Leaderboard

Amazing. You believe (somewhat reasonably) that the club has a soft, mediocre culture. Yet want us to be punished if an official instructed the coach to tank? What difference does it make if the plan was from top brass, Dean Bailey or the cleaning lady? It was clear that bizarre moves were being made against Richmond & it was clear that we were tanking. It was a hard nosed approach aimed at giving the club the best draft position & shot at future success possible. Something that several other clubs have done successfully. If you punish the club, you punish the supporters like you & I who have sat through this garbage over the past 6 years, 30 wins from 127 effing matches! All I'm clinging to is hope, hope that we can rise from this. If we were to admit systematically tanking the sanctions would be catastrophic & remove all hope, something we the supporters don't deserve. If we were to admit tanking the only thing we would get that we would deserve is raucous laughter coming from Carlton, Collingwood, Hawthorn etc because we were such a rabble that we dropped ourselves in the [censored] and they got away with it Scott free.

He forgot: * The amount of journalists reporting on AFL far outweighs those reporting on Australian politics. More quantity = less quality. * The journalists ready & willing to insert themselves into the headlines by editorializing news stories. * Journalists making news stories based on what they or other journalists say. * Journalists blatantly taking [censored] out of context. * Journalists reporting on the gossip of the game & not what happens on the field. Caro being AFL-drip fed the North to the Gold Coast story in 07 & then her blatant anti-Brayshaw agenda since is a fine illustration of this. * The amount of bias being inserted into the AFL commentariat - I don't even know who you are Andy Maher so I couldn't care less that you're a passionate Blue. Whatever happened to impartiality? I could go on, but it seems that Ro-Ro (hes a Bombers fan don't ya know?) has missed giving the AFL a whack for handing out so many media passes to nuffies who have NFI.

What an exclusive I can break to you all on demonland. Andrew Demetriou's email addressing all things tanking to Adrian Anderson. Major news. Here we go: Yo Adrian, How's it going? Things are pretty sweet up here at the Olympics in London. I went to the badminton last night - awesome. Got some autographs at the basketball. But I could go on and on about the awesome time I'm having. I hear there have been some dramas around tanking in the last couple of days. Boy, thought we'd heard the last of this one. Oh well, I wrote this letter during the men's 100m freestyle final, so if you could put this out as a press release that'd be just great. Just edit where necessary. Try to make me look funny. "Dear media members, AFL fans and employees who are back home enjoying our great game while I conduct important business in London. It is with great sadness that I must inform you that the AFL has today decided to administer some penalties in light of public comments made recently by Northern Bullants player Rock McLean. As a consequence, we have decided to harshly penalise the Melbourne Football Club for their flagrant tanking in, well, pretty much any game between 2007 and 2012. But more on that later. Sadly, while strenuously digging around for evidence of Melbourne's foul play, we have discovered that they were not alone. It is with a heavy heart that the AFL hands down the following penalties to various clubs for breaches of the newly created Tanking Act: Carlton: The Blues appear to have been the trailblazer for Melbourne's rorting. You can't tell me the Cruiser (look, I can't spell his name - you don't think having to deal with the pronunciation of bloody R Nahas on Brownlw night is enough?) Cup wasn't a little fishy. I seem to remember T Johnstone having something like 67 possessions and 6 Brownlow votes on the night. Total debacle. Where was Fev? No, not literally - I couldn't care less what he was doing at Crown that night - why was he dropped for the last 9 games? As a penalty, Carlton will be forced to swap their #1 pick from 2007, the aforementioned Cruiser, with Melbourne's #4 pick, Cale Morton. My apologies to Cruiser and his family. Collingwood: It's very sad (but hilarious when considering what Eddie's reaction will be) to acknowledge, but Collingwood have been found guilty of some shenanigans of their own. Hmm, losing the last 9 games of 2005 while stuck on 5 wins eh? Didn't think we'd pick up on that one, did you? And just two years removed from back to back grand final chokes no less. Collecting Thomas at 2 and Pendlebury at 5 was a hefty return. Given that Pendlebury won the 2010 Norm Smith, and no one was fooled by calling him Embleberry up there on the stage, we've decided to strip the Pies of the 2010 premiership. (Adrian, let me know when it's safe to come home. PS. Don't read that last bit out.) Hawthorn: Like Collingwood, the Hawks will have to surrender their most recent premiership triumph. Such was their willingness to send players off for season-ending operations in 2004 in great number, numerous children missed out on hospital beds for life-saving operations. Please note, steel reinforcement has been added to the walls of the MCG coaches boxes. West Coast: See the last two. 2006 premiership cup: gone. Blatant malarkey required to get into position to draft Chris Judd, let alone NicNat. Couldn't get em for 'recreational reasons' in 2006, nailed em here. Adelaide: the Crows will be forfeiting the 1997 premiership. Before half of SA chokes on a Farmers Union iced coffee, squealing about not doing anything wrong, ask yourselves - how many times has Shane Ellen played in the forwardline before or since the '97 Grand Final? Positional experimentation is for after hours, not grand finals, thank you very much. St. Kilda and the Bulldogs: One premiership each? Really? Nice try. You now have zero each. Richmond: like the last two, you are an embarrassment to the competition, and not just for introducing the roar-o-meter to the AFL. Two finals appearances since 1982, and this in an era when we've rigged it so half the teams make the finals. We punish Richmond and its supporters by allowing the club to continue as is. Brisbane: You weren't fooling anyone with the 'we only want 8 Fitzroy players' shtick. What, couldn't find a spot for Jason Ramsey or Brent Frewen? Could have been a five-peat (we would have bankrolled it too). You lose the 2001 premiership. Well, no, we need the game in Queensland. Just change your logo, would you? It makes me hungry. Essendon: since 2008, only Richmond and Essendon have disgraced the stae of Victoria by losing to Melbourne. You want to debate that Michael Hurley s better than Jack Watts? Fine, he's a Melbourne player now. Fremantle: LOL! All the advantages afforded to an interstate club in an AFL-mad city and you've made the finals thrice? For being the perennial skidmarks on the AFL's underpants for 18 years and without any accomplishments to remove the Dockers must revert to their original clown suit uniform. Port Adelaide: playing the kids eh? Hmm, Chad Cornes and Dean Brogan excelling at GWS - clearly flogging players off before their use by date. AFL license is hereby revoked. (Adrian: phew, that was easy - I've been wanting to do that for a while). Geelong: one of the more I sickening cases of tanking I've seen. The corruption not only of the sport, but of the female womb. How long did it take to establish this "father-son academy"? How many women tanked themselves out of regular relationships to take part in this production line of prodigies? All three premierships from the modern era are hereby removed. Sydney: (just leave this bit out, Adrian. No one will count the teams anyway). And so we come to Melbourne. This hotbed of treachery and tanking is met with the swift hand of the law. All premiership points for 2012 to be stripped, and their #1 pick from 2009 taken away. They will however be given an additional priority pick at the start of the first round in consequence of their third wooden spoon in five years. We hope this is a warning to all teams, not just Melbourne, of the seriousness of tanking. Yours sincerely, Sir Andrew Demetriou (just watched the equestrian with the Queen - think I talked her into it)" Thanks Adrian -AD

