Jump to content

WELCOME TO THE MELBOURNE FOOTBALL CLUB – JAKE MELKSHAM

Theo
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

It appears that Port, Saints and the Dogs, have asked for top up players and for the AFL to make the Bombers pay for their suspended players.

We are noticeable by our absence on both fronts.

I wonder what our tack is?

  • Quote
    •  
    1 minute ago, Redleg said:

    It appears that Port, Saints and the Dogs, have asked for top up players and for the AFL to make the Bombers pay for their suspended players.

    We are noticeable by our absence on both fronts.

    I wonder what our tack is?

    i think we are only absent on the former, redleg

    anyway the afl are yet to (publicly) decide on whether suspended players can be paid and if so, how much

    stay tuned

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    Things might happen/ or not come Feb 10;)

  • Quote
    •  
    6 hours ago, chookrat said:

    Could we just put Melksham in Terlichs number and play him as Terlich. Woukd anyone notice?

    Yes, Melksham can play. Dead give away.

  • Quote
    • Like 4

    5 minutes ago, Good Times Grimes said:

    CAS disagrees with this.

    Now you're being pedantic. Compared to Terlich.....  

     

    But you are so right. That is the price we pay for dealing with the EFC. 

    Edited by ManDee
    typo

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    41 minutes ago, ManDee said:

    Now you're being pedantic. Compared to Terlich.....  

     

    But you are so right. That is the price we pay for dealing with the EFC. 

    The more time goes by without us hearing about the club lobbying for a top-up player for 2016, the more certain I become that we were prepared for this outcome when we began to court Melksham. We've got more than enough solid options down back to cover his loss this season.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
     
    2 minutes ago, Good Times Grimes said:

    The more time goes by without us hearing about the club lobbying for a top-up player for 2016, the more certain I become that we were prepared for this outcome when we began to court Melksham. We've got more than enough solid options down back to cover his loss this season.

    That is my feeling too. We don't need a top up to replace Melksham. We have several players that can do a similar job. Better to upgrade our rookies or Smith, at least we get to keep them. Why waste resources on a player we may never use and have no rights to.

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    Looks like we may be joining the top-up party:  http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-02-02/demons-seek-topup-rookie-for-suspended-melksham?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=RSS+feed%3A+AFL+Latest+News

    But we would upgrade a rookie to our senior list and top up the rookie list to maintain a full list.  However, it seems we are not too fussed:  "It is believed the Demons are in no rush to bring in a new player in place of Melksham, with the club under the impression the player would be inadequately prepared from a fitness point of view, as well as being behind in understanding the club's game plan". 

    As Melksham was never really there, we are not going to miss him...its more a case of keeping the overall numbers topped up.

  • Quote

    52 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

    Looks like we may be joining the top-up party:  http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-02-02/demons-seek-topup-rookie-for-suspended-melksham?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=RSS+feed%3A+AFL+Latest+News

    But we would upgrade a rookie to our senior list and top up the rookie list to maintain a full list.  However, it seems we are not too fussed:  "It is believed the Demons are in no rush to bring in a new player in place of Melksham, with the club under the impression the player would be inadequately prepared from a fitness point of view, as well as being behind in understanding the club's game plan". 

    As Melksham was never really there, we are not going to miss him...its more a case of keeping the overall numbers topped up.

    This is precisely what confronts the crowd at Tullamarine.

    Edited by iv'a worn smith

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    51 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

    Looks like we may be joining the top-up party:  http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-02-02/demons-seek-topup-rookie-for-suspended-melksham?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=RSS+feed%3A+AFL+Latest+News

    But we would upgrade a rookie to our senior list and top up the rookie list to maintain a full list.  However, it seems we are not too fussed:  "It is believed the Demons are in no rush to bring in a new player in place of Melksham, with the club under the impression the player would be inadequately prepared from a fitness point of view, as well as being behind in understanding the club's game plan". 

    As Melksham was never really there, we are not going to miss him...its more a case of keeping the overall numbers topped up.

    This makes me think we possibly have a VFL/SANFL/WAFL player in our sights but who knows.

