6 minutes ago, binman said:

Mmm - i didn't see that. 

Might need to give her a second peanut!

More like

On 9/30/2021 at 11:22 AM, sue said:

More like

I remember at Windy Hill in the 70s there was a guy selling peanuts from a hessian bag that he used to lug around the outer....20c a bag...

When I was coming home on the train after our win against Essendon, my kids and I were outnumbered by a heap of Bombers supporters on the train, shouting profanities at us and saying things like you guys only won because of the umpires, and Geelong will smash you, and Bulldogs are the best team anyway and they will win the flag easily.

I kept my mouth shut because there were a few ferals amongst that bunch, but I’d love to be catching a red rattler with those peanuts right now.

Talk is cheap only actions gives results and Melbourne were playing good football the Essendon supporters were also doing what supporters do when they lose blame the umpires and are jealous of the opposition clubs.

On 9/29/2021 at 12:27 PM, Little Goffy said:

CRYSTAL BALL

I was wrong about Melbourne. Since 2018 I’ve been waiting to see them kick on since making the preliminary final, I thought they were ready to challenge for a premiership in 2019 and 2020.

But I now believe this group can’t win a premiership and a major change in direction is needed in their list management and recruiting strategies, and a big list cull and rebuild to find players that bring those four non-negotiable traits – skills, footy smarts, competitiveness and character.

 

WE MUST ENSURE THAT GARY BUCKENARA PREDICTS WE WILL HAVE A MASSIVE PREMIERSHIP HANGOVER

This is the man who said Hawks are going back to the top after 2017 season, they did but where a fake top 4 side in 2018. After the 2019 season I said that we would  perform like   the Hawks after 2009.

Matt Rendall had a more accurate view about the Dees in 2021 than Buckenara

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2021/01/27/rendell-rates-carlton-melbourne-and-essendons-chances-of-playing-finals/

On 10/2/2021 at 9:29 AM, durango said:

Talk is cheap only actions gives results and Melbourne were playing good football the Essendon supporters were also doing what supporters do when they lose blame the umpires and are jealous of the opposition clubs.

I could search for "umpires" on Demonland and come up with thousands of results.🤔

On 9/29/2021 at 11:49 PM, Winners at last said:

Agree with the description of McClure as a 'dinosaur'. I don't understand how he gets a gig. Total moron.

I absolutely despise Ross 'budding' Lyon. The word 'vile' springs to mind.

Why hasn't anyone mentioned Triplechins? He tipped the Bulldogs to win the GF because a filth person couldn't tip Melbourne. Or something like that. Great logic TC. Call yourself a professional ??? 

 

 

He's cheap.

On 10/2/2021 at 12:11 AM, jnrmac said:

I remember at Windy Hill in the 70s there was a guy selling peanuts from a hessian bag that he used to lug around the outer....20c a bag...

I used to drink at a bar in the Philippines that was well "served" by street touts. One particularly annoying half-wit sold hot peanuts in addition to odd items such as bird noise makers and tasers.

I once told him I would buy a large bag of peanuts if he let me hit him with a shot of a taser.

Looking forward to making it back when borders open because his peanuts were delicious!

A lot of talk in the media (David King prime example) was about shutting down Lever & how by doing that the Dogs would well on the way to shutting down Melbourne.

Lever was serviceable, they put a lot of work into him but others stepped up...Salem for one, Petty, Rivers, Bowey.

It's been a balanced team defence all season, whole of ground...why would a so called expert come out with such dribble.

The GF defence was a very even contribution (Salem the standout) with great assistance as usual from Brayshaw & Langdon.

By the way, watching again it's interesting to see how a 30 game player in Petty sucked Libba in throughout the game. Petty is a very competitive and smart footballer with just the right amount of mongrel.

On 9/29/2021 at 7:59 AM, DeesignerAU said:

What articles have you read or vision have you seen from so-called experts that makes your blood boil?