To me, the big question is the motive. All can be considered tanking if the motive is explicitly to lose. But, if the number one priority is not winning, instead say future development then no, that is not tanking. Motives are however very hard to prove either way.

Is it any different to deliberately conceding a behind to the opposition, so that you might promote a greater positive result later? As Clint points out, there is a difference between trying to lose (tanking) and not trying to win (developing). I'll make a further distinction in the trying to lose category - there's trying to lose so that you can win later with better draft picks - there's trying to lose for some betting related financial gain

You can think what you like Paul, it's a free country, but FFS, don't go on public record and drop us in what is a serious accusation you [censored]!

Paul Gardner was/is President of a global advertising firm. He supposedly understands media and sponsorship. I say two things: 1. the financial situation under him was deplorable and very nearly bankrupted our club. His expertise in getting us sponsors and marketing our team were essentially useless. 2. For him to come out now and make these comments publicly shows that he is out to destroy our club. He would have known the full effect of what he was saying and the forum by which he delivered it. He is either monumentally stupid OR he is seeking to damage the club in the most vicious way possible. I dont give a toss that he worked 7 yrs pro-bono. Plenty of others have done more. Its what he did and has recently done that he will be judged on and in both cases he will be judged very harshly as a failed administrator and guardian of our club. As far as I am concerned he is not welcome at our club. He is suffering from relevance deprivation syndrome and should F off.

Personally if I were going to the trouble of contacting him I would have just said that I thought he was bitter and his intentions were to damage the club and that is the only logical outcome of his 'speaking out'. His perceptions in regard to the way we played are personal. He didn't like it? Then had the option of not watching, not being a member, registering his upset with the club, privately. I wasn't happy about our experimenting but at the time the reality was we were left with no choice. There were more members who would have been MORE peeved if we had have missed a priority pick 2 years running. These were not enviable choices. I would have liked to ask Mr Gardner what he would have done if he thought the FD was structuring up for picks? Would he have exposed them, sacked them, whilst simualtaneosuly revealing a 5 million dollar debt? They are hard calls even in hindsight. To sum up, anyone who goes down media street in the way he has is bitter and a [censored].

