Leaderboard

How good is this bloke, will/has there ever been a demon so universally loved (AFL wide) both for his approach on and off the field as much as Bernie Vince? (i'm sure there has, but it is rare). Love what this bloke brings to the team week in and out. If only we had him his entire career. Catch this quote (paraphrased) from his latest catch up on Robbo's Roast: http://www.melbournefc.com.au/video/2015-07-23/robbos-roast-bernie-vince "I kick a real kick out of helping young guys, that is something i could see doing after footy is working in development, i love helping the young guys they just have such amazing attitudes--the whole footy club has, they are just eager to learn. That's why i want the MFC to do so well. I am getting towards 30, i would love to play finals footy before i finish and if i could in any shape or form help these young guys come through then i could sit here (MCG) and watch them play in a Grand Final and think: I HELPED THEM GET THERE." Would love to have a beer with Bernie.

Went down to training for an hour this morning. Cold. Good to see Petracca kicking and running, albeit away from the main group. Seems very 'up' and must be keen to get on the park. Kent was also away from the main group and didn't stay long. Pedersen was helping the ruck group by tossing the ball up and in with his left hand. Seems to be a good feeling out there. Brendan Mc is very vocal during training and is constantly urging greater effort from the young ones. Training drills ... pretty much what they normally do but they were going pretty hard at each other when I left. Nearly forgot, Frost was there as well but mainly as a spectator. How good is it to have so few 'outs'?

Does anyone else find Harvey as annoying as I do?

Selfish outside player who thinks of himself more than the team. I despise him.

Think Viv needs to be given a full game and given an opportunity to play for his spot on the list. No point making him the sub... Stretch should be the sub

Or a conversion

You cannot discount where these two clubs have been in recent history though. One played in Grand Finals in the last five years and still has a core of players from that team playing, so a strong culture has been in tact and been able to nurture the young guys coming through. The other club fielded the worst team in 2013 I think I've ever seen, has won about 20 games in seven seasons and had deep rooted cultural problems across the entire club, as near as two years ago. There's absolutely no point in comparing them. St Kilda have a couple of nice, young players, but we've built a core over the last two or so years that will far supercede their crop. This week will see another tight game and possibly a Melbourne loss, but over the next 5 to 10 years, I think you'll find we'll be dominant. We're moving in the right direction and are currently about on par with St Kilda, although they're probably slightly more consistent due to their core group of leaders from the Lyon era. But we've closed that gap significantly in 12 months and it will only improve next year, whereas St Kilda may lose one or two of their experienced leaders. I think when this happens, you'll find they'll dip in form.

My mate lives in the same building as Bernie and couldn't speak more highly of the guy. By all accounts he's a pleasure to chat with and the perfect neighbour. Just like you'd expect from a good country lad! Club should auction off a beers-with-Bernie night post-season for the Treloar fund.

HOWS THAT I win the chocolates exactly 23 goals as predicted....effn genius

Tuned into tonight's game and must say in contrast to the above I am enjoying the contest, free flowing game, skills on full display from both sides and yes the scoring is a bit one sided but this is still a great spectacle. And I must say I really loved Ronaldo's goal for Madrid to go 2 up, football at its best.

He was in the main group for all the time that I was there and did some nice things in the drills.

Unless you've completed a medical degree this week and can provide detailed injury updates, I won't be reading your reports KC - last week's failure to immediately diagnose Kent's hammy tightness was a total disgrace !

While I generally like Rohan Connolly's writing, this one's a bit facile. I can think of other reasons why people might have lost interest. For example, I'm sick of seeing the same few teams on free to air TV at night. I don't have a chance to watch daytime games, which mean I've consistently had Carlton, Richmond, Geelong, Sydney and Hawthorn games to watch. As a consequence, I cannot recognise the players in teams like St Kilda, Bulldogs, Freo or WCE (and others). That, in turn, means I don't appreciate the competition as much as I should because I don't know enough about these other teams.

