xarronn

I posted this in the 3 Word Analysis thread, - just because attendance was brought up in it. It's a comment on both Saturday and the views about us now being able to do without the money for Darwin that were being brought up last week. Playing in Darwin v MCG. The key point I want to make is that 27,000 was a substantial increase on previous attendances against Port. It is likely that a game at the G against Adelaide may have had a few more, but the pie in the sky estimates of 40,000 at the G if we hadn't played in Darwin are so far off the mark, that it is worth noting and remembering. A number of people have brushed off the financial need for games in Darwin without being realistic about where the club is at right now. One more thing, a lot of people become members to support the club. They may attend few or no games, but they want to contribute financially. Saturday's attendance was pretty respectable, - and after seeing the attendance at Collingwood's game, its astonishing that anybody would be critical.

Playing in Darwin v MCG. Not the right thread for this, but as attendance has been brought up, I may as well continue it. The key point I want to make is that 27,000 was a substantial increase on previous attendances. It is likely that a game at the G against Adelaide may have had a a few more, but the pie in the sky estimates of 40,000 at the G if we hadn't played in Darwin are so far off the mark, that it is worth noting and remembering. A number of people have brushed off the financial need for games in Darwin without being realistic about where the club is at right now. One more thing, a lot of people become members to support the club. They may attend few or no games, but they want to contribute financially. Yesterdays attendance was pretty respectable, mind you there were very good reasons to attend.

W4A, I agree that it would be far better for us to have a bye after Darwin, as it would be for our opponents. I have no doubt the club would be pushing for the best fixture possible, but I also understand that there may be many other factors at play. It surprises me that you think that date that we play in Darwin is a result of mistakes rather than competing priorities. We have played Freo and Brisbane up there, - three of the 8 games have been against those clubs. We all know that we have been crap for many years, so I was curious what our record has been between 2010 and 2016 if we looked at a random round and the results of the following round. I looked at rounds 14 and 15, - totally selected at random. Had to swap for rounds 16 and 17 in 2015 because we played in Darwin in rd 14 that year. Not perfect but as close as possible to a random comparison with Darwin. Darwin - 3 W 4 L In the following round: 0 W and 7 L Rd 14 - 3 W 4 L In the following round: 1 W and 6 L Unsurprisingly, there is barely any difference during such a terrible era. Finally W4A, I'm sure no Melbourne supporter is happy with mediocrity, but the issue is what does the club have to do to keep it moving forward. As far as having a loser's mentality goes, wouldn't that be thinking we cant win in Darwin on a regular and consistent basis in the future?

Reasons why no change for NT deal: 1. Pretty sure we recently signed up for an extension on the NT deal - 3 years? So little or no chance of changing any time very soon. 2. I know that PJ has worked out the finances and I am happy to rely on his calculations v a levy on memberships or some other alternative. ie a bird in the hand v bird in the bush. 3. Anyone who says the money doesn't matter, clearly doesn't have to find the money to pay for the Football Department, The Womens Team or the NT Academy etc. 4. The NT Academy - not only does this cost money but it is advantageous for us to have a presence there and lets see what that might do for us. 5. If we had not had the injuries, is there any reason why we should not have beaten Adelaide? What is this hellhole stuff? There was exactly the same commentary about Etihad until we started winning. Winning or losing is more about the team not the venue, especially in Darwin. 6. We lack majority support in Darwin? Why would we expect that to not be the case? Have we been a dominant team for 10 years? Do we have 55 to 60 thousand members as Adelaide or Port or West Coast do? But if we do become a dominant team for the next few years, a lot could change. 7. I am not suggesting that this deal should stay in place forever, but what would we have done without the finances from this deal in the last few years and what might happen if if we collapse again in a few years time?

You are correct Bandi, we have played there 8 times, but the first was 2006 - against Adelaide, they won by 5 points. I think our successes and failures in Darwin would have a lot more to do with the team we have available than the way we play the ground. After all, how many years and games did we get to play at Etihad before we finally had a team good enough to win. That includes against teams for which Etihad was not their home ground, - Freo, Brisbane, etc. As it happens we have a pretty reasonable record in Darwin, we've won 4 and lost 4. Three of those losses were in 12, 14 and 15, I think we all know how well we were going in those years. In between we beat Brisbane in 13. (Oops, thanks BBP quite right lost to Brisbane, that makes our record 3 wins and 5 losses). And further supports team v venue as main influence. I agree with an earlier poster, that we were better placed, team balance wise, last time against Adelaide. I'm not writing off our chances, but as is clearly obvious, a few of our players are struggling because of lack of match play and subsequently their touch and fitness. If we win this, it would suggest that we have a special team this year.