I mentioned yesterday that in my fury of Paul Gardner weighing unnecessarily that I emailed Grey Group. Lo and behold - Paul got back to me. Unfortunately the first mail sent to him was web based so I dont have a copy of it but it was along the lines that a "true Melbourne person wouldnt have said what you said". It was short and sweet. He responded and I have taken the opportunity to really spell out why I was unhappy with what he did.Start from the bottom up. Hi Paul, Thanks for your response but I think you have missed my point. It is not what was said that made me contact you – there are many, in fact most that share that exact sentiment. My email was directed at a person who I strongly believe didn’t need to come out and air his views in the manner in which you did. I have number of rhetorical questions to throw at you (or you may want to respond) · Why exactly did you think you were called on to comment - because you an expert commentator ? because you are a media celebrity ? The reason you were called on, is because next to Dean Bailey you were the next closest Melbourne authority figure no longer working for club ( albeit you departed six months before the end of the season) that was likely to give the journo’s a headline. You were contacted because you are /were a Melbourne supporter, a Melbourne Football club President , a Melbourne person. Contrast what Paul Johnson said - he took care in his answers and let people draw their own conclusions. He actively decided not to whack the club. Compare the media reactions of Paul Johnson’s interview to yours – one approach was inflammatory - the other wasn’t. · I understand your distaste for what transpired – however did you believe at the time that there wasn’t enough coverage of the story ? Did you believe that there wasn’t enough outrage and it was being buried ? (Brian Taylor suggested that the MFC be removed from the competition !). With someone with a purported love for club would not a more helpful approach for our club been to assess the situation and see that this story was already massive and didn’t need any more help. After Brock’s statements this was going to be addressed by AFL one way or the other. Do you believe you weighing in was going to open the “unopened eyes of the AFL. The tanking train had well and truly left the station – there was little need for a Melbourne President to chase the train jump on board and help fuel the fires. · Let’s consider how other good Melbourne people have behaved when confronted with unpalatable situations o Dean Bailey sacked as coach - did he take parting shots at the club which he had every right to do when he was marched out the door ? He handled his exit with class. o Mark Neeld – “I will make you fitter harder and stronger”- Did he add because “because my predecessor left the list in a deplorable state” ? o Could you imagine Jim Stynes standing up and saying “What a magnificent job the supporters have done in eradicating our debt” and then adding “ considering the precarious financial state previous administrations left us in”? Your legacy is frequently debated on the supporters website and opinion is divided but there are many who rightly acknowledge many of the good things you did for our club. Go on the supporters board now and with few exceptions the question is being asked “Why did a Melbourne President find it necessary to whack his own club”. The club is going through a tough time onfield and has had much unwanted media attention this year and this is just one more. I’m sorry Paul – if you consider yourself a true Melbourne person you would understand that the input you delivered wasn’t necessary – authority figures from a club don’t publicly whack their own. (I am an active member of the Demonland community and as a courtesy I am printing your response to me on our supporter boards as many supporters are disillusioned with your actions and want answers) Regards Jeff From: Sent: Wednesday, 1 August 2012 5:21 PM To: Subject: your note... Thanks for your comments…I responded to what I think is a poor practice that should be stamped out by the AFL. Regardless of my feelings for the club I support and worked pro-bono for nearly seven years, it is wrong to enter any game without the intention of winning. If you think this is the kind of club or effort you want to support, that’s your opinion…and it’s sad. Hopefully other supporters don’t share disillusions that losing makes a club strong. paul

Is there ANY DANGER AT ALL we can pick players in this next draft who are ready to go FROM DAY 1??? We don't have time for %$&%ing bean pole project players this year, we need a quick fix and we need it right now otherwise we might as well shut the bloody door now. This is just another frustration that is pi$$ing a lot of people off.

It's not the same as McLean. McLean was on a football program & answered a pointed question about his career in an honest (yet tactless) fashion. Gardner was a dial-a-quote & as an ad-man he would've known it. McLean is a nuffie who didn't think things through, Gardner's approach had far more malice about it. As for those finding this openess refreshing, I suggest when next posed the question from a significant other "Does my bum look big in this?" - respond with refreshing honesty & see how far that gets you. Unfortunately the real world doesn't operate on openess, honesty, sunshine & farts.

If found guilty of tanking MFC should be stripped of all premiership points for 2012 and all premierships for past 47 years.

Nice get nb. I think you may've been wasting your time though. The guy is clearly a fwit with an axe to grind. If he felt so strongly about this 'poor practice' why didn't he come out with these feelings at the time rather than three years later? Did he write to the club at the time to express his concern at what he was seeing? If he was so anti-tanking when he was president why didnt he slam other clubs such as Hawthorn, Collingwood & Carlton for cheating & cry "the MFC will never, ever delibrately lose games of football"? Does he want to see the club he supports & thousands who support it punished & go through misery just because he didn't agree with an alleged past practices? He must have a mighty superiority complex if he believes the need to air his public opinion outweighs what is best for the entire MFC community. Nutbean, your letter was tactful & considerate towards his opinion while questioning his course of action over the issue. His response was glib, smug & condescending. You are class, he is not.