It's only you and every other non-North supporter on Earth. That he's a great player with impressive longevity isn't in dispute though.

well then come on home Dion. Come on home. He is my no.1 for us to target. Would be incredible if we got him. Dion comes out of the underratedly solid 2010 draft. Among the like of Swallow, Gaff, Caddy, Heppell, Smedts, Isaac Smith, Darling etc. Melbourne picked up Lucas Cook......................... If we can get Dion that makes up for a draft we badly missed out on.

IMO munga you never ask coaches, they have one primary objective i.e. to win games Everything else runs a bad second it is the coaches who have developed the game that we have at present. Forget them and do what is necessary to improve the game.

My initial reason for joining this forum several years ago was to bring to attention the degradation of the 'style' of footy. i felt i had an advantageous position to observe this for the reason being that i had gone several years without seeing a game due to living overseas. Apart from 2 or 3 posters, i was shouted down. i feel vindicated now by the overwhelming shift in opinion amongst the media and footy itself. Due to the unique position i had of observing it through a "back to the Future" type experience i saw the shift and decline in style before it really became obvious to an audience who had viewed it week in week out and could not see the subtle changes . Throughout this debate I have insisted that the interchange needs to be capped. the counter argument is that it wouldn't change things much but thats when the case is mounted to cap them to say 80 a game. well i agree that 80 a game wouldn't make a difference. There is a direct and very distinct correlation between the huge uptick in rotations in the mid 2000s and the decline in style of play. Lets not mess around with 80 rotations. In the early 2000s, say the era of the Lions premierships, or even the late 90s, footy was great. Forget the argument stating there were bad games back then too. Thats such an obvious statement that it shouldn't even be mentioned . of course there were. But the good was better and more frequent. Rotations were about 25 - 30 a game. Lets bring it below that to counter the superior athletic condition of todays players. Each bench position can be changed once a qtr, excluding the blood rule. The other argument I believe is false is when people counter that the high rotations create a fast paced game. I call Bullsh1t on that one. What they do is create an ability for players to run faster for longer but there is a BIG difference between players moving faster and the GAME moving faster. As it stands with all the stoppages and congestion, although players are able to move quicker for longer , the game is moving much slower. Remember 10 years ago when the players were in position, the ball would race down one wing, and then transition back out of defense along the opposite wing. Position to position, one on one to one on one. Fast footy is the BALL covering ground quickly. So, in summary, my thoughts are that players are to start qtrs and after goals in traditional positions and that each interchange position can be changed once a qtr, excluding blood rule.

I'm driving 1400 km to see us win, so nothing less than a win is acceptable. Dees by a couple of goals, I reckon

Only the good teams keep their opponents to 4 goals for the game

26000 on a friday night.... Bigger crowd at the worst game of all time last Sunday at the G!!

i'm in for 23 goals

I took my 2 kids to the footy every chance I had....We had ham and salad rolls and a large bottle of cordial....sat out in the rain and barracked as hard as we could They are still both members and my grand daughter is a paid up member (8 months old) Even though we lost more than we won.....It was great family time

Dee-luded WTF is wrong with your font? Did you smoke crack whilst typing? I feel like I'm reading a ransom note from a b grade film.

Only 4 kids, Bub. Is that enough to qualify me for comment? And yes, I know it sucks to be the only loser MFC kid in the school when everyone else goes for a good team. I was that kid once.