Many of us have felt that the MFC missed a great opportunity when Collingwood took over the facilities at the old Olympic Park and Glasshouse. Things have since improved for the club with training and Admin facilities, but there is still a twinge of regret in my mind. However, perhaps not everything has worked out for the Magpies at the Holden Centre. Reading a Collingwood fan site, it appears establishing a social club there has not been successful. I have copied three posts from Magpies supporters below: What's the go with the social club & glasshouse Went to the game on Saturday and walked past the social club as I walked to my car over the river. I am a social club member and haven't been to the new glasshouse facility once.I wandered in and got told by 2 security guards that social club members had no access to the glasshouse. And because it's so isolated, nobody wants to go there. The club never should have moved it's admin base from Vic Park. If we instead spent the money we've spent on the Glasshouse at Vic Park we'd have top notch facilities there. Closed due to lack of interest, the email said it in double.speak way The other matter which was mentioned is that the Magpies are no longer using the once highly touted Altitude Room at the Holden Centre. I am not suggesting that the Pies, have a white elephant of a facility, but as they say, "not all that glitters is gold".

Words mean things. It's important to use the right words. Are you sure you mean to say 'corruption' Corruption: 'having or showing a willingness to act dishonestly in return for money or personal gain'. Who's paying them and what are they being paid to do? (Surely they aren't all being paid to get us, (MFC). They are human and most of us tend to think that there is a tendency to be inconsistent, error prone, erratic - but corrupt - Nah!

The lack of second efforts through the game might be put down to a lack of match fitness. Its the incident where he just gave up and I think left it to Garlett that disappointed me. I would have hoped it would have been a lesson learned from an identical moment earlier this season. In that game, the same thing happened in the pocket and Hogan simply stopped, again Garlett fought on and managed to push the ball towards another player in or near the goal square and a goal resulted. He was match fit in that game and I would have expected that with the follow up review last time, he would have him pushed himself on this deja vu occasion, even if his fitness was limiting his second efforts overall.

May be a bit tarnished by reports of his recent actions at a suburban game. He then ran off after that apparently. Haven't heard much more about it in the last few days. I wonder where this incident stands, because I believe he is a Nth Melbourne director.

So Bub, if he had 4 weeks suspension prior to his appointment, does that mean he should automatically be barred from working for the AFL? Dipper had a far worse record and was employed at the AFL. He was involved in both Ozkick and some diversity program which included the International cup. What about Leigh Mathews coaching Collingwood just a few years after his de-registration for the assault of Bruns? There may be many more AFL employees who have suspensions at various levels and we don't know about them. And what on earth does this mean? Can you spell out what is going to happen to the AFL? As far as I am concerned, Farhour's actions reflect on himself not the AFL. I really have no idea where you are going with these statements.

Any chance you may wish to retract this LH? You set up a straw man based on an incredible level of cynicism about the leadership of the AFL and you are 100% wrong. Why would you even begin to think that it would be a smokescreen? "AFL chief executive Gillon McLachlan has accepted the resignation of former diversity manager Ali Fahour and said he would not return to the league in another role." I usually find your posts sensible and informative, could not understand where your line of thinking emanated from in this case.

Yes, that's the bit I remember. You see Carey looking sh%t scared? I don't and why would he?

Amazing isn't it, the AFL do the right thing, they gather information and wait for due process to take place. That happens in about 48 hours after the matter becomes publicly known. Farhour appears at the NFL Tribunal, the matter is heard. He is suspended for life and decides to stand down from his AFL position. The AFL will now make a considered statement, being in possession of all the facts, rather than just operating on media reports. But no, the AFL are unprincipled &@?$'s, according to the narrative amongst a number of posters here on DL. Obviously what we really need, is to have someone heading the AFL who tweets the first thing that comes to his/her head at the earliest opportunity. Let's have a lynch mob mentality, that's what is missing!

You remember that incorrectly, Carey didn't take a backward step and Archer looked ridiculous.

Visible evidence: Deliberate, high impact punch to the face; Mills falls prostrate to the ground Outcome: Player is assisted off the field; diagnosed with concussion; takes no further part in the game Three questions: 1. Given the maelstrom of criticism of Bugg and his action and then the issue of one punch assaults being added to by the even worse Farhour incident, do you really think he would have received any mercy? 2. Is Bugg and the club better served by a (very unlikely and unseemly attempt), at a week's reduction of penalty, (surely no rational person would really suggest it could have been reduced by 2), or by following the course he took? 3. The criticism of the QC (by some), seems naive. Do you really think that he handled it differently to the way Bugg and the club wanted it handled? The way they would have in fact instructed him on how to deal with it?

They get a defence when they claim to be innocent. Bugg didn't make any such claim. Any claims for mitigation would have made no difference to the result given the visible evidence and outcome of the punch. He and the club decided to take whatever was given and get on with the rest of the season. Everything I heard from player, captain, coach and club was spot on. What some posters on here wanted was not what Bugg or the club wanted. I'm proud of all of them, and I'm proud of my club!

Bugg gets six weeks

In no way am I saying it is the same as a punch to the head or even a punch to the body, but when you say unprovoked violence, - it happens all the time on the field. Dees2014, not many stuck up for Bugg on the following occasions, do you class these incidents as unprovoked violence? Can you remember Easton Wood attacking Bugg before the game even started a couple of weeks ago? No action taken, no question to answer. Later he was attacked again which resulted in a free kick in front of goals and he came up with scratches and bleeding from the head. It seems we do accept unprovoked violence on the football field. In fact there was a distinct sense that many people saw it as entertaining and deserved because Bugg had put up a message on Facebook. The Farhour incident, seems to have heightened the focus on Bugg as well.