I am still rankled with him for claming we were tanking under him. We never did. He just wanted to put himself into the story. Well, the story is about to die, nothing will happen and those that think this is loosening up the clutches of the current admin are kidding themselves. Clubs close ranks when they are being constantly attacked. This year has been crisis riddled (most out of our control) and yet Schwab is looking more and more likely to stay on as CEO. I argued with RF a few months back about how I could understand the club 'moving on' from Schwab but now I can see them 'sticking fat' in light of the fact that we are under attack and he is constantly being accused as the Rasputin of our little world here. It is self-defeating to those that want to see the back of Schwab - if you attack him for everything that goes wrong, your lost credibility attaches to your relevant claims and just entrenches him further.

This thread is purely for the blue sky junkies, of which I'm not always a member, but I need to dream. Also, despite this season being our annus horribilis, the following prospects aren't completely without merit. I consider this season over come grand final day and thus the curse of this season will also be over - just in time for trades/drafts. And I'm sick of talking and reading about tanking. Club politics isn't really my thing, even though I have contempt for some previous key stake holders. In another thread I've shied away from getting Cloke purely because of the cost, but today I'm going to embrace the idea on the basis that the list management team headed by Tim Harrington have carefully planned for free agency and can manage such a "purchase". I'm also going to assume that we get Viney in the second round. Possibilities: 1/ In - Cloke (Collingwood), Caddy (Gold Coast), pick 3, pick 4, Viney Out - Sylvia, pick 13 to Gold Coast 2/ In - Cloke (Collingwood), pick 3, pick 4, pick 13, Viney Naturally this thread isn't concerned with likely delistings or later picks/acquisitions, just pointy end picks and substantial ways of improving the list. The beauty of getting Cloke is that he costs nothing other than the wage. Team: Def: Nicholson, Frawley, Rivers H/B: Grimes, Tom McDonald, Garland Cen: Caddy, Viney, Toumpas H/F: Watts, Cloke, Howe For: Jurrah, Clark, Blease Rucks: Jamar, Trengove, Jones I/C: Martin, O'Rourke, McKenzie, Gysberts New: Cloke, Caddy, Viney, Toumpas, O'Rourke. While not perfect and still with room to improve, this is pretty much a spud free zone. You don't see names such as Bate, Dunn, Petterd, Morton, or teases such as Moloney and Sylvia. It also doesn't allow for others such as Taggert, Tynan, Strauss, Tapscott ... Toumpas and O'Rourke are very highly rated inside and outside contested ball winning mids with pace and elite kicks. Unlike Trengove they're quick and unlike Scully they're great kicks and will be stronger bodied. Toumpas captained SA in the u/18 national championships. Both are predicted to be top 10 draft picks. Most rate Toumpas top 5 and TAC Future Stars on Channel 9 ranked O'Rourke as they're second best prospect. Viney and Toumpas will add instant character and leadership qualities. Trengove and Grimes will welcome young leaders and mids of their ilk. Also, rather than being 17 year olds like Flower and Healy, or even schoolboy draftees of more recent times such as Andrew Walker, Callan Ward, Dangerfield and Jack Watts, these players will play nearly all year as 19 year olds. They'll not be 'A' graders overnight, but they'll impact our group with their class immediately. Note: all three of these guys have better credentials than the highly rated Toby Greene of GWS and he's averaging 26 disposals in his first year. He was a teammate with Viney at Oakleigh Chargers and another first round draft pick only last year. Every single supporter knows there are no guarantees with drafting, but assuming we draft well it's like having Beams, Shuey and Selwood walking into your club. I've seen Viney and his approach to football and the only other mid of recent times that I can liken him to is Joel Selwood. He has the same manic attack on the ball. We lack pace, but straight away we'd gain three young mids with pace. Look at the spine, or goal to goal line: Frawley, McDonald, Viney, Cloke and Clark. It has the potential to be one of the best in the league. Look at the forward-line. With the addition of Cloke I've put Watts back into the forward-line. The two best defenders go to Cloke and Clark, but the opposition have still got to cover Jurrah and Howe as other agile marking options, plus a 196cm Jack Watts. We still need a quality crumbing forward, but I've put Blease in there for now. That is a ridiculous forward-line to match up on. The back-line is a little top heavy, even though Garland and Frawley are good at playing on 'smalls'; and we need an elite kick out of defence, such as Suckling, or Guerra, but it's got the makings of a decent back-line. If you can't sway Caddy to come to the club then pick 13 may be retained and a dynamic and fast little player such as Ben Kennedy may still be around. He's a terric small with a booming kick who plays midfield and kicks goals. A midfield in 3-4 years of Jones, Caddy, Trengove, Viney, Toumpas, O'Rourke and possibly Gysberts provides a mixture of pace and hardness, and has the ingredients to be the envy of the competition. Obviously we may not choose Toumpas, or O'Rourke, but that's the type of quality that will be on offer. Forget Cloke's poor year. He's a gun key forward and we've seen enough to know that he and Clark would be a nightmare for the oppostion, especially with quality flankers around them. Supporters mustn't give up hope that we can draft well. At the top end this draft is quality, especially for midfielders. As Terry Wallace said on the weekend, we have a chance to do what the Saints did in 2000 when they picked up Hamill from Carlton, Gehrig from West Coast, and Riewoldt and Koschitzke with draft picks. Current first round mids/utilities gained from drafts: Hodge, Ball, Dal Santo, Hayes, Goddard, Wells, Judd, Murphy, Griffen, Cooney, Thomas, Pendlebury, Sidebottom, Selwood, Bartel, Deledio, Cotchin, Stanton, Thompson, Dangerfield ... Just look at the names. All of these players were first round draft picks. And you can add 'in demand' players such as Boak, Caddy and our own Nathan Jones as other first rounders. This year there will be players of similar quality and we have a chance to get two (three if we use pick 13), plus Viney if he comes in the second round. The possibilities to change the course of this club are enormous. Do other supporters share my belief that this club can be transformed quicker than a lot of the general public, or media commentators envisage ? Btw, I know I'm not the only supporter with this type of hope. I'm just one of many. But just as certain there will be some that consider such blue sky scenarios only fit for the land of the fairies. If we can't get Cloke we need some other mature key forward to improve our structures and to help Clark. I'm excited by the opportunities ahead. *If mods would prefer this thread on the draft board naturally they'll move it. I posted here because it's a mixture of blue sky with our core list, as well as drafts/trades.

