12 minutes ago, Diamond said:

How about this crap from the AFL website: under the heading of “The 24 must watch games of 2018”:

Round one, Richmond v Carlton
MCG, Thursday night

“This looms as the biggest season opener Richmond and Carlton have faced off in since it became a traditional clash. The Tigers will unveil their flag to their faithful supporters, who will probably still be delirious. It will also be the first time the teams have played since Bachar Houli left Jed Lamb unconscious after collecting the Blue with his left forearm in round 14. “

WHAT???

The 2017 premiers vs a team that finished in the bottom 4??

How is this a must watch game? 

Pumping up their own tyres, got to make it look good on paper. And to be fair both teams fans turn out for it. 

Obviously this point is....well pointless for most, but personally Sunday Arvo’s are the worst time slot for me living in the UK. Was really hoping for some more night games so I could watch the Dees at a better time. 

Lets make the finals next year and demand more coverage. Carlton getting 4 Friday nights is a bonafide joke. 

4 hours ago, Diamond said:

How about this crap from the AFL website: under the heading of “The 24 must watch games of 2018”:

Round one, Richmond v Carlton
MCG, Thursday night

“This looms as the biggest season opener Richmond and Carlton have faced off in since it became a traditional clash. The Tigers will unveil their flag to their faithful supporters, who will probably still be delirious. It will also be the first time the teams have played since Bachar Houli left Jed Lamb unconscious after collecting the Blue with his left forearm in round 14. “

WHAT???

The 2017 premiers vs a team that finished in the bottom 4??

How is this a must watch game? 

Out of the "24 must watch games" Carlton is listed 4 times. 

Geelong vs Carlton at the Cattery is another.

The article is one of opinion though but FMD!

 

 

7 hours ago, DaveyDee said:

I'm going for the old conspiracy theory - this year will be Jacksons last - so the AFL is prepared to test the water and see if we are capable of standing on our own two feet. 

If we smash memberships and crowd numbers this year they will allow us to elect our own CEO and board.

We've always elected our own board's and we've always stood on our own 2 feet ... I'm not sure where you get your information from.

PJ was recommended to us by the AFL and we duly appointed him.  We did receive a one-off grant of 1.4 million dollars in early 2013  but that's it.  As a comparison Port Adelaide were helped out to the tune of 14 million because of their lousy stadium deal with footy park.  Various other clubs have received large handouts as well in comparison. 

For further information read our annual reports.  I don't believe the scuttlebutt and innuendo from those with obvious agenda's - most of it is lies.

11 hours ago, Diamond said:

The evening before Anzac Day is akin to a Friday evening game. People will go because they have the next day off work.

Get there early next year Diamond, I reckon the G will be full. 

5 hours ago, monoccular said:

If PJ is to agree to an extension on f the NT deal, I believe one absolute stipulation must be that the Darwin game is always without question played prior to a bye. 

There can be no reason other than AFL bloody mindedness that we never get our bye after that game, and we are always stuffed after it.  (I haven’t done any analysis of our opponents’ performances the following week)

The Alice Springs game is really no more taxing, maybe less so, than a trip to Adelaide, Perth, Sydnet or Brisbane so a bye after that is no big deal. 

The bye should happen after Darwin but I think I'm right in saying that we won our immediate game after the Darwin game last year. 

That might also have something to do with our improved list

But I do agree with your view. 

11 hours ago, A F said:

The punctuation in that link hurts me.

The content therein, not so much. Concur greatly, unfortunately.

I'm more troubled by the spelling..."to" when it should be "too".

1 minute ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I'm more troubled by the spelling..."to" when it should be "too".

I'm not too, to, 2, two concerned...

was listening to MMM this morning and they had Gill on, he said that because Anzac Day falls mid week it takes a couple of weeks for the teams to catch up, and that MFC requested both NT games to be played on a Sunday ( I presume so they can go early and do community work etc)

Reading between the lines I think this prevents prime time slots so that they can minimise short breaks. I haven't looked to see how this effects Coll, Ess and Richmond )

probably doesn't 

12 hours ago, Spirit of '87 said:

McLachlan's comment about Carlton being allocated 4 Friday night games:

"There's clearly a bit of risk in them if you took the end of 2017 (as a guide on their form next season) but I think Carlton are building a strong team and they're well coached."

