Jump to content

WELCOME TO THE MELBOURNE FOOTBALL CLUB – JAKE MELKSHAM

Theo
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

4 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Coming from a long way back

with no elite facilities or coaches....

Overrated 

  • Quote
    •  
    16 minutes ago, stuie said:

    Haha oh you're so reading my mind "Curry & Beer"....

    I actually take a grown up approach to it and say that he did the wrong thing, he's copping his punishment and then I look forward to him coming back and contributing to the MFC.

    You can keep your temper tantrums, fist shaking and moral superiority to the confines of the playground.

     

    = you're 'cool with cheating'. That's OK for you to have that position. You don't have to just be contrary for the sake of it, to the extent you are actually contradicting yourself.

    you didn't say those exact words, but everyone on this site understands that is OK to claim that that summarises your position. You don't have to quote someone exactly, it's called 'paraphrasing'. See how Wiseblood shares your general POV, but he was able to articulate his argument in a way that makes a conversation function properly, and doesn't make a thread full of ridiculous circular pedantry? and as a result, he doesn't have a bunch of posters wanting to pull their hair out?

  • Quote
    19 minutes ago, Curry & Beer said:

    my god. wtf. First of all, I thought most people understand that you don't have to be an AFL footballer yourself in order to comment on AFL footy. Otherwise the whole site should be closed now. Secondly, can you read? Stuie is claiming that a 4-year contract is some sort of 'proof' that Roos and Co knew he was going to get rubbed out. That is obviously complete bullpoo. How does that match your comment? At what stage has anyone questioned Melksham as a player? Seriously you should re-read the posts and apologise, you've completely misfired.

    oh and of course stuie likes it. Another poster completely misses the point and he scores it as somebody supporting him. Weak and desperate and typical.

    3 hours ago, stuie said:

    Exactly. A 4 year contract is a pretty clear indicator of that too.

     

     

    3 hours ago, Curry & Beer said:

    it's not an indicator of a goddam thing

    I think it is an indicator that he is a better footballer than you, what was the longest contract offered to you?

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

     

    You said   "it's not an indicator of a goddam thing"

     

    Clearly it is an indicator the the football department thought he was worth it.

    Seriously you should re-read the posts and apologise, you've completely misfired.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
     
    18 minutes ago, stuie said:

    Hahahaha this is the best. I love it that your post starts with "my god. WTF" and then has a hissy fit about other people getting "likes" before going for the teenage girl insults at the end.

    What a drama queen.

    Totes amazeballs. #YOLO

     

     

    is that all youve got? weak personal attack and no argument even attempted. explain to me what you 'liked' about mandee's ridiculously poor reading of a conversation and how it backs up your melksham argument. this'll be good. in fact, don't do it.

  • Quote
    45 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

    Can someone please make clear what the penalty against Melksham means with respect to the following:

    • is he allowed at the club's rooms (eg, gym) when the rest of the team or club officials are not there?
    • is he allowed to see any of the club's officials (eg, physio, dietitian, etc) away from the club rooms?
    • can he maintain fitness by playing in any other football competition other than the AFL or VFL?
    • can he maintain fitness by playing any other non-football competition (eg, basketball) if he's good enough to do so?

    PS: And can Stuie, SWYL, C&B etc, take it outside and stop hijacking this thread.

     

     

    no

    no

    no

    not sure

  • Quote

    1 minute ago, ManDee said:

     

    I think it is an indicator that he is a better footballer than you, what was the longest contract offered to you?

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

     

    You said   "it's not an indicator of a goddam thing"

     

    Clearly it is an indicator the the football department thought he was worth it.

    Seriously you should re-read the posts and apologise, you've completely misfired.

    ah so you agree with stuie's absurd position that a 4 year contract is proof we knew he would be rubbed out for a year and we didnt care

  • Quote
    1 minute ago, Curry & Beer said:

    is that all youve got? weak personal attack and no argument even attempted. explain to me what you 'liked' about mandee's ridiculously poor reading of a conversation and how it backs up your melksham argument. this'll be good. in fact, don't do it.

    Take a chill pill Curry.

     

    3 hours ago, stuie said:

    Exactly. A 4 year contract is a pretty clear indicator of that too.

     

    You said  Curry & Beer  "it's not an indicator of a goddam thing"

     

    Well my friend it is a very good indicator of several things, including that the football department thought he was worth it. No doubt you will ignore this fact as it does not suit your argument which is I might say more intent on character assassination than informed comment. If you were to try some of your own suggestions perhaps we would all be better off.