Heaven knows we have all wavered over the years here on Demonland but most media "experts" are particularly whimsical and inconsistent with their predictions. Take the guy who presented the cup for example:
https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-2019-melbourne-great-garry-lyon-labels-demons-2018-season-an-aberration/news-story/11adfe12baf08bd32ec2849f34f483fd

On 10/2/2021 at 12:11 AM, jnrmac said:

I remember at Windy Hill in the 70s there was a guy selling peanuts from a hessian bag that he used to lug around the outer....20c a bag...

And I remember the guy at the G shouting "peanuts - shilling a bag".

 

On 9/30/2021 at 11:15 AM, binman said:

Mmm - i didn't see that. 

Might need to give her a second peanut!

Definitely worthy of the two peanuts Binman. For a start, when I researched this, i find she did in fact still have a carry over peanut on her record from the past. Her bringing up that past so close to the GF means the penalty simply needs to be given. If you don’t apply it now nobody will take the peanut sanction seriously. 

Release the second peanut!!

 

1 hour ago, rjay said:

A lot of talk in the media (David King prime example) was about shutting down Lever & how by doing that the Dogs would well on the way to shutting down Melbourne.

Lever was serviceable, they put a lot of work into him but others stepped up...Salem for one, Petty, Rivers, Bowey.

It's been a balanced team defence all season, whole of ground...why would a so called expert come out with such dribble.

The GF defence was a very even contribution (Salem the standout) with great assistance as usual from Brayshaw & Langdon.

 

Good call on this. This is the key take-out from the season and the GF Rjay.

Just how do you stop the Dees now.  Sure, shutting down Lever seems obvious, anyone could tip this (even King), but then what happens next? Lever's great, but not THE key.

No-one is.  Its the team defence 'stupid', as they say, to paraphrase Bill Clinton. That's the key.

To your comments I would add how often do we see Neal-Bullen and even Spargo in the last line. Heaps.

Same goes for forwards. Up to 1/2 time in the Prelim we had 8 separate goalkickers for the 9 goals.

2022 will be fascinating to watch how other teams now try to address the new standard to defeat the Dees given the huge self-belief the team will now have and their drive to do it again at the 'G'

 

4 minutes ago, Demon17 said:

Good call on this. This is the key take-out from the season and the GF Rjay.

Just how do you stop the Dees now.  Sure, shutting down Lever seems obvious, anyone could tip this (even King), but then what happens next? Lever's great, but not THE key.

No-one is.  Its the team defence 'stupid', as they say, to paraphrase Bill Clinton. That's the key.

To your comments I would add how often do we see Neal-Bullen and even Spargo in the last line. Heaps.

Same goes for forwards. Up to 1/2 time in the Prelim we had 8 separate goalkickers for the 9 goals.

2022 will be fascinating to watch how other teams now try to address the new standard to defeat the Dees given the huge self-belief the team will now have and their drive to do it again at the 'G'

 

You can even see BB there at times...they all cover a lot of ground.

43 minutes ago, Wells 11 said:

Definitely worthy of the two peanuts Binman. For a start, when I researched this, i find she did in fact still have a carry over peanut on her record from the past. Her bringing up that past so close to the GF means the penalty simply needs to be given. If you don’t apply it now nobody will take the peanut sanction seriously. 

Release the second peanut!!

 

Double peanut penalties for offences in Grand Final Week would be consistent with AFL MRO penalty scales.

3 hours ago, rjay said:

A lot of talk in the media (David King prime example) was about shutting down Lever & how by doing that the Dogs would well on the way to shutting down Melbourne.

Lever was serviceable, they put a lot of work into him but others stepped up...Salem for one, Petty, Rivers, Bowey.

It's been a balanced team defence all season, whole of ground...why would a so called expert come out with such dribble.

The GF defence was a very even contribution (Salem the standout) with great assistance as usual from Brayshaw & Langdon.

By the way, watching again it's interesting to see how a 30 game player in Petty sucked Libba in throughout the game. Petty is a very competitive and smart footballer with just the right amount of mongrel.