The inference from that comment would be that in contrast, Melbourne, despite coming off 12 wins and finishing ninth, are not building a strong team and are not well coached, therefore warrant only 1 Friday night game! 

And giving Carlton 4 games is based on the AFL's somewhat subjective and speculative assessment of Carlton's "strong team", being "well coached" and how they'll go next year. 

I don't know whether McLachlan was being interviewed or whether this comment was in a written statement. But if he was being properly  interviewed, he should have been asked, "So, which teams are not well coached? And who is not building a strong team?" Unfortunately, apart from a couple of proper journalists, AFL HQ gets away with spouting such nonsense because most AFL accredited media are too scared to ask critical questions like these for fear of missing a seat on the gravy train. 

Or they're too stupid.

Or both.

8 minutes ago, rjay said:

I'm not too, to, 2, two concerned...

So said Julius Caesar when querying Brutus.

9 hours ago, bandicoot said:

Essendon are coming off a 4 day break.... 

loss??? Our manic game style suits etihad. 

Yes fair enough, i didnt realize they had a short break as well. Etihad is our new home ground granted, they play well there tho. Lets hope we smash em!

9 hours ago, DaveyDee said:

I'm going for the old conspiracy theory - this year will be Jacksons last - so the AFL is prepared to test the water and see if we are capable of standing on our own two feet. 

If we smash memberships and crowd numbers this year they will allow us to elect our own CEO and board. 

If we return poor membership numbers and crowds AFL will install another nominated professional football administrator ( AKA PJ mark 2 ) and no vote for the members in the composition of the board.  

Fun times ahead. 

I don't mind a good conspiracy but alas this one sounds shonky. Then again that could be the AFLs motto.

The dlckheads have just handed us an abysmal fixture should one be hoping to build attendence or membership.

Someone else duly and poignantly observed it's a blueprint for buy a 3game membership !!

Think we'll do well if we can keep 40k.

When even the senile rag openly questions overlooking us for prime time you just know the fix is in.

There's your real conspiracy !!

1 hour ago, Macca said:

We've always elected our own board's and we've always stood on our own 2 feet ... I'm not sure where you get your information from.

PJ was recommended to us by the AFL and we duly appointed him.  We did receive a one-off grant of 1.4 million dollars in early 2013  but that's it.  As a comparison Port Adelaide were helped out to the tune of 14 million because of their lousy stadium deal with footy park.  Various other clubs have received large handouts as well in comparison. 

For further information read our annual reports.  I don't believe the scuttlebutt and innuendo from those with obvious agenda's - most of it is lies.

Your naivety is quite funny - you need to take your rose coloured glasses off. MFC would not exist today if it were not for AFL support.

"Recommended" - yeah right. You clearly dont understand how the AFL work. Just for the record they also "recommended" our board. 

"We did receive a one-off grant of 1.4 million dollars" - With no strings attached ??? cough, cough. 

Get real Macca you read the annual reports - they are a lovely set of numbers now we have an AFL appointed CEO and an AFL approved board. Long may it continue. 

5 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

I don't mind a good conspiracy but alas this one sounds shonky. Then again that could be the AFLs motto.

The dlckheads have just handed us an abysmal fixture should one be hoping to build attendence or membership.

Someone else duly and poignantly observed it's a blueprint for buy a 3game membership !!

Think we'll do well if we can keep 40k.

When even the senile rag openly questions overlooking us for prime time you just know the fix is in.

There's your real conspiracy !!

I never know whether to laugh, cry or cringe when I see MFC supporters take on and openly get stuck into the  AFL - you would think we had just won a premiership. Smart man once said never bite the hand that feeds you. 

1 hour ago, DaveyDee said:

Your naivety is quite funny - you need to take your rose coloured glasses off. MFC would not exist today if it were not for AFL support.

