Jump to content

Featured Replies

God it is nice to be on the other side of this conversation...

 
10 hours ago, RalphiusMaximus said:

It's Carlton.  They get special rules just for them.  Bonus Friday night games, priority picks, immunity from investigation even when one of their coaches comes out and says they tanked to get Kreuzer... 

I wouldn't be surprised if they wound up with the top three picks this year. 

I get so tired and worn out hoping that the AFL would at least try and attempt to be fair in their handling of the competition. 

They invent a reason for every baffling decision.

 

32 minutes ago, Redleg said:

I get so tired and worn out hoping that the AFL would at least try and attempt to be fair in their handling of the competition. 

They invent a reason for every baffling decision.

 

Their motivation is $$ no matter what they say publicly.

A strong Carlron is more $

 
  • Author
11 minutes ago, Unleash Hell said:

Their motivation is $$ no matter what they say publicly.

A strong Carlron is more $

You're right and this is why we should use every tactic we can to move past Carlton while they're down.

Chances like this do not come along often.

I love how Neil skips over the fact we didn’t get a priority pick and links us giving up an AA fullback as the same thing. 

We did receive pick three but too much has been made of the pick that is received by the media. The AFL (correctly IMO) linked the pick to the clubs current draft position. This was to over compensate a club at the bottom, if the top echelon clubs continued to pick off their free agents. 

 

 


34 minutes ago, Unleash Hell said:

Their motivation is $$ no matter what they say publicly.

A strong Carlron is more $

What a lot of younger AFL Supporters don’t quite understand. 

There is a lot of money ? still connected to Carlscum, the AFL are well aware

They want Carlscum back up near the top. 

The treatment of Chris Judd tells everything. The guy eye goughed opponents and still won Brownlows

We have no reason to complain about other clubs getting a helping hand.

Without AFL assistance we may not even be around. 

21 minutes ago, hemingway said:

We have no reason to complain about other clubs getting a helping hand.

Without AFL assistance we may not even be around. 

thanks, dr who

 
20 minutes ago, hemingway said:

We have no reason to complain about other clubs getting a helping hand.

Without AFL assistance we may not even be around. 

Fair point, but I also think this is about some sort of appropriate justice - that is fairness in how the rules are applied.  No one came out and wanted us to get anything after 186, we were just pilloried as a terrible club with lots of problems.  Carlton lose by 109 to us, and all of a sudden everyone wants to give them a leg up.  

But I get it, they are the ‘mighty blues’.  If it is not paper Visy bags, then it needs to be something else.  They have recruited terribly, fed off the dregs of GWS (Grand Sale, Grand Sale!) and been shyte for ages.  I would only be happier if the bombers had the length of suffering that these buggers have.

Honestly, a few additional draft picks are probably not going to make a difference.  I think they need to boot SIlvagni and change some of their admin.  I think Bolton could be a good coach, and there is enough talent in just Cripps and the Curnow boys to build a team around.  They just need to get their heads out of their arses.

I think assistance is appropraite where necessary, but think they have the ability to carry a couple more seasons before they need to be rescued by the AFL.  I would think Gold Coast needs a lot more than these buggers in terms of assistance right now.

32 minutes ago, hemingway said:

We have no reason to complain about other clubs getting a helping hand.

Without AFL assistance we may not even be around. 

That’s true but I don’t believe it was the AFL’s nostalgic desire to "save the oldest football club in the world" but rather because they had signed a media deal to provide 9 games a week.

I think the only bit of decent timing we had over that time was not to have our near death experience in the last year of that deal. 

Pretty much the prlcks had no choice but to throw out the life bouy 


3 hours ago, buck_nekkid said:

Fair point, but I also think this is about some sort of appropriate justice - that is fairness in how the rules are applied.  No one came out and wanted us to get anything after 186, we were just pilloried as a terrible club with lots of problems.  Carlton lose by 109 to us, and all of a sudden everyone wants to give them a leg up.  

But I get it, they are the ‘mighty blues’.  If it is not paper Visy bags, then it needs to be something else.  They have recruited terribly, fed off the dregs of GWS (Grand Sale, Grand Sale!) and been shyte for ages.  I would only be happier if the bombers had the length of suffering that these buggers have.

Honestly, a few additional draft picks are probably not going to make a difference.  I think they need to boot SIlvagni and change some of their admin.  I think Bolton could be a good coach, and there is enough talent in just Cripps and the Curnow boys to build a team around.  They just need to get their heads out of their arses.

I think assistance is appropraite where necessary, but think they have the ability to carry a couple more seasons before they need to be rescued by the AFL.  I would think Gold Coast needs a lot more than these buggers in terms of assistance right now.

Some good points Buck.

My comment was a just a general philosophical view.

Part of the problem seems to be that AFL exercises its largesse along discretionary lines rather than established principles or rules,  giving rise to argument over fairness etc. . 

3 hours ago, FarNorthernD said:

That’s true but I don’t believe it was the AFL’s nostalgic desire to "save the oldest football club in the world" but rather because they had signed a media deal to provide 9 games a week.

I think the only bit of decent timing we had over that time was not to have our near death experience in the last year of that deal. 

Pretty much the prlcks had no choice but to throw out the life bouy 

harsh but probably true.

The great era of Dominance for the MFC happened before TV ? Coverage. 

