BOUND FOR SOMEWHERE ELSE - a Demonland Feature

[Johnny Karate 559]

After the Roos it'll be us targetted next - anyone who doesn't believe that has their head firmly buried in the sand. This thread disappoints me as I believe that messageboards like these represent the most passionate Melbourne fans - I think I even heard the idea of a merger of our club floated.

Any Melbourne supporter that's worth their grain of salt will buy a North Melbourne membership to try and keep them in Victoria. Clubs like us made the AFL - not the other way round, welfare during tough patches is deserved. The arrogant bastards can get stuffed if they think they can take more of our teams away for a bunch of theatre goers up North.

If the AFL had a viable plan for a GC based side rather than attempting fulfil an arrogant prophecy of by 2010 there will be AFL games every week in SE Qld - this wouldn't be such an issue for me. It just reeks of cynical opportunism from the AFL while the Roos board is leaderless. Perhaps the Roos administrators have botched things up for the club but I think it sucks that 20,000+ members will be punished for it.

I am intending to write to the MFC, North Melbourne and Bulldogs to suggested discounted membership deals if they are already a card carrying member of one or both of the other two clubs. If there is an increased level of support for these clubs the AFL wont find it so easy to shove us around.

[rpfc 28,383]

Kangaroos are dying...better to salvage something and move with picks, a recruitment zone, and no debt.

Bulldogs are teetering. They would be prime for relocation to be the second Sydney team in about 2020, in the west.

Melbourne nearly ate Hawthorn whole in 1996. I am not as concerned as others because I realise that Melbourne will always play in the AFL.

But I do hope they are called the Demons and wear the red and the blue...

[beelzebub 23,348]

yep..thats right go out a buy a memebership for North.. like that will save them.. go to the benefit concert...like that will save them.

Its all very romantic and passionate isnt it. Has nothing to do with reality though; which is that North have been on the road to oblivion for some time...and they are not alone. Some would say we too oght to be careful, crafty and aware of the situation. WE ARE !! Thats why we are developing the brand. To ensure we go nowhere.

North have little in the way of support...people like Aylett know it.. and if he is reluctantly contending the move north makes ense ...who am I to argue.

Laidley knows the Kangas are firmly planted in the quicksand, hence he reluctance to sign a new deal.

Brayshaw is playing with himself if he thinks it not a matter of IF but when . There are going to be casualties in the game as it goes forward. The AFL needs to rationalise the Victorian participation . It knows the populations are moving. Brisbane will easily equal Melbourne for pop and spending inside of 20-25 years and so teh AFL knows that in order to maintain the stabilty of the game and to grow it in the new markets it needs to sew seeds that will be plants come the next generation.

Teams like the Kangas can grasp it with two hands and forge ahead..make for themselves a new destiny ..with hope and chance.. or become another Fitzroy!! The Doggies may want to look a bit ahead too.

whoever does take teh path less popular wil probably secure the gratitude of the League and be assured cashflow and help. Those that dont see teh writing on the wall are bid doomed by their stuuborness.

Melbourne IS different.. there simply has to be a Melbourne of some sort in the league.. there doesnt need to be a North...or a Bulldogs etc.

no one wants to say goodbye to an old friend... but would you rather it YOU ???

[Jumping Jack Clennett 1,780]

To say"there HAS to be a team called Melbourne "seems a bit naive to me, though I pray it's true.

I don't think the AFL would think twice of expunging our name from existence if it suits their goals.

Couldn't it be argued that it's incongruous to have a team CALLED Melbourne , that struggles for existence,in the state that spawned the game?

No, I don't think we should clutch at straws by saying "we're called Melbourne, that'll help us in our constant battle for survival".

We must continue to fight for financial viability and sound administration. These two factors are EVEN more important than on-field performance, though there's no doubt, that helps the cause.

We're somewhat erroneously thought of as being from the "top end of town". We shouldn't fight this perception , but use it as much as we can to derive funds, and to continue to attract the best Club leaders.

[Johnny Karate 559]

Fitzroy had 3000 members in 1996, were pretty much insolvent and were a skeleton of a side on the field. North Melbourne have 20,000+ members and finished 3rd in 2007. Comparing the two is apples and oranges.

Brisbane doesn't even have those numbers now, they were formed in 1987 and have 3 flags in a row and now the AFL wants to have a second team in SE Qld without even articulating the plan or viability of such a venture...

