Jump to content

Featured Replies

14 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

I would suggest one or two of those AA's were 'gifts' and Rance has only one 'picture hook'/premiership medal. 

Don't care about the AA's but would be very happy for Jake to surpass Rance's medal count. 

Plenty of time for Jake to do that.

Hi LH. I don't care about the AA's either. What's the sense in being named in a team that doesn't play anyone ? Not sure what you mean by the picture hook though. Rance is the 'author' (that can't be the right word) of three children's picture books. Rabbit's Hop, Monkey's Tail and Tiger's Roar. Although the last one could be an official Richmond season review for their cognitively challenged fan base.

 
2 minutes ago, Rab D Nesbitt said:

Hi LH. I don't care about the AA's either. What's the sense in being named in a team that doesn't play anyone ? Not sure what you mean by the picture hook though. Rance is the 'author' (that can't be the right word) of three children's picture books. Rabbit's Hop, Monkey's Tail and Tiger's Roar. Although the last one could be an official Richmond season review for their cognitively challenged fan base.

My apology.  I didn't know he had written 'picture books' so thought it was a vague reference to premiership medals/GF photos.  LOL amazing what we can convince ourselves of when something doesn't 'make sense'.

I think we are on the same page - no pun intended!

15 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

I always thought Rance was overrated. He was certainly ordinary one on one

Commentators always got a stiff one over Rance

He was good, but not awesome in my eyes

Lever has been outstanding this year

6 games in....

Same for me, WYL. Rance was a very good backman and is better than Lever, but I don't have him in my best 10 full backs or centre-half backs.

Scarlett, Hardeman, Southby, Langford, Mew, Dench etc... - there are a lot of people way ahead of Rance. 

And strangely enough, Rance really struggled on Jesse Hogan. 

Lever is a very good reader of the play, a great team backman, very courageous, and a natural leader (our next captain?) but can get found out one-on-one. 

With each at their best, probably have to take Rance at this stage, although Lever is still relatively young. 

 
3 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

I would suggest one or two of those AA's were 'gifts' and Rance has only one 'picture hook'/premiership medal. 

Don't care about the AA's but would be very happy for Jake to surpass Rance's medal count. 

Plenty of time for Jake to do that.

Are you suggesting that an AA selection panel consisting of Kevin Bartlett, Matthew Richardson and Danny Frawley showed any hint of Richmond bias? No. I won’t hear of it.


On 4/30/2021 at 3:05 PM, The Swimming Dee said:

But, but, but...we paid two first rounders for him remember.

I never understood the argument we paid too much. He was always going to star for us and part of the timing for him to hit this form was due to our system not allowing him to work to his strengths. Tomlinson has been a key to this

We really only paid equivalent of pick 8.

2017 pick 10, 2018 picks 19 and 67

For

Jake Lever, 2017 pick 35 and 2018 pick 47.

 

Or think of it like "pick 19 for pick 35 and 67, and Lever for pick 10".

 

7 hours ago, PaulRB said:

Both Lever and Rance are/were beneficiaries of good defensive structures that make their success almost inevitable. 
The number of times the opposition pop it up for Lever to easily intercept would be embarrassing for them, if it wasn’t a deliberate result of us executing our game plan. 
Both great players, but Rance was a prat... so Lever by a mile. 

I actually think that Lever is an outstanding reader of the play.

Sitting up high at the G, it is amazing how many times Lever leaves his man well before it is kicked, to run 35 m, and end up making the spoil.

He also directs a lot of the traffic and positioning down back.

7 hours ago, Maldonboy38 said:

Same for me, WYL. Rance was a very good backman and is better than Lever, but I don't have him in my best 10 full backs or centre-half backs.

Scarlett, Hardeman, Southby, Langford, Mew, Dench etc... - there are a lot of people way ahead of Rance. 

And strangely enough, Rance really struggled on Jesse Hogan. 

Lever is a very good reader of the play, a great team backman, very courageous, and a natural leader (our next captain?) but can get found out one-on-one. 

With each at their best, probably have to take Rance at this stage, although Lever is still relatively young. 

Quite happy with Lever thanks. Never rated Rance nearly as much as the “experts”

 
4 hours ago, deanox said:

We really only paid equivalent of pick 8.

2017 pick 10, 2018 picks 19 and 67

For

Jake Lever, 2017 pick 35 and 2018 pick 47.

 

Or think of it like "pick 19 for pick 35 and 67, and Lever for pick 10".

 

Yeah I know. The simplified trade argument especially concerning Lever has just annoyed me so much in the past...he is a gun!

12 minutes ago, The Swimming Dee said:

Yeah I know. The simplified trade argument especially concerning Lever has just annoyed me so much in the past...he is a gun!

Carlton took Lachie O'Brien (pick 10) and Liam Stocker (pick 19) after Adelaide handed them off as part of the Bryce Gibbs trade.

 

We got Petty (pick 35), and traded the 47 (with a pick 36) for 27, which got us Sparrow.

 

So it's almost:

Lever, Petty, Sparrow

For 

Bryce Gibbs, pick 35, pick 67!


Obviously this discussion is entirely based on the interpretation  (and the bias) that this site enables ?

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.

      • Thanks
    • 133 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.

      • Thanks
    • 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.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 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? 

      • Thanks
    • 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?

      • Thanks
    • 391 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/

      • Thanks
    • 47 replies