Dear Chook, please note thread title change: Dear Ethan

I found the article pretty simplistic. There are a greater number of issues facing the game than just stoppages. For one, I'm bored sh!tless with Hawthorn being an ever-present powerhouse. They're odds-on to win it again, making it three in a row, four GFs in a row, five Preliminary finals in a row. If their opponent is Sydney or Fremantle, which is more likely, then that will mean we've had a grand total of three sides make the GF in four years. But just as importantly, fixturing is horrendous. Free to air TV is dominated by the same sides. If I want to sit down on a Friday night and enjoy a game, I'm essentially forced to watch Carlton, Richmond, Collingwood, Hawthorn and Geelong. I'm sick of being forced to watch the same sides weekly. So I've significantly reduced watching non-MFC games. Meanwhile, if I want to follow Melbourne closely, I'm forced to show up at ridiculous times like 1.10 or 4.40, or even 3.20 which exists solely for TV. And if my club goes interstate they essentially disappear off the face of the earth, save for those fortunate enough to afford the rip off that is Foxtel (although I will give credit to local pubs who do their best to have AFL on where possible). As for the game, I've always believed it will evolve over time and problems like stoppages will sort themselves out. Having said that, I agree that the interchange cap needs to be reduced (significantly, IMO). I don't like the concept of zones, nor do I think they're necessary - eventually, with interchange rotations forced downwards, sides are going to start resting more players in the forward line (because they can't rest them on the bench and they won't be able to push up to the stoppages like they do now). It will sort itself out if we give it the push it needs in the form of reducing rotations.

And I don't agree with Viney about the St Kilda game. We may have had the lead with 40 seconds to go, but we only held the lead for 20 seconds in that whole last quarter and the ball barely left their forward 50. They deserved to win that game more than us.

Unfortunately we just don't fit the template to get a fair go with the fixture (that's a "fair go" not preferential treatment) It seems to meet the AFL's criteria to receive a decent fixture a club needs to ... Have a large membership Have their supporters attend games in large numbers Attract a large TV audience Be a successful team on the field Play an attractive brand of football However, I'd argue that the above criteria shouldn't be the criteria at all when fixturing games ... prime time TV games aside, all the clubs should be on an equal footing when running a "fair" competition. As a comparison, even the smallest clubs in the EPL always receive home games against all the big EPL clubs (those games become big money spinners for those small clubs too) The fixture shouldn't favour the bigger and more powerful clubs at all. Considering it has done for 15-20 years now, it's any wonder there's now a bigger gulf between the rich and the poor. The Bulldogs, Saints are often in the same boat as us and North probably would be if they were struggling on the field. All because of the AFL's manic desire to maximise crowds and TV numbers. Something has to give when that's the goal so the smaller clubs become expendable. Other smaller clubs like GWS & the GCS are "company stores" (so to speak) so they obviously don't face the same financial pressures. In the end, we continue to receive a fixture that just doesn't bring in enough revenue ... 7 home games against the interstate clubs with 3 of the remaining home games against the other smaller clubs (Bulldogs, Saints & North) has become the norm. That spells disaster when compared to the "other" bigger Victorian clubs who consistently receive up to 5 home games each against the other big Victorian sides. The same pattern has been in place for quite some time now. Up to 5 big home games for a half a dozen Victorian clubs versus our 1 big home game (QB clash) X multiple years is grossly unfair. Sometimes we're lucky enough to receive 2 decent home fixtures (next year we should be the home team against Richmond on Anzac eve) The solution (in part) is to drag ourselves up to the middle tier (or above) and hope that Jackson can then get a much better deal for the club. In the meantime, he might want to push for a home game to start the season against one of the other big Victorian teams (Essendon or Geelong?) The real solution is for the AFL to start acting like proper custodians of the sport. Does anyone honestly believe that can happen?

Fair appraisal there AF I only have one objection That has yet to be proven

Sit with the Demons and make sure all the 'little' things are good. I.e. Bring plenty of brownies. Through baked sweets we can make this club great again.

Agree with how cringe worthy the Viney comments were. The last quarter of that game was played in their half so the Dees would have snatched it. I wish the players would just shut up and let their actions on the field do the talking. I'll be shattered if we can't beat St Kilda at the 'G with Riewoldt on one leg. Honestly, they went out and got the $350k a year coach. We got the $1.5m one. They have taken kids, kids and more kids and we've gone a little bit older with the likes of Vince and Lumumba, and even went for Tyson who'd been in the AFL system for a couple of years. These are the games where these players really have to deliver. These are the games we recruited them for.

