WELCOME TO THE MELBOURNE FOOTBALL CLUB – JAKE MELKSHAM

[HulkHogan 69]

Yep love it. Exactly what we need.

Yes, absolutely love it!

Tough player and a great tackler

[DeeSpencer 24,793]

What's the difference between Jake Melksham and Dom Tyson?

Tyson's best (last year) was much better. More prolific ball winner. Better hands in close. Goal kicking from stoppages. Reads the ball from the ruckman better. He had a down year this year but is 22 and can likely spring back. If he had 2 more average years then he'd be where Melksham is.

Melksham hasn't elevated his game in the midfield. Isn't winning big numbers, isn't dominating through great ball use. So he's getting reinvented through a move to half back and can hopefully step up a level with that chance.

[Norm Smith's Curse 2,423]

Posted 17 August 2014 - 08:38 AM

Jake Melksham should/could be a target. Hard and classy. Just what Roos stated we need. Believe he is disgruntled and looking for a fresh start. In his own words he 'plays best when given a role'. Pick 23ish should get the job done. Roos should get into bombers ear about a trade/swap scenario. (After we know the ASADA washout)

JV7 likes this Like This

Did I know something 14 months ago..... Lol

interesting. Any other tidbits?

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

He chose our club when most others wouldnt. (regardless of money/contract etc)

Get around him.

Welcome Jake.

No.

He is a drug cheat.

[rpfc 28,052]

No.

He is a drug cheat.

Gawd...

Even, I am in the 'they should be punished regardless of how much they knew' but give it a rest with the 'drug cheat' stuff.

From what we all have extensively read - this was not a Lance Armstrong-like operation that took place.

And he may not be punished, but I will tell you what he will be - he will be running around in the red and blue.

[G-max 154]

This has probably been posted already but here's Melksham putting Lindsay Thomas in his place:

[daisycutter 29,343]

Gawd...

Even, I am in the 'they should be punished regardless of how much they knew' but give it a rest with the 'drug cheat' stuff.

From what we all have extensively read - this was not a Lance Armstrong-like operation that took place.

And he may not be punished, but I will tell you what he will be - he will be running around in the red and blue.

lol rpfc. was that an intentional pun?

[demon-4-life 467]

This has probably been posted already but here's Melksham putting Lindsay Thomas in his place:

Does it matter that Melksham gave away the 50 metre penalty?

[beelzebub 23,200]

Does it matter that Melksham gave away the 50 metre penalty?

yes it does

A criticism of him is regards his sometimes erratic decision making.

Exhibit A

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

Gawd...

Even, I am in the 'they should be punished regardless of how much they knew' but give it a rest with the 'drug cheat' stuff.

From what we all have extensively read - this was not a Lance Armstrong-like operation that took place.

And he may not be punished, but I will tell you what he will be - he will be running around in the red and blue.

Sorry RPFC, I can't agree.

Kavanagh and Zaharakis managed to see this for what it is and get out.

He's an elite athlete and responsible for what goes into his body. I don't buy the 'players were duped' argument. There were too many shady goings on for a reasonable person to not have sincere doubts.

Hiding behind a veil of feigned ignorance doesn't change the fact that he was involved in the regime. To let him get away with this sort of behaviour provides others with a template for future cheating.

So no, I won't give it a rest. I'm extremely unhappy that he is on our list. The only way I'll be happy that he's wearing red and blue is if CAS clears him and provides a damn good reason for it.

From the current information at hand, I judge him to be a drug cheat. If new information comes to light clearing him, I will change my stance.

[rpfc 28,052]

Sorry RPFC, I can't agree.

Kavanagh and Zaharakis managed to see this for what it is and get out.

He's an elite athlete and responsible for what goes into his body. I don't buy the 'players were duped' argument. There were too many shady goings on for a reasonable person to not have sincere doubts.

Hiding behind a veil of feigned ignorance doesn't change the fact that he was involved in the regime. To let him get away with this sort of behaviour provides others with a template for future cheating.

So no, I won't give it a rest. I'm extremely unhappy that he is on our list. The only way I'll be happy that he's wearing red and blue is if CAS clears him and provides a damn good reason for it.

From the current information at hand, I judge him to be a drug cheat. If new information comes to light clearing him, I will change my stance.

Guilty until proven innocent...

Your stance is outrageous compared to the next-level systematic cheating of the system that is seen in other sports like cycling.

And if Zaharakis and Kavanagh did not 'get out' - if they thought it was as bad you say it is I am sure they would have gone straight to Demetriou. Zaharakis is known to have something akin to a phobia of needles - that is hardly the motive of a conscientious objector...

They will fall to the actions of their club and their own diffidence on their actions - but whatever WADA throws at them I will accept and nothing more and then they will be absolved in the eyes of reasonable people; this has gone on long enough and these blokes have one final judgement of consequence and that is enough for me.

But it isn't enough for you?

Would you not allow them back into the sport? Essendon can continue but not the players they duped?

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

Guilty until proven innocent...

Your stance is outrageous compared to the next-level systematic cheating of the system that is seen in other sports like cycling.

And if Zaharakis and Kavanagh did not 'get out' - if they thought it was as bad you say it is I am sure they would have gone straight to Demetriou. Zaharakis is known to have something akin to a phobia of needles - that is hardly the motive of a conscientious objector...

They will fall to the actions of their club and their own diffidence on their actions - but whatever WADA throws at them I will accept and nothing more and then they will be absolved in the eyes of reasonable people; this has gone on long enough and these blokes have one final judgement of consequence and that is enough for me.

But it isn't enough for you?

Would you not allow them back into the sport? Essendon can continue but not the players they duped?

Honestly I think Essendon as a club needs a huge penalty as well. I never said anything to the contrary, I'm not sure why you bring that up.