Jurrah a chance for VFL next week Whooo Hooo

IRRELEVANT by Clyde The (former) Clifton Hill Cabbie I don't know if anybody out there remembers me. In my time as one of this great city's leading cab drivers I was well known by all and sundry who used my services to convey them around town for my opinions on politics, religion, sport and a variety of other subjects. I always believed I had a deep knowledge and understanding about our nation's number one sport until one day, this young bloke turned his attention away from his iphone, sat up in the back seat of my taxi cab, angrily snubbed his nose up against the perspex window that divided us and told me to STFU. To him, my opinions on the football were "irrelevant". How dare he? I was a keen student of the game and I got a lot of my inside information from listening to talk back radio and reading the sports pages of the little newspaper which was full of stories written by people who had contacts inside the various league clubs. Surely, the sources of my information were impeccable? Later, after thinking about it a little more, I realised that time was indeed passing me by in this new world of digital electronics and whiz bang gadgets. Perhaps, I was becoming irrelevant? I'm in retirement now. I live in this nice nursing home and although I occasionally get to watch a game on TV, I usually manage to fall asleep even before the result's done and dusted (which these days means by half time). I hardly ever get to read the newspapers because the print's too small and the eyesight's failing and most of the people here knit or play lawn bowls so I don't really know much about what's going on in the AFL any more. I suppose that's what makes me feel even less relevant than ever before. However, I always look forward to that once a year day when one of the good people at Demonland visits me and asks me to write a preview of a Melbourne game for the site. This year's visitor was my old friend The Oracle but he delivered what I regarded at first as the supreme insult when he asked if I would write about the Demons' forthcoming encounter with the Gold Coast Suns. I thought for a while and asked, "who in blazes are the Gold Coast Suns?". He replied that they were one of the new franchises that joined the competition last year. "You mean like Hungry Jacks or Dominoes Pizza?" "No, they're an AFL team that plays at Carrara. Gary Ablett Junior's their captain." "Ablett? Well, that's okay then. Brock'll fix him up." Brock was one of my favourites. The Oracle's next revelation hit me right between the eyes. He told of Brock's defection from Melbourne at the end of 2009 because of a problem he had with the club's "experimentation" that went against the grain of everything he'd ever been taught. So he decided to leave and head to a club whose traditions were seeped in integrity and honesty. I was incredulous as The Oracle explained the events of the week in great detail. There was one thing that puzzled me but no sooner had the words leapt out of my mouth that I realised that my question was totally irrelevant. "You would think with three experienced journalists and commentators doing the interview, one of them would have asked him why a man who held such lofty principles could have possibly gone straight to a club whose reputation not only for tanking but for generally rorting the system was legendary?" It was at this point that all those years of spouting conspiracy theories gripped me and in a moment of inspiration, I understood what this was all about and it had very little to do with the practice of tanking. The whole thing was a set up. The puppeteers were pulling the strings to perfection. The kid who not long ago publicly claimed he contracted aids from somebody's mother had left what passed for his brain in the studio's green room. They knew from the start that he would take the bait and it played itself out perfectly for them. The agenda and the people behind it soon became apparent. As I put this proposition to my visitor, I suddenly felt that I was becoming relevant again. He was almost out of the door when I noticed he had left me with several copies of the sporting sections of the week's newspapers to help with the research for my story. All that was left for me to do was to wade through the rubbish and sift through half a dozen beat ups and testimonies from former players and officials and then I could write my match preview. That was the easy part. The clash between 16th and 17th is a game in which every aspect of team selection and every move that the coaches make is likely to come under scrutiny for all the wrong reasons by suspicious journalists and others struggling to make a sensational story out of nothing. But the game itself is totally irrelevant. THE GAME Melbourne v Gold Coast