If we had claimed Flags in the 70’s we would be in a much better bargaining position. 

This current surge of form must be sustained, we can overtake the Carlscum’s and Essendrugs, if we keep winning. 

Hard Work yes, but nothing this club can’t do

  • Author
28 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

The great era of Dominance for the MFC happened before TV ? Coverage. 

If we had claimed Flags in the 70’s we would be in a much better bargaining position. 

This current surge of form must be sustained, we can overtake the Carlscum’s and Essendrugs, if we keep winning. 

Hard Work yes, but nothing this club can’t do

not just win... we need to lobby the AFL (or is that nobble the AFL) so that we are seen as the power club to replace Carlton.

From the time of Dick Pratt and the "Saturday Takeover Cub" mentioned more than once by the NCSC (the predecessor to ASIC) Carlton have had the reputation of being a club for the money movers. Time to convince the AFL that those days are over.

BTW I had forgotten that Fitzpatrick's fund Hastings were one of those that took a loss on Docklands. Caro mentioned it today on 3AW.

23 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

not just win... we need to lobby the AFL (or is that nobble the AFL) so that we are seen as the power club to replace Carlton.

From the time of Dick Pratt and the "Saturday Takeover Cub" mentioned more than once by the NCSC (the predecessor to ASIC) Carlton have had the reputation of being a club for the money movers. Time to convince the AFL that those days are over.

BTW I had forgotten that Fitzpatrick's fund Hastings were one of those that took a loss on Docklands. Caro mentioned it today on 3AW.

Winning is the only way. All the other bits will follow


45 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

not just win... we need to lobby the AFL (or is that nobble the AFL) so that we are seen as the power club to replace Carlton.

From the time of Dick Pratt and the "Saturday Takeover Cub" mentioned more than once by the NCSC (the predecessor to ASIC) Carlton have had the reputation of being a club for the money movers. Time to convince the AFL that those days are over.

BTW I had forgotten that Fitzpatrick's fund Hastings were one of those that took a loss on Docklands. Caro mentioned it today on 3AW.

 

21 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Winning is the only way. All the other bits will follow

Along with finals appearances.  Then increased member base.  Need to overtake the Blues before the AFL will take any notice.  They are still 10,000 ahead.  As yoy say SW, must keep winning

10 hours ago, Danelska said:

God it is nice to be on the other side of this conversation...

Isn’t it though.

This topic created some very heated debate around here over the years. Looking back it was entertaining in a weird kind of way, but thank god those days are behind us.

Strange how the Bluze only lost by 28 points at that AFL advantaged ground tonight !

23 hours ago, FireInTheBelly said:

I thought clubs were supposed to 'earn' prime time games. With the Blues getting all these Friday night spots surely they aren't going too bad?

Let's look at this Friday nights game, only 38000 for a collingwood game would not have rated how many would there have been as against Adelaide last Friday? Magpies, Carlton even saints all have more Friday night games then as how does that happen were higher up the ladder then them all last year and now, magpies I can understand Carlton also, but [censored] saints ? Why does the saints have more???????

14 hours ago, hemingway said:

We have no reason to complain about other clubs getting a helping hand.

Without AFL assistance we may not even be around. 

Bull we would still be around the AFL gave us [censored]  all what a extra 1.4 mill other teams got way more then that, example port got a extra 9 mill over 3 years. The MCC has done much more then the AFL they give us a extra mill every year being part of the MCC banner, and it was not PJ who got us back together with the MCC, it was CS And the thing about buddy to Sydney the hawks could have done what the crows did with danger, and Sydney would have had to give the hawks more picks. PJ has been a good CEO but we still had to pay him, there are a number of CEO that would have done a good job, do you know even Cameron shwab, was asked to go back to us BY the AFL. No they did not do much at all it's over exaggerated how much they did. Do you work for the AFL? we won 10 games over 3 years  and got no PP, that now has to be the bench mark for a. PP


On 5/26/2018 at 4:13 AM, olisik said:

Murphy will leave as a FA and they will get band 1 compensation giving them pick 2 anyway. 

Which is what happened with us and Frawley. Gil will make sure Carlton is looked after in the FA department.

23 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

What a lot of younger AFL Supporters don’t quite understand. 

There is a lot of money ? still connected to Carlscum, the AFL are well aware

They want Carlscum back up near the top. 

The treatment of Chris Judd tells everything. The guy eye goughed opponents and still won Brownlows

To be fair to the AFL, Judd won his Carlton Brownlow despite only elbowing Pavlich in the face.

Just now, Tony Tea said:

To be fair to the AFL, Judd won his Carlton Brownlow despite only elbowing Pavlich in the face.

Yes, sorry for my oversight Tony!!!

 

Injuries to key players, a bevvy of recent top 10 picks, and a history of blatant tanking. Ridiculous that anyone might ask for a PP for them.

On 5/26/2018 at 1:04 PM, hemingway said:

We have no reason to complain about other clubs getting a helping hand.

Without AFL assistance we may not even be around. 

Without AFL MFC was gawnnnnnnn - shut the doors last to leave the building to switch the lights off forever. 


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

  • 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.

      • Like
    • 34 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.

    • 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.

    • 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? 

    • 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?

      • Like
    • 242 replies
  • 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/

      • Like
    • 47 replies