You'd think that opposition coaches would be immune from from being influenced by outside noise, particularly given they more than anyone know how much rubbish the footy experts spout. 

Be that as it may, i'm sure goody was more than happy for that sort of shut down lever, shut down the dees misinformation guff to swirl about. Same goes for the shut down Maxy, negate the dees guff.

The discussion on Lever was funny because it centred on the idea of either putting a defensive forward on him or isolating him one one one with a key forward.

The experts were banging on about Schahe's role on Allir as if it was a masterstroke. And suggested he might play similar role on Lever. Allir still had 15 odd intercepts possessions. But with the ball coming inside 50 quickly with no pressure on the kick he was always gong to struggle to be the damaging AA rebounder he had been.

And the experts pointed out the dog's efforts in round 19 to engineer a match up on Naughton. Lever still had 15 intercept possessions and Naughton only kicked 2. 

But more to the point, in the two previous finals - and the round 23 game against the cats - Lever still got his intercepts but played a more traditional one on one role. And he is so much better one on one than he was last year (i suspect he is stronger and more confident in his knees). 

So goody would have been more than happy for the dogs to waste energy trying to engineer a match up for Lever. 

Same goes for efforts to negate Maxy. I know maxy told Goody to leave Jackson on the ball in the third, but I have no doubt goody always planned to use Jackson more often in the ruck than he had previously. And doing so really muddled the Dogs tactically i think.

Leaving aside the 3 quarter goal blitz, Jackson rucking allowed Maxy to drop back into the dog's half and made it super difficult for them to get a contested mark inside 50, or an uncontested mark for that matter. It also helped May defend Naughton (who King said would be the dog's most damaging player). 

And the experts told everyone to watch out for Daniels and flagged the need to shut him down.

It was actually quite interesting from a tactical perspective how they managed Daniels. In the first half he had 26 possessions, and by in large they let him run free. I thought he did very little with those possessions and i only counted one effective inside 50 kick (English marked it - and the proceeded to kick it into Petty on the mark). Despite that Goody sent Sparrow to him (i think) in the second half and completely shut him down.

Maybe that was always the plan (ie let him go in the first half, shut him down in the second) as not only did we take him out of the game , we ran off him as he tired and exposed him for lack of pace and run.

Meanwhile, coming into the game, the experts didn't really highlight the danger Salem posed. He was our best player in the first quarter i think. Or at least our most damaging. And that is when we won the game. He was allowed to sit free forward of center and he had some crazy amount of inside 50s and score involvements. Why wasn't he tagged?

All week the media were banging on about Beveridge being a tactical genius able to spin goaled from thin air. 

Throughout his coaching tenure Goody has never been given credit for his tactical acumen by the experts, and many dees fans i have to say. That script was followed in the two week lead up with barely word said about his tactical ability. 

But i reckon Goody smashed Beveridge tactically. 

Beveridge had no strategy to deal with Jackson in the ruck or Maxy dropping back. He let Salem run wild in the first quarter. May was clearly hampered yet he didn't try to make him run or stretch out - for example by playing Naughton higher.

Yes it's how they defend, but surely he had to tell his defenders to stop setting up 5 metres in front of their opponent as we exposed that all day. 

And most of all they needed to be aggressive in the third quarter, for example try going thought corridor, throw caution to the wind, and get that lead out to 5 goals if possible. 

Goody, on the other hand, used Jackson brilliantly, isolated their defenders, didn't worry about the Lever match up (more than happy for Petty and rivers to be the attacking interceptors), had Salem playing super aggressively, shut down Daniels, negated Libba, shut down Naughton and shut down Mcrae (25 possessions for a player who averages 35 or something crazy). He also completely shut down two of the key players in the Port game in Smith and Hannan, rendering the latter basically a spectator. 

Despite all of that very few experts gave Goody any credit for winning the tactical battle.

And i didn't hear a single expert criticise Beveridge for his performance, othe rthan questioning why he didn't do more to stop the goal blitz in the third. Which is ironic, becuase there is not much he could have done, if anything about those center square clearances - they were all on their players. 