With all the whinging that goes on about them recieving welfare off the field they'll get twice as much up at the Gold Coast as well as draft & cap concessions. When North are gone we're next as I believe the dogs have rebranded themselves more successfully than we have at this stage. En masse our supporter base has been shown up as largely apathetic wheras Footscray fans have fought the league head on before.

I don't see it as us v. them off field, rather it is us and them. We are in the same boat - we are just fortunate we didn't have complete clowns like Miller on our board who decided to rebrand us as the "Demons" - given the overall apathy of our supporter base we'd've been dead long ago. The name Melbourne gives us a little bit of an advantage branding wise but not much.

If we can show there is enough support for these clubs to remain in Melbourne the end result is beneficial for all supporters concerned we are the heart of the AFL not the GC. They'll have to cough up the 17th license.

[Chook 15,012]

Can I just say that the most frustrating thing about being a Melbourne supporter is the totally skewed perception of us as rich supporters, when juxtaposed with the fact that the Demons are continually clutching at the precipice of financial oblivion. It doesn't make much sense, does it? That is something that has always bothered me about Melbourne's image.

But does anybody really think that if in ten years time, the club membership tally is as follows, that Melbourne's position would not be under pressure?

Adelaide Crows: 50 000 - 55 000 (I think the Crows will always be Australia's largest team - clearly from a state as mad about AFL as Victoria and without the

dilution of supporter-base caused by having so many teams)

Port Adelaide: 35 000 - 40 000 (off the back of some long-term success, driven by a new generation of players)

West Coast Eagles: 42 000 - 50 000 (always going to be Freo's bigger brother)

Fremantle: 40 000 - 45 000 (with some success, the Dockers could really get some good numbers)

Brisbane Lions: 30 000 - 37 000 (will probably always be Queensland's major team)

Gold Coast Kangaroos: 30 000 - 35 000 (with support from the populous Gold Coast, as well as many of its traditional Victorian supporters)

Sydney Swans: 30 000 - 35 000 (with the Dogs' added competition, the Swans' could get some solid, unconditional loving from its Rugby-mad, in-and-out

supporter base

Penrith Bulldogs: 30 000 - 35 000 (with dual support in the Western suburbs of Australia's two largest cities, the Dogs could get some solid membership)

Collingwood: 45 000 - 55 000 (the biggest club in Victoria, invariably supported by those brainless enough not to realize how disgusting this team is)

Essendon: 43 000 - 50 000 (obviously one of the Big Two in Melbourne)

Richmond: 40 000 - 45 000 (with some success, the Tigers still have the potential for some strong numbers)

Carlton: 43 000 - 50 000 (after a resurgence driven by the Blues youth of today)

Hawthorn: 30 000 - 38 000 (with some solid support from Tasmania)

St. Kilda: 30 000 - 35 000 (same old, same old)

Geelong: 33 000 - 40 000 (off the back of a dynasty that many believe the Cats will have had)

Melbourne: 23 000 - 30 000 (absolute upper limit w/o major on-field success/major restructuring of the brand, i.e. moving or merging with Hawthorn/St. Kilda)

Thoughts?

[deefuture06 0]

If ur figures are correct we wont have lasted 10 years!. We would have just stood still! I am hoping that the current off field changes will be the start of an increase in membership of at least 1000 per year over 10 years. This will be due to re branding and our link to China and other asian groups. I am hopeful that will have tasted premiership success during that period also. (wow I may live to see a flag in my lifetime!)

[mauriesy 7,287]

Collingwood: 45 000 - 55 000

Essendon: 43 000 - 50 000

Richmond: 40 000 - 45 000

Carlton: 43 000 - 50 000

Hawthorn: 30 000 - 38 000

St. Kilda: 30 000 - 35 000

Geelong: 33 000 - 40 000

Melbourne: 23 000 - 30 000

Thoughts?

My thoughts are that these are extremely optimistic projections for the other teams, and an extremely pessimistic projection for Melbourne.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

Can I just say that the most frustrating thing about being a Melbourne supporter is the totally skewed perception of us as rich supporters, when juxtaposed with the fact that the Demons are continually clutching at the precipice of financial oblivion. It doesn't make much sense, does it? That is something that has always bothered me about Melbourne's image.

