Jump to content

Featured Replies

commentators hate a one sided thrashing so usually are biased to the under dog

enjoy it! means we are one of the best in the comp!

leave the pity commentary to the shizen clubs. 

 
Just now, Dr. Gonzo said:

Honestly I can't believe the absolute muppets on other boards (BigFooty) and social media claiming the Suns were robbed by the umps last night. Watching the game I thought we were getting a raw deal and got a couple back at the end. Suns were unlucky with a couple but seriously they wouldn't have been close if the umps didn't gift them a bunch of goals in the 3rd.

I feel like I'm not one-eyed either, last week I thought we were looked after by the umps, North were pretty hard done by (not that it would have made a difference). I thought we were lucky not to get the whistle blown against us a couple of times in the final quarter last night but for the first 3 quarters we were pretty bloody stiff.

People are only because that was what the commentary was saying. There’s no talk of the incredibly soft free kicks King got in the third.

In the end they actually got a chance, and didn’t take it. So they weren’t robbed, they simply couldn’t execute.

1 minute ago, The heart beats true said:

This drove me insane. It’s such an obvious distraction.

I thought by the way Ben was shaking hands with the MFC players after the game...

 

Fox have a narrative for every game, and oppo nuffies are too dumb to think for themselves.

Edited by Clintosaurus

Unfortunately JVR will probably get suspended because MFC. His fist is nowhere near the head and actually makes contact with the fleshy part of his arm. Just a mistimed spoiling attempt. Won't save him though.


  • Author
38 minutes ago, The heart beats true said:

 There’s no talk of the incredibly soft free kicks King got in the third.

 

Can you tell me what they were for. I have no idea, as they weren't replayed.

Jvr lifted his arm to avoid the most of the contact

 

Bollard copped a knee earlier in the game. I think we could argue that was a contributing factor to bollard getting subbed out. And I think it’s legitimate to question why he was on the field at all after that incident. 

What about the down the field free kick in our goal square which caused the scuffle at 3/4 time? They didn’t show Ben King running from behind play to belt someone in the ribs. Just said cameras didn’t catch the incident.

 

Edited by BW511


1 hour ago, The heart beats true said:

In the 3rd quarter the suns got 3 free kicks in front of goal, one to Ellis and 2 to King, all resulting in goals, and they didn’t show the replay of the incident once.

Theres a clear mandate by both broadcasters not to show free kicks being paid in front of goal. That they don’t think we are aware of it is embarrassing. There’s an average of 27 seconds to show a replay of an incident before a shot for goal. The only logical conclusion is that they are trying to protect the umpires.

Totally agree with all of this, especial the last sentence.  The AFL pull the strings on everything, so of course they run a tight ship with the broadcasters and commentary.   Didn't Tim and Sam Lane disappear from mainstream commentary because they didn't follow the AFL script?  

2 hours ago, bush demon said:

The Hawks then narrowly got past us in a '63 final (Barassi suspended) and that premiership marked an unbroken and unparalelled run of premierships for every decade since.

Except that Geelong won it in 1963. I think Hawthorn’s first premiership was in 61. Yes, Barassi was suspended in 63. 

3 minutes ago, Fanatique Demon said:

Except that Geelong won it in 1963. I think Hawthorn’s first premiership was in 61. Yes, Barassi was suspended in 63. 

Quite right. Rot set in after our 60 flag. Thence, Kennedy's commandos.

At the end of the day people who gives a flying [censored] what commentators like Dunstall and dermie think. 

2 minutes ago, bush demon said:

Yes, Barassi was suspended in 63. 

Off topic, I know…

For all the talk of how brutal players were back in the good old days, players who threw a punch were suspended for weeks. In Ron’s case (where there was no clear evidence of a punch on Roger Dean) he got 4 weeks. These days that might be two weeks, down to one with an early guilty plea. 


  • Author
3 minutes ago, dl4e said:

At the end of the day people who gives a flying [censored] what commentators like Dunstall and dermie think. 

It’s not so much the commentary, which is often inane, but rather the picking and choosing of what they show. 

1. Dunstall is a banana bender by birth

2. Are Dunstall and Berm on the AFL payroll in any capacity?

Edited by Queanbeyan Demon
Typo

35 minutes ago, Fanatique Demon said:

For all the talk of how brutal players were back in the good old days, players who threw a punch were suspended for weeks. In Ron’s case (where there was no clear evidence of a punch on Roger Dean) he got 4 weeks. These days that might be two weeks, down to one with an early guilty plea. 