  • Quote
    17 hours ago, beelzebub said:

    Things might happen/ or not come Feb 10;)

    The only certainty is that the day before will have been the 9th.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    7 hours ago, Good Times Grimes said:

    The more time goes by without us hearing about the club lobbying for a top-up player for 2016, the more certain I become that we were prepared for this outcome when we began to court Melksham. We've got more than enough solid options down back to cover his loss this season.

    But Casey will have lost a player. That is unfair.

  • Quote
    7 minutes ago, Redleg said:

    But Casey will have lost a player. That is unfair.

    You're right, I wasn't considering Casey. 

    I can't wait for the footy to actually start so that we can move past this whole mess.

  • Quote

    Looks like the AFL is holding off making a call on the other clubs being allowed a topup player until Essendon has had their pick of the pack. We may then get to choose from what is left. While we may be looking for a rookie, I would assume that we would be constrained by the same rules as Essendon, i.e. only pick an ex player who has left the game in the last 2 years. 

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    So given the MFC now want to add a top up player to the rookie list rather than the primary and they have also stated that getting late in the pre-season for a new player to learn the game plan. 

    Putting 1 + 1 together gets you Daniel Cross. He knows the game plan, is still super fit, training with the team and could be brought in if injuries are worse than hoped for. Also I like the completing the circle aspect with Daniel handing over the number 18 to Jake who then hands it back to Daniel who then gives it back at the end of the year.. 

  • Quote
    • Like 3

    There goes the argument mfc were all good with getting duped.

    We've just timed it better. Progress I suppose :rolleyes:

  • Quote
    17 hours ago, Redleg said:

    But Casey will have lost a player. That is unfair.

    If we draft a Casey player in Feb onto the Rookie List - they will invariably play for Casey...

  • Quote
    • 2 weeks later...

    Article in the hun about Melksham. 

    In short we pay 4 months Essendon pays the rest although we dont have to pay anything under industrial law. It was unclear if we are going to pay anything though as it also said we havent paid him since his ban and wont until his return. 

    Roos has spoken to him a quite a few times and suggests he take an extended break from training and football and recharges the batteries. Roos said he should ramp up his training in June July so he is ready for his return in September. 

    Does that constitute training from the club while banned? Would hate to lose him for another year because we spoke to a journo!

  • Quote

    18 minutes ago, Chris said:

    Article in the hun about Melksham. 

    In short we pay 4 months Essendon pays the rest although we dont have to pay anything under industrial law. It was unclear if we are going to pay anything though as it also said we havent paid him since his ban and wont until his return. 

    Roos has spoken to him a quite a few times and suggests he take an extended break from training and football and recharges the batteries. Roos said he should ramp up his training in June July so he is ready for his return in September. 

    Does that constitute training from the club while banned? Would hate to lose him for another year because we spoke to a journo!

    hmmmm. dunno. presume/hope roosy would have checked it out

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    2 hours ago, Chris said:

    Article in the hun about Melksham. 

    In short we pay 4 months Essendon pays the rest although we dont have to pay anything under industrial law. It was unclear if we are going to pay anything though as it also said we havent paid him since his ban and wont until his return. 

    Roos has spoken to him a quite a few times and suggests he take an extended break from training and football and recharges the batteries. Roos said he should ramp up his training in June July so he is ready for his return in September. 

    Does that constitute training from the club while banned? Would hate to lose him for another year because we spoke to a journo!

    Think that's a bit of a long bow Chris. If he's not at the club and not training with the others or by an employee of the club, it's highly unlikely that a conversation about taking a break from footy before getting back into it would be in breach of the code.

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    What you just said is perfectly logical Moonshadow. However the AFL just deemed Heppel was only attending the Kia event as they were his "personal" sponsors. The AFL Integrity Commission ;) will probably investigate us fully over this.

     

    </sarcasm font>

     

  • Quote
    •  

    What happens when Heppell has his monthly Footy Show appearances representing the club? How is that fair?

  • Quote
    54 minutes ago, SaberFang said:

    What happens when Heppell has his monthly Footy Show appearances representing the club? How is that fair?

    You are expecting fair?

  • Quote

    • 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.

        • 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? 

        • Like
      • 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?

        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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.

        • 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

        • Sad
        • Like
      • 31 replies
      Demonland
    View All