learnt) means squat.

I also think that GWS wont be seen as losers from this transaction. They spread their list age a bit more, add a different midfield profile to the group in Kelly as well.

There's another issue involved in the Tyson/Salem v Kelly debate which hasn't even been mentioned. The Melbourne strategy has reduced risk. I don't wish ill will on any player involved, but if one has a career threatening industry in his early years, which team would be better off? Melbourne still with one of Tyson or Salem playing or GWS with no-one? Sure, the higher risk (ie, GWS strategy) may produce a higher reward...but it also has a higher risk of going pear shaped.

There's another issue involved in the Tyson/Salem v Kelly debate which hasn't even been mentioned. The Melbourne strategy has reduced risk. I don't wish ill will on any player involved, but if one has a career threatening industry in his early years, which team would be better off? Melbourne still with one of Tyson or Salem playing or GWS with no-one? Sure, the higher risk (ie, GWS strategy) may produce a higher reward...but it also has a higher risk of going pear shaped.

I think the initial thinking was we would get 2 good players for 1 great player potentially

but I am of the opinion Tyson will be at least as good as Kelly and Salem could well reach that level also so it's got the potential to be a massive win for us.

 

After the Bulldogs game, Giansiricusa was on GameDay where he did the review of the game.

They do a "Three Things I Learned" at the end of their review

One of Gia's three things went along the lines "Dom Tyson won't BE a star, he already is one"

The highlight with this post is trying to work out what the "censored" words are. I've tried to fill in the blanks, but I want to see if the poster and I are on the same page.

Surely the mods can make it that any post that is having a go at Barrett escapes the censorship rules?

How about we add to the lexicon.

That Scully is a barrett. Or

Collingwood supporters are barretts.

I need to go to the toilet to do a big barrett because i have a bad case of the barretts.

If you don't agree then you are a big barrett you rat barrett barrett.

No offence to the reader. If you take offence go barrett yourself.


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...

Featured Content

  • CASEY: Collingwood

    It was freezing cold at Mission Whitten Stadium where only the brave came out in the rain to watch a game that turned out to be as miserable as the weather.
    The Casey Demons secured their third consecutive victory, earning the four premiership points and credit for defeating a highly regarded Collingwood side, but achieved little else. Apart perhaps from setting the scene for Monday’s big game at the MCG and the Ice Challenge that precedes it.
    Neither team showcased significant skill in the bleak and greasy conditions, at a location that was far from either’s home territory. Even the field umpires forgot where they were and experienced a challenging evening, but no further comment is necessary.

      • Thanks
    • 2 replies
  • NON-MFC: Round 13

    Follow all the action from every Round 13 clash excluding the Dees as the 2025 AFL Premiership Season rolls on. With Melbourne playing in the final match of the round on King's Birthday, all eyes turn to the rest of the competition. Who are you tipping to win? And more importantly, which results best serve the Demons’ finals aspirations? Join the discussion and keep track of the matches that could shape the ladder and impact our run to September.

      • Thanks
    • 187 replies
  • PREVIEW: Collingwood

    Having convincingly defeated last year’s premier and decisively outplayed the runner-up with 8.2 in the final quarter, nothing epitomized the Melbourne Football Club’s performance more than its 1.12 final half, particularly the eight consecutive behinds in the last term, against a struggling St Kilda team in the midst of a dismal losing streak. Just when stability and consistency were anticipated within the Demon ranks, they delivered a quintessential performance marked by instability and ill-conceived decisions, with the most striking aspect being their inaccuracy in kicking for goal, which suggested a lack of preparation (instead of sleeping in their hotel in Alice, were they having a night on the turps) rather than a well-rested team. Let’s face it - this kicking disease that makes them look like raw amateurs is becoming a millstone around the team’s neck.

      • Thanks
    • 1 reply
  • CASEY: Sydney

    The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 1 reply
  • REPORT: St. Kilda

    Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
    This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

      • Thanks
    • 4 replies
  • PREGAME: Collingwood

    After a disappointing loss in Alice Springs the Demons return to the MCG to take on the Magpies in the annual King's Birthday Big Freeze for MND game. Who comes in and who goes out?

      • Thanks
    • 451 replies