Melbourne FC unsuccessfully applied to have footage shown to the Tribunal which showed that Barassi didn't even make contact to the head and that Dean was staging.   

Just watched the Round So Far on the AFL website. Riley Beveridge makes an outrageous comment that JVR doesn't have his eyes on the ball and that theAFL would be looking to refer this straight to the tribunal. It was a clumsy spoiling attempt and clearly he was trying to spoil the ball:

https://www.afl.com.au/video/920710/trsf-exclusive-vision-sheds-light-on-dees-free-kane-responds-to-dimma?videoId=920710&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1683383083001

And then they highlight the Ben King push that led to a Melbourne goal kick from thre square. Blurry vision from 100m away but they were very happy to make the call it wasn't deserving of a free kick!  

4 minutes ago, Sydney_Demon said:

Just watched the Round So Far on the AFL website. Riley Beveridge makes an outrageous comment that JVR doesn't have his eyes on the ball and that theAFL would be looking to refer this straight to the tribunal. It was a clumsy spoiling attempt and clearly he was trying to spoil the ball:

https://www.afl.com.au/video/920710/trsf-exclusive-vision-sheds-light-on-dees-free-kane-responds-to-dimma?videoId=920710&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1683383083001

And then they highlight the Ben King push that led to a Melbourne goal kick from thre square. Blurry vision from 100m away but they were very happy to make the call it wasn't deserving of a free kick!  

The only vision of this I have seen is from behind JVR so how do they know he wasn't watching the ball 


Even with the replays, it looked like a general play type incident that warrants a free kick and a few choice words, nothing more.

I think he will get 3 because of the stretcher but I am not convinced it even warranted one.

1 hour ago, Deebymistake said:

Totally agree with all of this, especial the last sentence.  The AFL pull the strings on everything, so of course they run a tight ship with the broadcasters and commentary.   Didn't Tim and Sam Lane disappear from mainstream commentary because they didn't follow the AFL script?  

I heard repeatedly during the week that Grundy had received the most "for" free kicks in the opening 7 games. The media went on ad nauseam about it.

I should have known what the response from AFL House would be; 7 "against" none "for."

4 hours ago, Redleg said:

Everyone loves a conspiracy theory.

With Dunstall and Derwayne openly barracking for the Suns, it was interesting that every time they said there should have been a Suns free or an incorrect free was paid to the Dees, the incident was replayed a couple of times and dissected by the commentators.

However, contentious frees and goals paid to the Suns were totally ignored and no replay to show the incident/decision was seen.

I had absolutely no idea why several frees and resultant goal decisions were paid to the Suns.

How does this happen repeatedly in a game that is so heavily televised with multiple cameras?

How many times was the JVR spoil on  Ballard repeated?

It seemed to be extremely selective vision and replays.

Just a bit of fun for post game discussion, easier of course when you win.

 

We love a good conspiracy theory on this program Mr Leg.

The JVR moment was way over the top. Would have liked to see the touch ball early in the game again considering one umpire called it.

 
41 minutes ago, Sydney_Demon said:

Just watched the Round So Far on the AFL website. Riley Beveridge makes an outrageous comment that JVR doesn't have his eyes on the ball and that theAFL would be looking to refer this straight to the tribunal. It was a clumsy spoiling attempt and clearly he was trying to spoil the ball:

https://www.afl.com.au/video/920710/trsf-exclusive-vision-sheds-light-on-dees-free-kane-responds-to-dimma?videoId=920710&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1683383083001

And then they highlight the Ben King push that led to a Melbourne goal kick from thre square. Blurry vision from 100m away but they were very happy to make the call it wasn't deserving of a free kick!  

And Jay Clark urging a. jVR suspension as well.

since when is it the media’s role to talk up this stuff? How about letting the (albeit flakey) MRP do its job.

39 minutes ago, BW511 said:

Even with the replays, it looked like a general play type incident that warrants a free kick and a few choice words, nothing more.

I think he will get 3 because of the stretcher but I am not convinced it even warranted one.

Why did he grab the back of his head immediately, rather than where the actual contact was????


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
    • 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.

    • 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
    • 385 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