No10

40 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

I want Jack Viney to absolutely crack Cam Guthrie open.

Up there as one of my most hated players going around. Will never forget what he did to Neville Jetta back in 2015.

Agree completely... But what did he do to Neville Jetta back in 2015?

1 hour ago, D4Life said:

Player said I’m staying!

Coach said Hogan staying!

Manager said he is staying!

Kicked 47 goals, handed off plenty, also played up field and in middle, typically has 2-3 opponents, missed a few games. 

Guy is a gun, give him another preseason and 20 more games, will be elite next year!

Well and truly time to close this thread!

And he’s the fastest in the AFL!

6 hours ago, No10 said:

I’m sure this has been mentioned...

I went to check those amazing Clarry stats were accurate (they were) and found this. I thought it incredibly surprising:

Am I alone in being shocked Jesse clocked the fastest speed in the entire AFL?

I must be late to this revelation.

Never trade Hogan.

I’m sure this has been mentioned...

I went to check those amazing Clarry stats were accurate (they were) and found this. I thought it incredibly surprising:

1 hour ago, Bobby McKenzie said:

1, Maxy's kick off the ground in the last quarter was huge. It covered a remakable distance.  I guess he used his long leverage very well on this occasion..

2. Petracca's brilliant pass to Melksham to seal the game. Reminded me of the Jack Watts pass to Dom Tyson in the Queens Birthday match last season. Can we safely add Christian's name to our elite kicks in the team?

Trac, Gus, Harmes, Salem, Oliver... the skills of these younger set are phenomenal (beyond elite)

Bring me the head of GWS!

1 hour ago, Chook said:

Hope you haven't bought a ticket to Sydney.

Yes! Packing now... uh oh

Perhaps ANB out?  He's clocked up a power of kms- given SCG is smaller he could freshen for WC.

And JKH, it doesn't seem right to run him up to finals.

3 changes, probably too many.

On 8/6/2018 at 8:23 PM, No10 said:

I’ve never seen a breakdown of ALFCA votes, unsure it’s released.

Mathematics is at fault for that being 4 votes from one coach.

I don’t think it’s emotional to assume Simpson gave him the 4 votes. But yes, that’s my assumption.

I believe MSF is right as it's the only mathematical possibility.

5Yeo

5Yeo

4Gaff

4Redden

3Redden

3Cripps/Sheppard

2Sheppard/Cripps

2Darling

1Sheppard/Cripps

1Lycett

 

On 8/6/2018 at 8:43 PM, Moonshadow said:

No it's not. You're making this vote equation up. Fake maths. Where's your evidence to say Simpson 4/Lyon 0? Happy to apologise if I'm wrong, will you and SWYL apologise if your opinion cannot be substantiated?

From the evidence so far, its not Simpson who should be ashamed, it you and SWYL

@Moonshadow Your ‘Fake maths’ comment was funny. I think it was meant to be funny?

But yes, my assumption was wrong that Simpson gave 4. I withdraw, apologise and stand corrected.

2 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Again, that is true.  I was referring to Gaff's reaction (none too happy with Simmo) and how it might affect his decision to stay or go.

I read differently, the coach tried to refocus him on the game, I didn’t think Gaff was upset by that.

My feeling is he’s more likely to stay. Alternatively, if WC handled him in the same manner we did Bugg, then I think he’d go.

Even down to the 4 votes, I think they’ve played this ruthlessly.

11 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

That may be true but it probably won't endear Simmo to Gaff.  So I was using it as an example to add to Mach5's hint that the way WCE have handled this would make Gaff more likely to leave.

I actually like the ruthlessness from Simpson and WC.

He’s a footballer, keep his head in the game, then after the game re-enforce he’s a good person and this is an accident in play, shield him from the media, make him feel totally supported and almost believe he wasn’t in the wrong.

He’s one of their best, make sure it stays that way. Let the AFL deal with all that integrity spin.

16 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Lowered his position in about .5 of a second. I am sure it will be the Defence, but it should be treated as very flimsy

True, but is supported by the vision. And a truckload of character references. Plenty of remorse from Gaff too, to be fair.

Solid defense from Gaff. Changing the conversation to the niggle off the ball. And as people have said on here, @McQueen - said he was aiming for chest but Brayshaw lowered his position...  Building the case for a light penalty. Still think 8wks.

41 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Given that Bugg got 6 weeks (reduced from 7 for pleading guilty) for "intentional, medium impact" and Gaff is charged with the more serious "intentional, severe impact" Gaff must get more than 6/7 weeks or it makes a mockery of the whole system.

As WCE are set to challenge and if Gaff is found guilty as charged he should not be given any penalty discount.  The Bugg discount was for pleading guilty not for showing remorse (which he did in spades), nor for a good MRP record.  

The AFL is carrying on about the 'Look of the Game'.  It doesn't look too good when a kid goes off the field with his face punched in.  If they really care about the 'look' and the impact of the Gaff incident on junior football then they cannot allow a reduced penalty.  If the penalty is less than 8 weeks the AFL should appeal. 

I thought Bugg was ‘high impact’.

Incidentally, Jonas also got 6wks in 2016 for high impact elbow that KO’d Gaff.

To your point, I’m interested to see what a defense does to the result.

I’m guessing 8wks, but if less then you’d have to wonder about all that integrity around the Bugg handling.

3 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

It's meaningless.  It only matters to those who want to make a mountain out of a molehill.  