     

     

     

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    20 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

    no

    no

    no

    not sure

    Fairly sure he can not play any sport that is under the WADA code. So the last questions is a no with a qualifier of he can play non WADA sports. 

  • Quote
    • Like 1
     

    Good to see this thread has descended into the normal crap that goes on at Demonland. Thankfully the few other threads I visit seem to somehow be immune. Will leave you all to it and make sure you have fun!

  • Quote

    I was a bit surprised when Lloyd on Footy Classified said that the Dees wouldn't be disadvantaged because Melksham is just a depth player. I don't think that is how we see it- you don't give depth players 4 year contracts. Smacks of sour grapes to me. Lloyd hasn't disconnected enough from Essendrug to provide credible commentary 

  • Quote
    • Like 4

    14 minutes ago, chook fowler said:

    I was a bit surprised when Lloyd on Footy Classified said that the Dees wouldn't be disadvantaged because Melksham is just a depth player. I don't think that is how we see it- you don't give depth players 4 year contracts. Smacks of sour grapes to me. Lloyd hasn't disconnected enough from Essendrug to provide credible commentary 

    Yes chook I was also watching at that time. Thought it quite bizarre. Didn't quite know what Lloyd was getting at but there seemed more to it than simply a "professional" judgement.

  • Quote
    18 minutes ago, chook fowler said:

    I was a bit surprised when Lloyd on Footy Classified said that the Dees wouldn't be disadvantaged because Melksham is just a depth player. I don't think that is how we see it- you don't give depth players 4 year contracts. Smacks of sour grapes to me. Lloyd hasn't disconnected enough from Essendrug to provide credible commentary 

    Actually, the Lloyd view is complimentary. If Melksham is "depth" we must have a better team than I thought we had. I don't think there would be too many arguments here that he's a lot better as a depth player than Bail, McKenzie, Riley, or even Matt Jones and Terlich.

  • Quote
    23 minutes ago, chook fowler said:

    I was a bit surprised when Lloyd on Footy Classified said that the Dees wouldn't be disadvantaged because Melksham is just a depth player. I don't think that is how we see it- you don't give depth players 4 year contracts. Smacks of sour grapes to me. Lloyd hasn't disconnected enough from Essendrug to provide credible commentary 

    As a commentator Lloyd is hopeless he has never been able to change from an EFC player to a commentator.

    His comments are always tainted by his obvious bias.

    I never listen to him.

  • Quote
    • Like 6
    29 minutes ago, Chris said:

    Fairly sure he can not play any sport that is under the WADA code. So the last questions is a no with a qualifier of he can play non WADA sports. 

    On current performance, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Gill took the AFL out of WADA merely so that EFC effectively did not have to incur their penalties. As it is, with top-up players etc they are trying to minimise the hurt as much as possible. If they did this, then Melksham and the others would be able to play this year also.

  • Quote
    Just now, CBDees said:

    On current performance, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Gill took the AFL out of WADA merely so that EFC effectively did not have to incur their penalties. As it is, with top-up players etc they are trying to minimise the hurt as much as possible. If they did this, then Melksham and the others would be able to play this year also.

    i'd be more than surprised, i'd be gobsmacked. no chance at all

  • Quote

    30 minutes ago, chook fowler said:

    I was a bit surprised when Lloyd on Footy Classified said that the Dees wouldn't be disadvantaged because Melksham is just a depth player. I don't think that is how we see it- you don't give depth players 4 year contracts. Smacks of sour grapes to me. Lloyd hasn't disconnected enough from Essendrug to provide credible commentary 

    Theres your first mistake.. taking Matthew Lloyd too serious. The guy is an absolute [censored] who can't take his bias essendon jumper off. I take more pleasure listening to Caro then this idiot.

    Edited by dazzledavey36

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    12 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

    i'd be more than surprised, i'd be gobsmacked. no chance at all

    That is IMO not going to happen with the Federal government breathing down their necks.

    $millions of concessions would not be past on.

    If they think they are in a bad spot with the EFC now it would produce ten time the crap and loss of money.

    Won't happen.

    There is a lot of posturing going on at present.

    By the end of February sanity will have returned.