There are two big stereotypes with AFL fans.

1) Collingwood supporters are the poor working class.

2) Melbourne supporters are rich snow-going upper-class.

Yes, there are always exceptions to these rules however as a general overview they are very much true.

The thing is, Collingwood's supporters may have less money, however they are more willing to spend what they have on going to games and buying memberships etc.

However, from my experience with working with some of Australia's richest people (again, exception to the rules apply) they are the ones who are not willing to cough up. Even for something as cheap as a coffee!

My point is, if anything the fact that Melbourne supporters tend to have more money is more of a hindrance than a help.

EDIT: That's just my anecdotal assessment.

[beelzebub 23,348]

Whilst a goodly number of memebrs is necessary ...a huge number isnt the most important aspect of corprate survival in todays climate.

Yes teh 'power ' clubs hava very good base. listen up folks...they always have. and we NEVER have. To plan the future of Melbourne based upon member tickets is folly and simply naieve. The MFC kknows this. which is why they are attempting to better the Brand, indeed expand the whole nature of the Brand.

23-26 000 will be enough Members.. for one simple reason...we're never going to get many more....short of a miracle.

Better sponsorship deals wil help... but they wont come overnight. Better income streams will definitely be the way of the future. If we live or die on the back of 5000 members ..we're doomed. Any club is. You have to have amuch better plan of attak than simply club sales and attendances.

Success breeds success. On field will help pave the way for other things etc.

The supposed "Dee" supporter is a figment of biased minds. We dont come from our defiined suburban haunts any more. The typical supporter of X club is no richer than that of Y. 5 of my good friends are ( sad to say of the filth variety ) no without means !! Point being its all crap about disposable incomes as stereotypes of todays supporter

But this is all a diversion from reality.. Member ship may mean around 3-4 million to most clubs..or 5-6 for the better ones. Turnover of a footy club is much much higher. The REAL money comes from other sources.. the AFL pie .. Sponsorships ; corprate coteries.. and Attendances.

I would say that initially getting bums on seats wil impact more than memberships...as it affects TV coverga eetc..and flow on benefits. getthe success and more members sign... but hey still arent the boom or bust item.

Success means you can garner another 500G-1m sponsor..etc etc.

The real money and survival is the BIG bucks...and people still argue about the little bucks !!

[Little Goffy 14,521]

After the Roos it'll be us targetted next - anyone who doesn't believe that has their head firmly buried in the sand. This thread disappoints me as I believe that messageboards like these represent the most passionate Melbourne fans - I think I even heard the idea of a merger of our club floated.

Any Melbourne supporter that's worth their grain of salt will buy a North Melbourne membership to try and keep them in Victoria. Clubs like us made the AFL - not the other way round, welfare during tough patches is deserved. The arrogant bastards can get stuffed if they think they can take more of our teams away for a bunch of theatre goers up North.

If the AFL had a viable plan for a GC based side rather than attempting fulfil an arrogant prophecy of by 2010 there will be AFL games every week in SE Qld - this wouldn't be such an issue for me. It just reeks of cynical opportunism from the AFL while the Roos board is leaderless. Perhaps the Roos administrators have botched things up for the club but I think it sucks that 20,000+ members will be punished for it.

I am intending to write to the MFC, North Melbourne and Bulldogs to suggested discounted membership deals if they are already a card carrying member of one or both of the other two clubs. If there is an increased level of support for these clubs the AFL wont find it so easy to shove us around.

North aren't going through a tough patch - they are a dead club walking. They are bleeding millions of dollars a year from the AFL and have no plan or prospect of turning that around.

Realistically, they can choose to become a power VFL team and compete with Sandringham, or they can make a radical move, which the AFL has indicated would have to be to the Gold Coast.

It's a miserable situation, I don't like it and it is obviously driven by the commercialisation of the game and the ridiculous resources going into football clubs. But buy a membership of another club which can't motivate it's own members, and can't enact a business plan of any sort, when it's heritage is on the line? Buy a membership of another club when my own club needs backing and is actually doing the responsible thing? If I was going to spend another $100 on football, it's all going straight to the Demons, because the sooner we're not in need of help from the AFL, the more resources the AFL will have to help struggling clubs turn around.