at the MCG Sunday 5 August 2011 at 1.10pm. HEAD TO HEAD Overall Melbourne 2 wins Gold Coast 0 wins MCG Melbourne 1 win Gold Coast 0 wins Since 2000 Melbourne 2 wins Gold Coast 0 wins The Coaches Neeld 0 wins McKenna 0 wins MEDIA TV – Fox Footy Channel at 1:00pm (live) Radio –SEN ABC774 THE LAST TIME THEY MET Melbourne 17.10.112 defeated Gold Coast Suns 12.10.82 in round 23, 2011 at the MCG. Oh my god. This was a game so tedious and boring that I was driven to the bar not long after the start of the second quarter. By the time I returned to watch the action fortified by an unknown volume of the amber liquid Melbourne was on its way to a five goal victory. THE BETTING Melbourne $1.33 to win Gold Coast $3.40 to win THE TEAMS MELBOURNE Backs Joel Macdonald James Sellar Tom McDonald Half backs Jack Grimes James Frawley Colin Garland Centreline Jordie McKenzie Jack Trengove Rohan Bail Half forwards Sam Blease Jared Rivers Lynden Dunn Forwards Jeremy Howe Colin Sylvia Brad Green Followers Jake Spencer Brent Moloney Nathan Jones Interchange Jordan Gysberts Cale Morton James Strauss Luke Tapscott Emergencies Jack Fitzpatrick James Magner Josh Tynan In Jordan Gysberts Cale Morton Luke Tapscott Out Neville Jetta (suspension) Daniel Nicholson (jaw) Stef Martin (foot) GOLD COAST SUNS Backs Taylor Hine Charlie Dixon Trent McKenzie Half backs Daniel Stanley Matthew Warnock Jarrod Harbrow Centreline David Swallow Gary Ablett Michael Rischitelli Half forwards Jared Brennan Tom Lynch Brandon Matera Forwards Luke Russell Sam Day Campbell Brown Followers Zac Smith Karmichael Hunt Harley Bennell Interchange Josh Caddy Liam Patrick Dion Prestia Matt Shaw Emergencies Aaron Hall Steven May Maverick Weller In Sam Day Michael Rischitelli Out Steven May Maverick Weller There must be a clever linguist out there somewhere who is capable of coming up with a word that means the opposite to "blockbuster", because such a word word be perfect to describe this game. Until recently, I would have regarded a Melbourne home game against the Gold Coast Suns as unlosable but I'm not so sure any more. With the club under attack in the media and the tanking debate swirling around it, I'm not all that certain about how the players will react to what I can only consider to be the destabilising atmosphere that has surrounded them throughout the week. After all, it's not often that you have a situation where a former player and former president are out there publicly whacking your club across the head and the media heavies are baying for your blood on a daily basis. It also doesn't help if, on top of these worries, you have a substantial injury list that severely restricts your capacity to pick a team that can win games. On my reckoning, no more than 30 players from the combined Melbourne senior and rookie list of 46 will be in action at the weekend. By way of contrast, North Melbourne will have close to its full list playing in three teams (the Roos are aligned to two VFL clubs and had 12 players representing Werribee alone in the final of the Foxtel Cup on Thursday night). Nevertheless, there are many commentators, either oblivious to thus situation or simply chosing to ignore it, who are maintaining that the Demons will come under more tanking scrutiny if they lose this match. Go figure? Being from the old school, I like to analyse games line by line and, pardon the pun, but I've come up with a result that is going to be very much a line ball. A great deal has been made of Melbourne's much maligned midfield but paradoxically, this is likely to be where the Dees can draw great strength. They might not have the sheer brilliance of Gary Ablett Junior or the youth, pace and ability to spread of their Gold Coast counterparts but they do have size, strength, experience and home ground advantage going for them. Nathan Jones has been a revelation all year and should not be underrated even in the company of the AFL's best player. He proved that last week with his 32 disposals 10 clearances playing to a losing ruck. His partner in crime, Brent Moloney was not far behind him in the disposal count with 29 on return from a brief stint in the VFL. Let there be no doubt, Beamer is playing for his football life along with one or two others like Cale Morton and Jordan Gysberts who are back in the side this week. Jordie McKenzie will probably have the toughest task of the lot after a down week against the Roos but he's taken some scalps this year and, as a kid from down Geelong way, he should rise to the challenge of taking on the former local hero. So this game might well be the antithesis of a blockbuster but I think it will be close and that the Demons will rise to the occasion, put their critics in their rightful place and make themselves relevant once again. Melbourne by 2 points.