Guilty until innocent? Yeah, I've judged based on what I've read and heavily suspect they are guilty. It's perfectly fine for a member of society to do that. My opinion will not alter CAS's verdict. I'm not a member of the judiciary and am not bound by their code of ethics. People make judgements all the time based on the evidence they have at hand. If CAS clears them, I'll change my stance. Until then I'm pretty sure they cheated and am unhappy one of them is now at our club.

I don't think my stance of labelling 34 athletes who took drugs to give them a competitive edge, with or without their knowledge, as drug cheats is unreasonable. I don't follow cycling, in fact I don't follow any other sports, so I don't see why my stance is outrageous. I care about AFL and to me Essendon's actions (and the players' inactions) are detrimental to it.

I am highly dubious regarding Zaharakis's fear of needles. Honestly I think it's a smokescreen. I think he saw what was happening and chose not to be involved, but didn't want to out his team mates and so came up with this needles thing as a way of excluding himself without having to report them or get them in trouble.

I am also happy for there to be one final consequence as a result of the CAS hearing. I'm not sure what I said that made you infer that I believed they should carry any additional burden?

You are reading a lot into a post were I simply said "no, he is a drug cheat" in response to "get around him". I think you're lumping me in with the 'baying for blood' group when all I did was apply a 'drug cheat' label to players whom I think it aptly applies to.

I will offer Melksham no support until I am sure that he is not in fact a drug cheat.

[rpfc 28,052]

I am also happy for there to be one final consequence as a result of the CAS hearing. I'm not sure what I said that made you infer that I believed they should carry any additional burden?

You are reading a lot into a post were I simply said "no, he is a drug cheat" in response to "get around him". I think you're lumping me in with the 'baying for blood' group when all I did was apply a 'drug cheat' label to players whom I think it aptly applies to.

I will offer Melksham no support until I am sure that he is not in fact a drug cheat.

The burden is your lack of support.

At what point can he gain it? When he has served his suspension, paid his fine, or the charges are dismissed?

I am honestly asking the question - of those that have a visceral response to this 'cheating' - when do these people become footy players again?

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

The burden is your lack of support.

At what point can he gain it? When he has served his suspension, paid his fine, or the charges are dismissed?

I am honestly asking the question - of those that have a visceral response to this 'cheating' - when do these people become footy players again?

Firstly, I doubt the lack of support of a random forum user who mostly posts in gifs is going to keep Jake awake at night.

Secondly, I will support him if CAS clears him. If CAS does not clear him, he will gain my support after his punishment (whatever that is) is completed.

Reasonable?

[rpfc 28,052]

Firstly, I doubt the lack of support of a random forum user who mostly posts in gifs is going to keep Jake awake at night.

Secondly, I will support him if CAS clears him. If CAS does not clear him, he will gain my support after his punishment (whatever that is) is completed.

Reasonable?

We were talking past each other - I think a lot of people would agree with your stance.

[Willmoy1947 3,971]

What about "guilt on probability" and he plays a bottler and the heart flutters with "by gees he's a good get".

Big conflict....

[Bang Bang Bang 5,776]

This has probably been posted already but here's Melksham putting Lindsay Thomas in his place:

I don't mind that kind of behaviour but there's a time and a place for it. Melksham could have turned a 50/50 shot at goal into a certainty with that macho [censored]. Looks like he gets away with it in this instance.

[watchtheeyes 1,404]

I don't mind that kind of behaviour but there's a time and a place for it. Melksham could have turned a 50/50 shot at goal into a certainty with that macho [censored]. Looks like he gets away with it in this instance.

That just looked like classic Thomas theatrics to me, I'm glad Melksham gave it to him.

[beelzebub 23,200]

Thomas IS a goose...but he sucked Milkshake in.

As others say. Time and place!

[DeeSpencer 24,793]

So if we waited until now we could trade pick 29 for Melksham and keep pick 25.

Small difference, but every inch counts. Could be the difference between picking and missing a star player, like when we wanted Jack Redden and Brisbane pounced and we got Jamie Bennell.

[SaberFang 7,151]

So if we waited until now we could trade pick 29 for Melksham and keep pick 25.

Small difference, but every inch counts. Could be the difference between picking and missing a star player, like when we wanted Jack Redden and Brisbane pounced and we got Jamie Bennell.

Exactly. It's not like anyone else was banging down the door for Melksham at his price, why did we rush into that one with such high currency when we knew we were shopping Toumpas for a lower second rounder?

[Its Time for Another 4,088]

So if we waited until now we could trade pick 29 for Melksham and keep pick 25.

Small difference, but every inch counts. Could be the difference between picking and missing a star player, like when we wanted Jack Redden and Brisbane pounced and we got Jamie Bennell.

Don't think it will make a difference in the end. Either pick would have been used for Bugg. We wouldn't have had either left over.

[Mach5 4,656]

Don't think it will make a difference in the end. Either pick would have been used for Bugg. We wouldn't have had either left over.

I agree.

I don't think we have any designs on keeping this pick anyway, so it's a moot point.

[DeeSpencer 24,793]

Don't think it will make a difference in the end. Either pick would have been used for Bugg. We wouldn't have had either left over.

GWS are all about the points.

So every bit matters to them.

We can offer them 29 and 45 for 22 and Bugg. They might say no.

If we offered 25 and 50 that could be more points.

[Yossarian 1,820]

So if we waited until now we could trade pick 29 for Melksham and keep pick 25.

Small difference, but every inch counts. Could be the difference between picking and missing a star player, like when we wanted Jack Redden and Brisbane pounced and we got Jamie Bennell.

As opposed to the other backup choice in Rory Sloane...

But you make a valid point.