I disagree. I mentioned Bugg because although the MFC article @Pates kindly posted said he'd trained harder and proven himself to be fitter and stronger, he can't break into the team, not even close.

We ask these kids to play on the absolute edge, these incidents have an affect. If I were Gaff, I'd now stay at WC.
The votes are just a hint to a far more brutal culture that rightly or wrongly can help him return to his best.

4 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

Can someone enlighten me as to why we care about coaches votes in this instance?  Seems totally meaningless to me.

I mentioned it because (given the thread is about Gaff being OOC) it seemed interesting that Simpson (*assuming it wasn’t Lyon) went out on a limb with his votes. It’ll surely come up.

It might’ve been emotional, it might’ve been strategic, it might be club cultural.

Either way, you’d expect Gaff will now think about how to recover from this and that becomes a factor in his choice.

*for Moonie

4 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

 

^ FAKE NEWS ^

No evidence to support these.

My God. It’s maths!

6 minutes ago, Pates said:

From an article on the club’s website:

“Bugg was sent away from the club for 10 days in the immediate aftermath of the incident with Mills, time he used to contact the young Swan to express his remorse for his actions and to reassess what he wanted to stand for as a footballer.

Upon returning, Melbourne's fitness staff put the forward through a punishing regime while he was ineligible to play between rounds 16 to 21.

Training would finish and the rest of the players would be laughing and carrying on, relaxing on the sidelines. And there would be Bugg, often the only one out on Gosch's Paddock, as the coaching and equipment staff were packing up, looking down at his watch to make sure he was meeting the times that had been set for him during gut-busting running sessions.

To his credit, Bugg didn't complain. He didn't drop his bottom lip, didn't blame anyone else other than himself. Bugg just got on with it and, after playing the final two games of the season back in the VFL once his ban had finished, set himself to have "the best pre-season of his career".

The 24-year-old beat out usual time trial king Tom McDonald in the club's 2km time trial post-Christmas, and he was often regarded as a standout – based on his work ethic on the training track – over summer.”

http://m.melbournefc.com.au/news/2018-04-05/bugg-resets-to-earn-trust-and-respect

Thanks, I hadn’t read this. I hope Bugg makes it back.

At the time the conversation was about how the MFC took a very high road during the aftermath and tribunal. There’s a long thread, obviously.

4 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

No, nothing mentioned in pressers. Any real source for 4/0 AFLCA Gaff voting?

I ask because if someone writes something as fact without evidence, posters like @No10 and @Sir Why You Little think it's accurate and create ridiculous outrage when it could, in fact, be fake. Not having a go at you, just trying to establish fact without emotion. You may be right, would be good to find the breakdown.

Obviously straight after the game the coaches were emotional. You'd hope coaches would be professional enough to vote without bias and the hyperbole of social media. If they can't, and they gave their votes based upon one incident, well, I'm glad they aren't at MFC.

Does anyone have the breakdown of which coach gave what votes? Thanks in advance.

I’ve never seen a breakdown of ALFCA votes, unsure it’s released.

Mathematics is at fault for that being 4 votes from one coach.

I don’t think it’s emotional to assume Simpson gave him the 4 votes. But yes, that’s my assumption.

24 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

How did the MFC treat Tom Bugg badly?

What should they have done better. 

These comments fascinate me, do the crime....

Bugg is lucky to still have a contract

There’s a long thread on Bugg, some more articulate legal comments than I could offer (I think Jr?). But essentially we left Bugg to wear it alone. If it were Viney I don’t think everyone would’ve been so fine.

7 minutes ago, old dee said:

You are guessing, the only fact we have is that he hit him in the mouth with a clenched fist which resulted in a broken jaw and damaged teeth.

All the rest in conjecture.

Buggs was a stupid act which could have had far worse result.

Were the Dees fans cheering Bugg on after the hit?

No of course not because it was a stupid and a dangerous act, any other response is condoning the act. 

I’m not guessing at what happened- Gaff punched him.

I mean to suggest WC might offer some defense at the tribunal. The votes from the coach suggest they’re not so willing to play the way we did with Bugg. Ie. guilty, no defence.

Just now, old dee said:

Ours was the correct approach. The WCE have form, knowing allowing drug takes to continue playing, allowing players to consort with criminals, attaching a Brownlow medialist verbally to the point he almost quit the game and then cheering on Gaff after the hit on Sunday. The  actions of WCE club and supporters carry no weight IMO.

Agree in part- giving 4 votes is a very poor message. However I thought we should've supported Bugg better.

If I were Gaff, I'd be inclined to stay at WC. For the MFC, I don't think we have the culture to support him after this. Maybe this was Simpson's thinking.

Will be interesting to see if they mount a defense.
Andrew did sharply pull away as Gaff swung, which meant arm contact instead became fist contact. Could go to intent.

1 minute ago, MSFebey said:

The coaches press conferences moonie ?

fair chance though I reckon as he was pretty much BOG

I believe MSF is right as it's the only mathematical possibility.

2 minutes ago, MSFebey said:

4 from one coach and 0 from the other 

Simpson standing by his player.

Not sure it's smart but very different approach to how Bugg was handled by MFC.

Gaff 4 votes in the AFLCA

6 hours ago, chookrat said:

Lol - what did Crouch do other than get smashed by our dominant midfield? 

Demonland 2018... how this place has changed.