"Recommended" - yeah right. You clearly dont understand how the AFL work. Just for the record they also "recommended" our board. 

"We did receive a one-off grant of 1.4 million dollars" - With no strings attached ??? cough, cough. 

Get real Macca you read the annual reports - they are a lovely set of numbers now we have an AFL appointed CEO and an AFL approved board. Long may it continue. 

No, I am not naive at all.

You've just bought into a popular narrative. 

If you are so sure of your information then you need to provide the proof. 

So,  provide the proof and back up your accusations.

Actual proof too ... not "I heard this" or "I heard that"

For instance,  I can provide a link to that 14 million dollar grant given to Port Adelaide.

And all our board elections have been ratified at the AGM's. 

I don't listen to heresay & scuttlebutt

 

 

Edited November 1, 20177 yr by Macca

18 hours ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Crap drawer.

 Sponsors nightmare.  

Why not even one Friday or Saturday night home game.  FFS. AFL on some kind of agenda.  

Our finals start round 21. Need to be 13 wins 6 losses by this point. 

Do you use that instead of a toilet?

12 hours ago, A F said:

The punctuation in that link hurts me.

The content therein, not so much. Concur greatly, unfortunately.

For those that think it doesn't matter, this is why punctuation is important......

 

42 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

I don't mind a good conspiracy but alas this one sounds shonky. Then again that could be the AFLs motto.

The dlckheads have just handed us an abysmal fixture should one be hoping to build attendence or membership.

Someone else duly and poignantly observed it's a blueprint for buy a 3game membership !!

Think we'll do well if we can keep 40k.

When even the senile rag openly questions overlooking us for prime time you just know the fix is in.

There's your real conspiracy !!

This attitude has irritated me for the last 12+ years.

Hope to build membership?  You do realise that people buy memberships regardless of how many games they go to?  I lived in Qld for 10 years, could count on one hand how many games I went to in that time where I used my membership.  Didn't stop me from being a member though.  It's called supporting your club.

And this rubbish about building attendance - there is one secret ingredient to building attendance for the MFC, it's called success.  For us, it comes in different forms, from playing a good quality/brand of competitive footy, to seeing W's on the board.  We are a loyal bunch, we've had to be.  If we are up and about, our supporters go to any games, at any time, on any day, providing it's our home game, and it's at our MCG.

Too many Melbourne supporters are conditional supporters, which is understandable as we've also had too many players that are conditional players.  

Edited October 31, 20177 yr by The Chazz

35 minutes ago, DaveyDee said:

Your naivety is quite funny - you need to take your rose coloured glasses off. MFC would not exist today if it were not for AFL support.

"Recommended" - yeah right. You clearly dont understand how the AFL work. Just for the record they also "recommended" our board. 

"We did receive a one-off grant of 1.4 million dollars" - With no strings attached ??? cough, cough. 

Get real Macca you read the annual reports - they are a lovely set of numbers now we have an AFL appointed CEO and an AFL approved board. Long may it continue. 

I am not getting into the prime time debate but am annoyed at your statement that we wouldn't be here without the AFL. Well actually it's the other way round. WE started footy and the AFL exist s because of the clubs. 

A rigged fixture stops all clubs  having the same chance to earn income. Therefore there has to be adjustments. Actually Carlton and StKilda get a bigger AFL grant each year than we do. 

I am sick to death of the ridiculous argument that when we are good enough we will get a better draw. It is just plainly wrong. The AFL do whatever they want whenever they want. Carlton have not played at Geelong in 10 years, we have 9 out of the last 10. I don't think Pies have either. Geelong at Geelong is basically an automatic loss of 4 points to the away team. No home game against Bombers in 12 years why? The prime time issue is just another inconsistenty issue created by the AFL. 

The AFL despite what some believe, is not being held accountable by the clubs. 

We are a game driven by money not fairness.

2 minutes ago, Redleg said:

We are a game driven by money not fairness.

Well said.

We have a game driven by business acumen and money - the AFL have a supporter base driven by emotion.

Long may it continue. 

15 minutes ago, The Chazz said:

This attitude has irritated me for the last 12+ years.