As for the Bulldogs, if they can't get it together when they've had $30m worth of facilities thrown at them by working with blatant electoral pork-barrelling, stuff em. They made a pact with the devil, if they still can't get by then they get what they've earnt and can fill the gap in Sydney's west. Maybe if they'd spent some of the last twenty years trying to actually welcome the West Melbourne migrant communities into the culture, instead of using the club culture to assert their 'Aussie-ness', they might be alright now.

Just a little explosion of frustration there. I'll hate myslef in about an hour, don't worry about that.

[Chook 15,012]

My thoughts are that these are extremely optimistic projections for the other teams, and an extremely pessimistic projection for Melbourne.

Whilst a goodly number of memebrs is necessary ...a huge number isnt the most important aspect of corprate survival in todays climate.

Yes teh 'power ' clubs hava very good base. listen up folks...they always have. and we NEVER have. To plan the future of Melbourne based upon member tickets is folly and simply naieve. The MFC kknows this. which is why they are attempting to better the Brand, indeed expand the whole nature of the Brand.

23-26 000 will be enough Members.. for one simple reason...we're never going to get many more....short of a miracle.

Better sponsorship deals wil help... but they wont come overnight. Better income streams will definitely be the way of the future. If we live or die on the back of 5000 members ..we're doomed. Any club is. You have to have amuch better plan of attak than simply club sales and attendances.

Success breeds success. On field will help pave the way for other things etc.

The supposed "Dee" supporter is a figment of biased minds. We dont come from our defiined suburban haunts any more. The typical supporter of X club is no richer than that of Y. 5 of my good friends are ( sad to say of the filth variety ) no without means !! Point being its all crap about disposable incomes as stereotypes of todays supporter

But this is all a diversion from reality.. Member ship may mean around 3-4 million to most clubs..or 5-6 for the better ones. Turnover of a footy club is much much higher. The REAL money comes from other sources.. the AFL pie .. Sponsorships ; corprate coteries.. and Attendances.

I would say that initially getting bums on seats wil impact more than memberships...as it affects TV coverga eetc..and flow on benefits. getthe success and more members sign... but hey still arent the boom or bust item.

Success means you can garner another 500G-1m sponsor..etc etc.

The real money and survival is the BIG bucks...and people still argue about the little bucks !!

Absolutely they are pessimistic numbers for us (and very optimistic for some of the other clubs). What I'm trying to ask - and maybe didn't put clearly - was that if other clubs make some rapid progress in the membership department (and thus likely in more important off-field areas), do people here think that the Melbourne Demons will exist as they are today, in ten years time? Will the AFL continue to carry a non-profitable team just because it holds the moniker of oldest club, founding club and the "Melbourne" name?

I agree with Belzebub that membership numbers are not the greatest indicator of financial success, but you have to agree that they do correlate with (and probably cause) a rise in corporate dollars, sponsorship, attendance revenues, etc. Take the Crows, West Coast, Collingwood and Essendon for example. Is it just a coincidence that the have the largest membership numbers and the highest annual revenue? I doubt it. Same deal for Melbourne, the Bulldogs and the Kangas.

[mauriesy 7,287]

Absolutely they are pessimistic numbers for us (and very optimistic for some of the other clubs). What I'm trying to ask - and maybe didn't put clearly - was that if other clubs make some rapid progress in the membership department (and thus likely in more important off-field areas), do people here think that the Melbourne Demons will exist as they are today, in ten years time?

Well, I still think you can only answer that question with some realistic numbers. Here's the current club membership, along with your most pessimistic projection and the difference:

Carlton 35,431 (43,000) +8000

Collingwood 38,587 (45,000) +6000

Essendon 32,759 (43,000) +10000

Geelong 30,169 (33,000) +3000

Hawthorn 31,064 (30,000) -1,000

Melbourne 28,077 (23,000) -5000

Richmond 30,044 (40,000) +10000

St Kilda 30,394 (30,000) -400

I can't understand why you think the worst-case scenario for Richmond is to grow by 10,000, but our worst case scenario is to go backwards by 5,000. They just seem like numbers plucked out of the air to make an argument.

[rpfc 28,383]

If we regularly get 30 000 members and breakeven financially, we will stay in our current form.

[Rogue 585]

Any Melbourne supporter that's worth their grain of salt will buy a North Melbourne membership to try and keep them in Victoria.

Buy two MFC memberships instead.