 

 

 

Edited October 3, 20213 yr by binman

Nice analysis, Binman

Media person 

Caroline Wilson

Medium

Print, Radio, Podcasts

Comment

Much argument amongst the judging panel her as to the rating - with anywhere between zero and three peanuts being pushed. 

Debate centered on the definition of axe to ground and how harmless she is. Also how much to bring old Caro grievances into the mix and whether there has been a continuous, unbroken chain of wrongness since her attacks on the dees in her coverage of the tanking saga (and arguably even further back).

The fact I stopped watching Footy Classified 2 years ago  makes assessment harder. That said has been relatively benign in her 3AW slots as it it pertains to being wrong about the dees.

But Caro's old fashioned pre grand finals beat up by claiming on FC that the dees had instituted a curfew on its players earned her a nomination. Totally made up and an attempt at creating some unnecessary, albeit pretty harmless, fugazi.

The clincher was two fold.

One - despite the club never using the term curfew, in fact explicitly saying it wasn't a curfew, she backed up her beat up by claiming 'players' had said it was a curfew. Implied multiple players and that she had heard from them directly.  

Two - she gave Ross 'I'm withdrawing my interest in the Carlton coaching job, despite there being no interest' Lyon the platform to claim the dees are treating their players like children, not adults.

On Ross 'the Boss, defence wins finals (editor note: but only of you can also score more than 30 points)' Lyon, he has been nominated for an award and i'm confident he will receive one.

Update

The judging panel has received multiple submissions criticising the decision to only award one peanut to 'Caro'.  Several of these came after her appearance on Offsiders on the Sunday after the Grand Final where she once again raised the tanking saga.  I mean why try to diminish our glorious victory?

And once again she drew a false equivalence to the Essendrug saga. I mean c'mon, how could they be considered equally morally wrong or any way comparable (other than both being forms of cheating).

For one thing, there is no suggestion the players were involved in the tanking saga. For another thing, no players health was put at risk. And lastly tanking was widespread in the AFL, so whilst wrong it was par for the course.

Injecting your playing list thousands of times with performance enhancing drugs and breaking (smashing?) the WADA code was decidedly not widespread.

So, after considering the evidence supplied in the submissions, and the fact Ms Wilson's post GF comments created a continuous, unbroken chain of wrongness with her attacks on the dees re the tanking saga, the panel has decided to change her score to two peanuts.

The panel have also warned Ms Wilson that it is only the fact she has become relatively harmless that has prevented her being awarded three peanuts.

Score

Edited October 4, 20213 yr by binman

7 hours ago, MT64 said:

And I remember the guy at the G shouting "peanuts - shilling a bag".

 

He did the main VFA game as well, Think he did very well financially.   but he is probably dead now or 110

16 minutes ago, binman said:

Media person 

Caroline Wilson

Medium

Print, Radio, Podcasts

Comment

Much argument amongst the judging panel her as to the rating - with anywhere between zero and three peanuts being pushed. 

Debate centered on the definition of axe to ground and how harmless she is. Also how much to bring old Caro grievances into the mix and whether there has been a continuous, unbroken chain of wrongness since her attacks on the dees in her coverage of the tanking saga (and arguably even further back).

The fact I stopped watching Footy Classified 2 years ago  makes assessment harder. That said has been relatively benign in her 3AW slots as it it pertains to being wrong about the dees.

But Caro's old fashioned pre grand finals beat up by claiming on FC that the dees had instituted a curfew on its players earned her a nomination. Totally made up and an attempt at creating some unnecessary, albeit pretty harmless, fugazi.

The clincher was two fold.

One - despite the club never using the term curfew, in fact explicitly saying it wasn't a curfew, she backed up her beat up by claiming 'players' had said it was a curfew. Implied multiple players and that she had heard from them directly.  