Hope to build membership?  You do realise that people buy memberships regardless of how many games they go to?  I lived in Qld for 10 years, could count on one hand how many games I went to in that time where I used my membership.  Didn't stop me from being a member though.  It's called supporting your club.

And this rubbish about building attendance - there is one secret ingredient to building attendance for the MFC, it's called success.  For us, it comes in different forms, from playing a good quality/brand of competitive footy, to seeing W's on the board.  We are a loyal bunch, we've had to be.  If we are up and about, our supporters go to any games, at any time, on any day, providing it's our home game, and it's at our MCG.

Too many Melbourne supporters are conditional supporters, which is understandable as we've also had too many players that are conditional players.  

Within your commentary you actually provide proof of my narrative.

If you can differentiate you'd get it.

8 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Within your commentary you actually provide proof of my narrative.

If you can differentiate you'd get it.

You claim that our '18 fixture is abysmal from an attendance and membership point of view.  Wrong.

Members should, and many do, sign up regardless of fixture.  If someone doesn't sign up because of our fixture, then they are more fickle than I first thought.

Attendance should continue to build as this group gets better.  They players don't GAF what time they play a game, and the time of the game has nothing to do with their chances of success.  The more success they have, the more our crowds, irrespective of game day/time, will grow.  

We have early success this year, which I think this fixture has definitely set us up to achieve, then memberships and attendance will take care of itself.

As a side note, in;

2018 - 14 games in Melbourne, 11 at the MCG

2017 - 14 games in Melbourne, 12 at the MCG

2016 - 14 games in Melbourne, 12 at the MCG

Yep, we are soooooooo hard done by in 2018.  FMD.

38 minutes ago, Redleg said:

I am not getting into the prime time debate but am annoyed at your statement that we wouldn't be here without the AFL. Well actually it's the other way round. WE started footy and the AFL exist s because of the clubs. 

A rigged fixture stops all clubs  having the same chance to earn income. Therefore there has to be adjustments. Actually Carlton and StKilda get a bigger AFL grant each year than we do. 

I am sick to death of the ridiculous argument that when we are good enough we will get a better draw. It is just plainly wrong. The AFL do whatever they want whenever they want. Carlton have not played at Geelong in 10 years, we have 9 out of the last 10. I don't think Pies have either. Geelong at Geelong is basically an automatic loss of 4 points to the away team. No home game against Bombers in 12 years why? The prime time issue is just another inconsistenty issue created by the AFL. 

The AFL despite what some believe, is not being held accountable by the clubs. 

We are a game driven by money not fairness.

So very true Redleg.

I have been trying to explain that success in itself will not deliver a sound club.

As you know the AFL/VFL as we now know it came about when the clubs were on their knees. They have done  a very good job but the incessant pursuit of money (called fan satisfaction or the like) means that the lesser 4 Vic clubs will always be there just to make up the numbers.

2 hours ago, beelzebub said:

I don't mind a good conspiracy but alas this one sounds shonky. Then again that could be the AFLs motto.

The dlckheads have just handed us an abysmal fixture should one be hoping to build attendence or membership.

Someone else duly and poignantly observed it's a blueprint for buy a 3game membership !!

Think we'll do well if we can keep 40k.

When even the senile rag openly questions overlooking us for prime time you just know the fix is in.

There's your real conspiracy !!

I'm interested to know which parts of the fixture you consider abysmal for building crowds and memberships?  Is it a particular time slot?  Ie Sunday at 3.30pm? 

 

33 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

So very true Redleg.

I have been trying to explain that success in itself will not deliver a sound club.

As you know the AFL/VFL as we now know it came about when the clubs were on their knees. They have done  a very good job but the incessant pursuit of money (called fan satisfaction or the like) means that the lesser 4 Vic clubs will always be there just to make up the numbers.

And maybe the 4 lesser clubs in Melbourne need to find a way to fight back.  Yesterday I proposed here on this thread that a joint venture could be put to the AFL by the 4 clubs with regards to Friday night or Saturday night games on free-to-air. 

Do nothing and we can expect more of the same.