But this is all a diversion from reality.. Member ship may mean around 3-4 million to most clubs..or 5-6 for the better ones. Turnover of a footy club is much much higher. The REAL money comes from other sources.. the AFL pie .. Sponsorships ; corprate coteries.. and Attendances.

I would say that initially getting bums on seats wil impact more than memberships...as it affects TV coverga eetc..and flow on benefits. getthe success and more members sign... but hey still arent the boom or bust item.

Success means you can garner another 500G-1m sponsor..etc etc.

The real money and survival is the BIG bucks...and people still argue about the little bucks !!

You're right, but what drives sponsorship?

I'd suggest that the extra 10,000 members Collingwood has over us is a major factor, both directly and indirectly.

[Chook 15,012]

Well, I still think you can only answer that question with some realistic numbers. Here's the current club membership, along with your most pessimistic projection and the difference:

Carlton 35,431 (43,000) +8000

Collingwood 38,587 (45,000) +6000

Essendon 32,759 (43,000) +10000

Geelong 30,169 (33,000) +3000

Hawthorn 31,064 (30,000) -1,000

Melbourne 28,077 (23,000) -5000

Richmond 30,044 (40,000) +10000

St Kilda 30,394 (30,000) -400

I can't understand why you think the worst-case scenario for Richmond is to grow by 10,000, but our worst case scenario is to go backwards by 5,000. They just seem like numbers plucked out of the air to make an argument.

Thanks for those numbers. You're right, I probably overshot the mark for a few of those clubs. What the exact numbers are now isn't really relevant, though, I don't think. The question still remains - if other clubs (particularly the Demons' fellow Victorian teams) shore up their membership numbers, but the Dees don't to the same extent, will we still be around in ten or 15 years?

I for one hope to Hell that we do. I also agree with Belzebub that membership numbers aren't even that important (though I still believe that they are indicative of off-field success - whether current or future). In short, I wasn't really arguing anything - I was merely restating, I guess, the whole purpose of this thread, which is to determine whether Melbourne supporters think that the Kangaroos' proposed relocation to the Gold Coast is positive or negative for a Club whose greatest assets (I believe) are its age, name and links with the MCG.

[Demons 32 235]

Any Melbourne supporter that's worth their grain of salt will buy a North Melbourne membership to try and keep them in Victoria.

Why?

Save them, they get stronger and then we are in the firing line.

If it is true that the AFL is going to want a team in West Sydney as well on top of the Gold Coast move.

I would want to seperate ourselves more from those clubs not help them.

It's kill or be killed. The better the Roos do the closer they get to us.

I say if your going to spend the money buy another Demons membership.

I do, every year. My membership, and one for my girlfriend who doesn't even support us. Im already planning this year on buying her little sister, a very strong saints supporter, a junior membership.

Why help another team? Charity starts at home. Get us right before we help someone else.

[Guest eraadyn]

Im sure its apparent to most on this forum that this is my first contribution, so please, go a bit easy on the replies

However, I have an opinion on what the look of the afl should be in the next 10 or so years as much as anybody.

It seems to me that currently Victorian people as a whole have not completely embraced the idea of an AFL, in that, most people are not willing to see Victoria 'lose' clubs to interstate even when it is painfully obvious that Melbourne cant support 9 teams with a population as it is. Having said that though there is also the argument that Demetriou and his cronies have biased the draw in favor of the 3 big teams of Carlton, Collingwood and Essendon, and that, were the draw fairer then perhaps the gate takings and marketing for the other 6 clubs would be more even and thus less of an issue. I believe this is partly responsible, but you have to realise that in a 16 team competition, 22 rounds is never going to be fair anyway, and those 3 teams bring in larger crowds by themselves that some teams do combined, and as such, with the AFL being a business (yes i know, its not a sport anymore, its a business) AD and his fellows are running the AFL very well as such. Personally I think that there are a couple of ways that this could be alleviated.

1. Have a 16 team/15 round competition and leave the NAB Cup as it is with each team playing each other once.

2. Have a 16 team/30 round competition and remove the NAB Cup, with each team playing each other twice.

3. Have a 2 conference, 8 per team format where you play each team in your conference twice, the other teams once each, the top two of each into finals and the remaining 4 on points/percentage.

I have never also known why the AFL insists on 16 teams, i personally think it is because they are used to the idea and dont want to change, having said that I dont like the idea of odd numbers of teams, because i mean, lets face it, no one likes to watch a bye So why not have 18 or 20 teams in the future?