Two - she gave Ross 'I'm withdrawing my interest in the Carlton coaching job, despite there being no interest' Lyon the platform to claim the dees are treating their players like children, not adults.

On Ross 'the Boss, defence wins finals (editor note: but only of you can also score more than 30 points)' Lyon, he has been nominated for an award and i'm confident he will receive one.

Update

The judging panel has received multiple submissions criticising the decision to only award one peanut to 'Caro'.  Several of these came after her appearance on Offsiders on the Sunday after the Grand Final where she once again raised the tanking saga.  I mean why try to diminish our glorious victory?

And once again she drew a false equivalence to the Essendrug saga. I mean c'mon, how could they be considered equally morally wrong or any way comparable (other than both being forms of cheating).

For one thing, there is no suggestion the players were involved in the tanking saga. For another thing, no players health was put at risk. And lastly tanking was widespread in the AFL, so whilst wrong it was par for the course.

Injecting your playing list thousands of times with performance enhancing drugs and breaking (smashing?) the WADA code was decidedly not widespread.

So, after considering the evidence supplied in the submissions, and the fact Ms Wilson's post GF comments created a continuous, unbroken chain of wrongness with her attacks on the dees re the tanking saga, the panel has decided to change her score to two peanuts.

The panel have also warned Ms Wilson that it is only the fact she has become relatively harmless that has prevented her being awarded three peanuts.

Score

I didn't see Caro on "Offsiders" where she apparently raised the tanking issue. But isn't that a relevant point to make when discussing the rise of the Demons from a team that was not just bottom of the ladder but also bereft of any moral leadership? It seems to me that by raising the issue she's expanding on the praise given not just to the team that had just won the GF but also to those who had been through the worst of times, just to get there.

 

 

4 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I didn't see Caro on "Offsiders" where she apparently raised the tanking issue. But isn't that a relevant point to make when discussing the rise of the Demons from a team that was not just bottom of the ladder but also bereft of any moral leadership? It seems to me that by raising the issue she's expanding on the praise given not just to the team that had just won the GF but also to those who had been through the worst of times, just to get there.

 

 

Sorry Ms Wilson, the panel have advised no further correspondence will be entered into.

Two peanuts it is.

17 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I didn't see Caro on "Offsiders" where she apparently raised the tanking issue. But isn't that a relevant point to make when discussing the rise of the Demons from a team that was not just bottom of the ladder but also bereft of any moral leadership? It seems to me that by raising the issue she's expanding on the praise given not just to the team that had just won the GF but also to those who had been through the worst of times, just to get there.

 

 

I watched it and to be honest on a day when everyone else was bathing in the glory of our success she managed to drop the tanking issue into her opening comments.  It stuck in my craw to be honest initially but I very quickly decided to let it go and revel in my boys getting the job done.  It really only diminished her position when all was said and done.

It is amazing how magnanimous one can be when one supports the Mighty Demon Premiers!!!!!!

31 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I didn't see Caro on "Offsiders" where she apparently raised the tanking issue. But isn't that a relevant point to make when discussing the rise of the Demons from a team that was not just bottom of the ladder but also bereft of any moral leadership? It seems to me that by raising the issue she's expanding on the praise given not just to the team that had just won the GF but also to those who had been through the worst of times, just to get there.

 

 

She didn't just raise the tanking issue she said it was equivalent to the Essendon drug scandal. There is no comparison at all. 

47 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I didn't see Caro on "Offsiders" where she apparently raised the tanking issue. But isn't that a relevant point to make when discussing the rise of the Demons from a team that was not just bottom of the ladder but also bereft of any moral leadership? It seems to me that by raising the issue she's expanding on the praise given not just to the team that had just won the GF but also to those who had been through the worst of times, just to get there.

 

 

Yes, it was reasonable to list all our previous woes, but there was no justication for her saying it was almost as bad as injeccting team with performance enhancing who-knows-what.   Leaving aside how absurd the comparison was, why mention Essendon at all?  She was just looking for a spot to put the boot in since the team left no room for that on Sept 25.