I think you meant to sign off ... Thanks, Paul.

Return home from the alternate universe.

We got two compo picks, the same as Geelong got for Ablett and more then the Dogs got for Ward. I'd say we're ahead.

I understand, and that is the surreptitious point of the poll. You are supposed to hit questions and say 'well, yeah, it is, but not all the time.' When you hit that 'logic point' you are tacitly saying that you cannot prove tanking on that particular point. IMO, the only definitive tanking that can only be considered tanking is the first question over player effort. The rest is in the murky world of motive and context - and you can't legislate based on that.

I can see now why he gets caned on here; you're wasting your time. My apologies to RR (the other one) I can see why you do what you do now.

????????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

HWCOS is irrelevant and has shown he puts himself before the club - persona non grata P.S. from a 'pro bono' supporter

The club obviously believes that they can afford it, so unless you are privy to information that says the club is telling us porkies, then the money involved goes out of the equation. If we were to stack up on midfielders, pray tell who they are going to be delivering the ball to... all of those forwards that have stepped up in Clark's absence? Go ahead and hand your membership back, I will buy another for my second son to make up the difference.

Actually you are referring to his SECOND interview His first interview was to a journo on the Sun and was the basis of the newspaper article. This preceded his SEN on-air interview This was where the Cameron reference came from and the confusing references to 2007/2008 On the SEN interview he accused the PLAYERS of tanking not the coach. This is the first time anyone has claimed that and he based it purely on opinion only. And THAT is offensive

I'll leave pointscoring to one side & agree to disagree with the other stuff. I just think Gardner's comments were unnecessary & tipped a bit of petrol on the media bonfire. I agree with you, he's a nobody & his comments won't affect any investigation. I just question his motives in why he did what he did & the way he said it. If he'd said there was a lot fishy about that Richmond game - I wouldn't have a problem, but his comments were just so stupid & without any foundation in reality. He's clearly got an axe to grind with the MFC - that's the only reason he would've said what he did. I am a bit fired up about it because the media & opposition clubs are laughing at us, calling us irrelevant & then this [censored] who is supposed to be one of us is shooting his mouth off to suit his own agenda.

You have been running around thread to thread claiming we should be punished, and now you are not sure it was punishable?! You are such jam jar that is hard to open!

Look carefully at what Paul Johnson said. That is how to answer a question regarding this situation. He answered honestly without embellishment and left drawing of conclusions to people other than himself. Cudo's Paul Johnson.

Its a screaming non event. Everyone enjoy WYL's melodrama in the meantime. Rubbish. If it cant be defined then it cant be proved. DC is right on the qualifications and in fact he has only hit the tip of the iceberg. And McLean....moral high ground......FMD!

And when the club folds due to sanctions? Will you still be riding high on your moral horse then, proclaiming your purity?

What a few days. Madness. At least it puts out in the open the people who should be stripped of journalist accreditation and/or the right to have children. This is an absolute fool's issue. I tear my hair out wondering how people make this into such a black and white issue. Well, perhaps it was in 2005 when a certain team lost their last 9 games to finish on 5 wins and qualify for a priority pick to snare Thomas and pendlebury. This is not last night's badminton where players blatantly lost on purpose. This centres on a club that has been incredibly poor on-field for six years and seeks to make an example of one or two games in 2009 where the club conducted itself consistently with how it has done so over the whole six years. Experimentation with playing positions, dropping players for disciplinary reasons - these have been happening consistently for Melbourne during the rebuild. There is no possible way that the AFL could find Melbourne guilty of any ongoing short of hiring someone to torture the players, coaches and officials from 2009 into falsely spewing out a confession, probably after being locked in a room watching every Melbourne game from 2007-2012 with their eyelids taped open. Seriously, what do people think is going to happen if Melbourne is punished? That no team is ever allowed to send a good player off for season-ending surgery with a broken hand if they're going to miss the finals? That Adelaide will be stripped of the 1997 premiership for farcically playing Shane Ellen in the forward line on grand final day? That we cannot delist Matthew Bate because EA Sports' AFL game gives him a higher overall value than Lucas Cook? Can we please have some common sense around this. Clubs need to have the ability to best prepare for the future, and at times this will involve experimentation of various sorts. Until the day comes when someone runs the length of the field in the wrong direction to boot the winning point for the opposition, we are making a mountain out of a molehill.

Come off it, honestly. This whole best game in the world business is so single minded, and you may say "well that's just my opinion" but so many people count it as fact. It's like Americans saying that the MLB finals are the "World Series" and then the USA team get pumped by Columbia or something. I'm really frustrated by this whole mentality of they've done a good job. To make money? yes, but at the expense of the integrity of the game. There are countless issues within the AFL that are so corrupt and contrived it has really affected the pubic perception of the game, or well at least for me and people i talk to about it. The whole game is controlled by the media and a small group of loud fans with a knee jerk reaction to one off relatively small events. Just because Mark robinson writes an article saying he doesn't like sling tackles doesn't mean you change the rules. I love this whole, "well they are making money hand over fist and clubs are now secure" argument. They're financially secure because they robbing you.