If it's true that Treloar was offered the same deal as Shiel, it's clear that they prioritised Treloar too, but he either wanted more money or had his heart set on returning to Victoria or both.As for Treloar lacking x-factor, I completely disagree. He's fast, hits the scoreboard and wins a heap of the ball. He's already in the elite category for mine and was there last year too. Treloar will be in the top 10 midfielders in 3 or 4 years time. He is a gun, who is probably down on form slightly this year, which tells you something, given his ability to put up big numbers consistently.

Brainwashing for the greater good can never start too soon.

Might be worth sending these stats through to Grant Thomas? They make the point really well.

You're lucky, mate. I've been with my girlfriend for almost 9 years. Still haven't been able to convert her. If she'd gone for almost anyone else besides Hawthorn, I reckon I would have been a chance to convert her, but alas they pump us every time and win the flag every year.I just have to bide my time.

Joel Selwood becomes the most valuable player in the comp

Good memory Daisycutter! yes i feel you may be right. its got to a stage also that most current players soon won't remember the game being any different unfortunately but like you said, at least its now up for discussion. Us dyed in the wool supporters will watch anything, almost, but my concern is the ability of the sport in its current form to be appealing to the next generation.

Agree with what you say Munga. But if you allow extra rotations for the blood rule you will see a rush of self-inflicted cuts..... (god, why has the AFL made me so cynical)

Gasp, he likes seeing goals scored and yet he took you to the soccer?!

The appeal of NicNat is his marketability. Living in WA I have a lot of mates who support the Eagls. They know he is overrated, there's never any debate. But the kids love him, he brings in the money. Commentators obviously get sucked in as well.

Exactly. NicNat is easily the most overhyped player in the comp. If he did exactly the same things and had the same stats but was wearing a Melbourne jumper and looked like Max Gawn then we would be moaning about his lack of tank and woeful disposal. The degree that the commentators dribble on about him his nauseating.

Our best all round player. I just wish he was two-three years younger. Maybe his birth date is wrong. That happens sometimes right? right?

What did I do to deserve that? I was simply pointing out that the sheer number of Bernie appreciation threads is a good indicator of his popularity. It’s called a metastudy. A study of the number of studies of a particular thing is often a good way of determining the overall truth or relevance of that thing. And as for peanut, well...

Great bloke. Great footy player. Hope he gets to wear red and blue in September in a year or two.

If he's 5 he'll enjoy the day no matter what. I took my son to his first game against the filth and they absolutely flogged us in the first quarter. When they finally kicked a point he excitedly yelled out 'daddy we've got the ball' much to the amusement of all around. He still barracks for the dees 20 years later!

If Matt jones plays I won't bother going

I won't be giving my kids a choice, OD. You're a demon or you don't go with me (or more aptly - you're dead to me).

I'd rather be 15 and happy than 75 and sour. No offence.

Are the crowds leaving the game because of the way the game is being run or the game itself. I tend to think the former rather than the latter. There will and should always be tinkering done. However poor visual TV angle coverage and favouring certain teams over others does nothing to help perceptions in the public domain. Finally I would think that The MCC and Australian Sports Commissions, even the Minister, are worried about the AFL's piecemeal dithering.

And it's the accumulative effect over a number of years which creates the bigger gulf. As an example - 5 x 60,000+ crowds might equate to 5 million+ in revenue whereas 1 x 60,000 game only equates to perhaps 1 million in revenue. That's at least a 4 million dollar head start every year for up to a half a dozen Victorian clubs (in theory) Thomas' other notable points were very important too ... the unseen stuff that someone like Jackson would know only too well. Winning more games would help (somewhat) ... do that and it would give our CEO some decent ammunition for a better deal. I guess a lot of us have got some reasonable solutions to a complex issue but we're talking about a governing body who have their eyes firmly planted on the almighty dollar.