    Edited by old dee

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    1 hour ago, Curry & Beer said:

    = you're 'cool with cheating'. That's OK for you to have that position. You don't have to just be contrary for the sake of it, to the extent you are actually contradicting yourself.

    you didn't say those exact words, but everyone on this site understands that is OK to claim that that summarises your position. You don't have to quote someone exactly, it's called 'paraphrasing'. See how Wiseblood shares your general POV, but he was able to articulate his argument in a way that makes a conversation function properly, and doesn't make a thread full of ridiculous circular pedantry? and as a result, he doesn't have a bunch of posters wanting to pull their hair out?

    There's so much more to it than this simplistic view and you know it.  Personally, and I can speak for others as well, I'm not okay with anyone cheating, and Melksham was part of that and he will serve his suspension. 

    Then he will get a second chance at turning his career around in the red and blue and I'm more than happy to give him an opportunity to do so.  If anything I hope sitting out this year really spurs him on and he becomes a really integral player for us off the half back line.  Sitting out for a year is punishment enough.

  • Quote
    • Like 4
    1 hour ago, stuie said:

    Hahahahahaha and now I have to explain to you why I "liked" someones post? Wow, you actually are an insecure teenage drama queen...

     

    hmm funny, you've avoided answering the question again, how strange

  • Quote

    just like Liam would be welcomed back too, his time served...

  • Quote
    1 hour ago, ManDee said:

    Take a chill pill Curry.

     

    You said  Curry & Beer  "it's not an indicator of a goddam thing"

     

    Well my friend it is a very good indicator of several things, including that the football department thought he was worth it. No doubt you will ignore this fact as it does not suit your argument which is I might say more intent on character assassination than informed comment. If you were to try some of your own suggestions perhaps we would all be better off.

    it is not an indicator of what stuie said it was. That's what I was replying to.

    you didnt answer this

    'ah so you agree with stuie's absurd position that a 4 year contract is proof we knew he would be rubbed out for a year and we didnt care ?'

    i assume you dont agree with that which means you are arguing with me about nothing

    Can you stop talking to me now, stuie doesn't doesn't need some follower missing the point

  • Quote
    8 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

    There's so much more to it than this simplistic view and you know it.  Personally, and I can speak for others as well, I'm not okay with anyone cheating, and Melksham was part of that and he will serve his suspension. 

    Then he will get a second chance at turning his career around in the red and blue and I'm more than happy to give him an opportunity to do so.  If anything I hope sitting out this year really spurs him on and he becomes a really integral player for us off the half back line.  Sitting out for a year is punishment enough.

    why have you made this post? I have already acknowledged that unlike stuie, your position is valid and adequately reasoned. I don't want him to have that chance. He is Essendon scum who has been caught cheating. This is the point we disagree on as I've already made clear.

  • Quote
    •  
    Just now, Curry & Beer said:

    why have you made this post? I have already acknowledged that unlike stuie, your position is valid and adequately reasoned. I don't want him to have that chance. He is Essendon scum who has been caught cheating. This is the point we disagree on as I've already made clear.

    Fair enough mate.  We will have to agree to disagree.  Cheers.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    2 minutes ago, Curry & Beer said:

    it is not an indicator of what stuie said it was. That's what I was replying to.

    you didnt answer this

    'ah so you agree with stuie's absurd position that a 4 year contract is proof we knew he would be rubbed out for a year and we didnt care ?'

    i assume you dont agree with that which means you are arguing with me about nothing

    Can you stop talking to me now, stuie doesn't doesn't need some follower missing the point

    it's not worth arguing it c&b

    at the agm the question was asked about milkshake and the answer was "at worst case we expect it would only be a few games" (paraphrasing)

    end of discussion. we miscalculated and got burnt.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    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...
    Go to topic listing

    Featured Content

    • 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
      Demonland

    • 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
      Demonland

    • 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
      • 154 replies
      Demonland

    • PODCAST: St. Kilda

      The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 2nd June @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we have a chat with former Demon ruckman Jeff White about his YouTube channel First Use where he dissects ruck setups and contests. We'll then discuss the Dees disappointing loss to the Saints in Alice Springs.
      Your 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.
      Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/

        • Thanks
      • 42 replies
      Demonland

    • POSTGAME: St. Kilda

      After kicking the first goal of the match the Demons were always playing catch up against the Saints in Alice Spring and could never make the most of their inside 50 entries to wrestle back the lead.

        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 327 replies
      Demonland

    • VOTES: St. Kilda

      Max Gawn still has a massive lead in the Demonland Player of the Year award as Christian Petracca, Jake Bowey, Clayton Oliver & Kozzy Pickett round out the Top 5. Your votes please. 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 & 1

        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 31 replies
      Demonland
    View All