He's been coached by Malcolm Fraser and Neil Harvey.

FMD, why do you feed this idiot? But you did agree with it: http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/16100-what-is-the-essence-of-a-football-clubs-existence/page__st__175#entry253045 http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/16027-the-t-word/#entry250849

There'll not be much left of the napkin.

There probably won't be a club but you don't seem to have the (insert whatever) to understand that.

Apology not necessary as far a I'm concerned. As rpfc alluded to, if PG is a wee upset about his email being copied into a forum as opposed to be being mistaken in the national media, or beating his chest on the radio about something he knows SFA about, then he has seriously got his priorities up sh!t creek. But we already know that.

You know there's a quote that timD used on this site when arguing with a nuffy the other day that will suffice for you in this situation: "you are fighting an imaginary war against an enemy that doesn't exist to prove a point you won't admit you're trying to make." FMD.

We Win = Scarf flaps outside car window down the Tulla on the way home, i log into Demonland, read the reviews and the forums, watch post match interviews and press on DeeTV, watch the replay during the week, read Superfooty and Realfooty then keep logging into Demonland throughout the week. We Lose = All of the above except the scarf.

Are you serious? You are happy that the AFL are investigating OUR CLUB so it may uncover what you believe is incompetence at the highest level in the Administration? Do you really understand what the ramifications of this will be, if they find a top official has instructed the coach to tank? Good luck finding a new team to support.

Excuse me, Nasher. But I once saw Damien Gaspar kick out from full back in a reserves game, stub his toe, break his foot, and be out for 10 weeks. So let's cut Scott some slack...

Initiailly, I read this 'reduced me to tears' purely because 'Sylvia' preceded that passage...

Heaven forbid someone should come into this club with the balls to take some punishnent. I just wish we had more players like him.

Mark Neeld deserves a medal for courage under extreme adversity with all the rubbish he has had to put up with in his first year as coach. In the words of Bobby Davis "It's fair dinkum unbelievable." We should probably all be locked up.

Or lets hope it's not in the Red and Blue Print!!!

Wish I could like the OP x1000, with all the misery & Weltschmerz being peddled around in the media & on these boards it's easy to forget that we have a future. A few thoughts to go with the OP... Please note I haven't watched any junior footy this year. I like what I hear of Toumpas, Stringer, O'Rourke, Wines & of course Viney, netting any two (or more) of these guys plus having a fit Trengove & Jones in the guts goes a long way to fixing the midfield which should be our priority. That said were we to select Brodie Grundy with #3 or #4 I wouldn't be jamming the fork in the toaster. Nor would I be upset if we were to trade #3 to get Jack Martin in the mini draft. Nailing this draft will go a long way to securing our future. I firmly believe we have the bare bones of a good side in 3-5 years right now, the bases are loaded, nailing this draft will be the home run. Clark, Frawley, Jones, Trengove, Howe, Jurrah Grimes & McDonald could all be A graders. Watts, Rivers, Jamar, Moloney, Garland & Sylvia have enough class to contribute more. Bartram, McKenzie, Bail, Jetta, Martin Nicholson & Sellar are handy role players. We may even find a player or two from the largely unproven group of Evans, Blease, Gawn, Gysberts, Strauss, Tapscott, Taggert & Tynan. Things are never as good or bad as they seem. Even if my optimism is somewhat blind, there are at least 15 good players on our list. This is what Malthouse walked into at the Pies in 99: http://afl.allthestats.com/?itm=111718&inyr=1999&t1=4 Of that very young Pies list they only had Buckley, Burns, N Davis, Licuria, Lockyer, Michael, Prestigiacomo, S Rocca, A Rocca, Tarrant, Williams who were any good. 3 years later they were within a breath of a premiership. Thompson at Geelong the same year: http://afl.allthestats.com/?itm=111718&inyr=1999&t1=8 Another garbage list that was transformed into the powerhouse of the new millenium by nailing their picks in 99 & 01 When Dean Bailey took over at the club I thought of how long it took Geelong to really get their [censored] together, 8 years. In 2015 it will be 8 years since Bailey started rebuilding the club, although our path was different & the journey could be a little longer I expect us to be around the mark in 2015 regardless.

Suck what up? The AFL singling us out for treatment and laying the boots in? If we do that we deserve to fold. We have two options if the AFL go us that I can see. 1. Deny everything and sue our accusers for defamation. 2. Admit everything and drag everyone and everything possible, including the AFL and the system they created, through the mud in as calculated and vindictive a way as possible. Either way, we have to fight. Won't be any choice as far as I'm concerned.