Ignoring possible trades in and out, I reckon we will take at least 4/5 picks in the National Draft and 2 in the Rookie draft, (if it still is a separate draft). The four / five outs from the main list are: Lumumba, Trengove, Garland and Hulett and/or Kennedy Trengove has barely played AFL level for 4 years, it probably isn't going to happen now. Garland was non-preferred last year, hasn't played great footy for several years, he's not likely to be figuring in future plans and he has a role with the AFLW team. Hulett still young but dropped to Development League late in his second year, indicates gone backwards. Kennedy, a major disappointment after what seemed like a promising start. How did we end up with Lumumba and Kennedy and Collingwood got Varcoe and Howe? (Rhetorical question). The two outs from Rookie list are: Tim Smith and Mitch White Tim Smith, at his age and with his foot injury, probably not worth persevering with, which is sad. Mitch White, he has played 4 times. His best was the half game against GWS in the last round of 2015. Still only 21 but we have to keep turning the list over. Jake Spencer is the quandary. Whenever it looks like he is about to prove his worth, he both under performs and gets injured. He's probably cheap to keep as insurance, but he wasn't used when he could have been, two weeks before Gawn came back. If we are a real chance in 2018, I don't think he will warrant being played in finals if Gawn is injured, - after what we have seen this year. Unfortunately it doesn't look like our other two rucks will be anywhere near senior level next year.

To bed? You sound dizzy.- LOL

True, but we were part of serious action. Our real chance and the one that got away was 1990. We had the team, we got a rest and we had the wood on Collingwood and Essendon. But we let West Coast jump us at Waverley and missed our best chance in half a Century. Now that is something to get upset about, not the piddly media rubbish.

Ok, let me make myself unpopular! I reckon virtually every post on this thread is a 'woe is me', hand wringing post. It's true that 'the media' will try and wring out any drop of controversy and often present anything but a balanced view. But to suggest they're out to get lil' old Melbourne because they don't want their old favourite "Established to fall" is just nonsense. A week ago we were the darlings of the media, last year the success of the Bulldogs, (another minnow club), was greeted with incredible acclaim. Mark Stevens and Scot Gullan are Bulldogs supporters. We are the story of the last four days and will be tomorrow. Then the spotlight will move to something/one else. As the old saying used to go, 'today's headlines are tomorrows fish and chips wrappers'. As for haven't been part of serious action for 53 years, c'mon! Have you forgotten 87 to 94 - a Grand Final and a couple of Prelims, 98 to 06, - a Grand Final and a couple of prelims. The so-called media is not a monolithic entity where everyone thinks alike. There are some particularly strange and very slanted people like Dwayne Russell and Mark Robinson. Then there are people who are quite different, like Gerard Whateley and David Schwarz. This thread sounds very much like a Donald Trump tirade against the media. As if this is going to make it tough for the club going forward, if anything the current sh*tstorm should galvanise the players and the club. As for Demonlanders, apparently we are not made of such stern stuff, so we will quiver like a blancmange. Ok, now I'm gonna take a deep breath!

Poita, I think your passion has probably got you looking glass half full. 1. You have to have experienced players at VFL level. Even if Trengove isn't going to make it, you need hardened bodies to lead the way and provide support. That's why Terlich and some others were there last year. 2. Leaving aside his indiscretion, something has changed with JKH in the last month, as has his body shape. May not make it but he is a new work in progress. 3. Joel Smith you left him out, hardly tried and failed. 4. Maynard, you left him out, not tried and failed. 5. Wagner, certainly isn't zero talent or a failure yet.I know he played AFL on Friday, but he is still a developing player. 6. What do you expect from the 2 rucks, both essentially in their first year because of injury and one is only 18. (Mitch White was only recruited at the end of 2015). 7. Are you sure about lengthy contracts for Bugg and Kennedy? They're both in their second year on our list, at most I would think one more year left. I wouldn't accuse Buggy of not trying. I'm not surprised he had a bad game on Friday after the incident. 8. In any case not every player can be best 22/

Interesting that after having such a great season last year and then being rookied by Melbourne, I don't think I have seen Keilty figure in the best at Casey all season. Is anyone who gets to see Casey live able to shed some light on his form and prospects? No mention of Hulett's performance in the Development league. Did he play? Into his second year on the list to be dropped to the DL has a bit of the Max King feel about it.

Two points: 1. Agree completely with the sentiments about punching, but want to point out that to my knowledge, the worst injuries from these one punch / coward punches arise from the victim striking their head on a hard surface when they fall. So maybe that's why fatalities on a football field have not occurred, (stand to being corrected). 2. Leigh Mathew's and Shaun Smith's careers did not intersect. Do you mean some other Melbourne Smith? Just read later post - Steven Smith. Didn't know about that.