Back my first point, Melbourne as a city cant support this many clubs in its current state so here is my proposal for the immediate (5-10 year) future :

Carlton, Collingwood, Essendon, Melbourne, St. Kilda and Geelong. (notice that these are the 6 remaining founding clubs)

Hawthorn to Tasmania (or disband them and create a new Tasmanian franchise)

North Melbourne to merge with Southport or have their franchise sold to another private shareholding in Southport (they can afford it)

Richmond disbanded

Western Bulldogs to western suburbs of Sydney (the name fits and a new ground and marketing are planned for there anyway or again disband them and create a new franchise)

West Coast and Fremantle in WA (to be joined by a third club in 10 years+ such as Subiaco or Claremont) (team 16)

Adelaide and Port in SA (to be joined by a third club in 10 years+ such as Glenelg or Norwood (team 17)

Sydney and another team in NSW (WB??)

Brisbane and North/Southport in QLD or a second team in Brisbane itself

Why not an NT and/or NZ team sometime down the track? We are spending all this money on "Footywild" in South Africa, but not a hell of a lot in NZ, effectively our 9th and 10th states? (team 18/19/20)

I have now lost my train of thought, but i think you get the idea.

New format.

More a national competition

And I say bring back a proper reserves comp and let the states have there own comp without affiliations to afl clubs, its too messy and is hindering development.

Now, like i said before, criticise, but be gentle-ish....

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

I have never also known why the AFL insists on 16 teams, i personally think it is because they are used to the idea and dont want to change, having said that I dont like the idea of odd numbers of teams, because i mean, lets face it, no one likes to watch a bye So why not have 18 or 20 teams in the future?

TV Rights. They contract to provide 16 teams playing 8 games a week. IF they could get value the AFL would have more licences out.

BTW, welcome and you will find earlier in the thread there were attempts to crystal ball the AFL team list in the future.

Why?

Save them, they get stronger and then we are in the firing line.

If it is true that the AFL is going to want a team in West Sydney as well on top of the Gold Coast move.

I would want to seperate ourselves more from those clubs not help them.

It's kill or be killed. The better the Roos do the closer they get to us.

I say if your going to spend the money buy another Demons membership.

I do, every year. My membership, and one for my girlfriend who doesn't even support us. Im already planning this year on buying her little sister, a very strong saints supporter, a junior membership.

Why help another team? Charity starts at home. Get us right before we help someone else.

Well done Demons 32.

[TonyMelb 7]

TV Rights. They contract to provide 16 teams playing 8 games a week. IF they could get value the AFL would have more licences out.

BTW, welcome and you will find earlier in the thread there were attempts to crystal ball the AFL team list in the future.

Well done Demons 32.

correct regarding the 16 teams as the 8 games per week equals total number of hours needed to justify the TV rights millions! Aas Kerry Packer worked out with cricket sport is a hell of a lot cheaper to produce than TV programs such as sitcoms and movies - or even reality and quiz shows. Does not mean AFL would not change this in long term tho'.

Also, AFL recognised that a significant number of footy followers will be lost if any Victorian club closes down. Number of Fitzroy supporters dont follow AFL closely or at all now. If MFC ceased we would not change allegiances to another Vic side. AFL model assumes new interstate supporters will replace those lost in Vic.

Also agree Demon 32 is spot on! Any extra funds any Demon supporter has should go to MFC membership whether additional or upgrading. No place for any complacency about risk to OUR CLUB until the number of Vic clubs has reduced to 8 or less OR until MFC financial performance is much stronger.

[Always a Demon 0]

How can we expect to attract new memnbers and get back those who have lost interest when we are undermined as supporters by the Melbourne Executive. What have they done to our Mascot? We are now the Melbourne ?????'s. When did they ask you or me if we want to get rid of our beloved Demons tag. In addition the members pack this year is pathetic - a tie for the blokes and a neck scarf for the ladies. It seems to me that the Exec have lost touch with the members and are concerned with only one thing - the corporate dollars. Lets be honest, who cares if China does or doesnt embrace AFL? We are never in our lifetime going to see international matches. Keep AFL where it belongs in Australia and Melbourne DEMONS in Melbourne. See you at the next match in your tie. :wacko