Harvey Wallbanger

They were both there. Laurie, Howes and Johnson listed as AFL emergencies. Maybe Billings and Woewodin are carryovers for the AFL with the other three named in the VFL team.

Apologies for the late report. Absent: Viney, Lever, Melksham, Hore, Petty and Mentha Clayton always does more voluntary running at these sessions than others. He and Fritta are tight. Longish one-on-ones between Goody and Jeffo. I agree with Picket that Tholstrup will likely be the sub to give Sharp a fair crack. Wouldn't think it would be Jeffo, Turner or Windsor, the other three from the 5 interchange.

Phew. Thanks Roy.

The main question is "Did Clayton train today"? Some photos from Casey on the socials, but none of the ginger locks.....

But he does comment on Caulfield - he says he wants to understand it more "and the other options". It's that additional comment that is the problem. Members are only aware of Caulfield as the current option (we've had a few before). It would have been easy for the Board to instruct him that it's Caulfield all the way, and to say that - unless it isn't? Creates confusion. Still sounds like he wants to get out of his old job sooner rather than later....

All the pressers seem to have been done on the Tuesday. The Club's announcement to members came out after 9 pm on Monday evening (given Caro had "broken the story". Again, speculation only, but it seems something may have happened between the Monday evening (hit the ground running) and Tuesday morning: perhaps he was reminded of his obligations to his existing employer.

"We would've been well aware of his timelines for resigning from his current role." This is the bit I am not so sure about. Maybe he told our Board it wouldn't be a problem to leave VECCI early, but his existing Board, said - "Hang on young fella...." If you are correct it would be good if the Club confirmed that...... I heard him say "conversations are ongoing" etc, etc re VECCI and Racing Victoria, which is why I was interested to see VECCI come out today with their own position, which is very clear.

That's correct Redleg - the only thing we absolutely need is access through to our proposed building site, which goes through the freehold land over which Mount Scopus holds an option to purchase from the MRC.

The Chamber has just advised that "they have commenced a selection process for Paul's replacement, with Paul remaining in the role until after 14WCC in September".

If that's all true DJ why did we use the language in teh announcement to members that "he will hit the ground running and Members will have opportunities to hear directly from him very soon". Pure speculation but maybe: He was called after the Board meeting to say he had the job. Caro had broken her story as the Board meeting was occurring - so the Board says: Is it OK Paul if we send out a notice to members? You'll be able to start soon, right? The next day his existing employer says - Hang on a minute, you have a notice period here..... He can still honour the part of doing some media, but he certainly cannot "hit the ground running". Let's all hope that VECCI lets him go early. Messy start though.

I was concerned by the Footy Class interview talking about various different home base options, when the official position of the Club as far as members know is that the Caulfield feasibility study is done and we are now supposed to be working on the business plan, designs, permits etc..before the fund-raising starts. However our CEO designate did say he was not "all over the detail of the Caulfield project". So two possible conclusions - (1) he was not following the party line on Caulfield because he hasn't been briefed or (2) Caulfield may have hit a hurdle and the prospect of other options are being reconsidered?

"Paul will hit the ground running...."

According to the Herald Sun our new CEO will commence in the role in early September.

Board meeting today. Expect news shortly.....

Pure speculation - but Casey have a bye this weekend - we play in Perth, and he is from WA, so maybe time to see family? Yes, Lukar is looking quite comfortable off half-back. Needs game time and an uninterrupted pre-season to be able to put his best foot forward. I don't have any official measurements pre and post his illness - Ghosty?

3 goals 4 behinds actually.

Further to Ghosty's notes: Absent today: May, Lever, Spargo, Pickett and Kentfield Marty Hore continued his rehabbing with a physio. The dreaded soccer ball was out - the boys love it. Petracca and Sestan gave it a miss and had a kick with Marty. AJ was last off the field and was having some goal-kicking tuition with Chocco.

Fair enough - but play a guy out of form and risk ruck domination when he rucks. I would rather that TC "gets a taste" soonish. The day will come (I hope not), and it could be this year, when we need a short term, full time replacement for Max. It has to be a ruck who "can do it all game". Isn't that why we brought TC in? And against West Coast would be a good time to trial it, rather than against Hawthorn, Brisbane, then Sydney.

That's it Adam, but Max doesn't have to sit on the pine when TC is rucking. Max's engine, plus his marking ability means we can keep the relatively short forward line we played last week and Max can push forward. He still needs his 6/7 minutes rest per quarter but if TC is rucking well, Max can spend some more time elsewhere. What we cannot afford is a second string ruck who gets mauled whilst Max rests, leading to momentum for the oppo, a la the last 12 minutes on Thursday night.

We saw last night how important ruck dominance is. Rest Max for 10-15 minutes at the end of the game and it was one-way traffic (the wrong way!). Campbell has the same sort of impact at Casey (anyone who watched the Casey game at Geelong would have seen how the game changed after half-time when Campbell went off). I get that Campbell is not the long term answer, but he is part of the solution for this year (and maybe next year) at least. Get him into the AFL team and take the pressure off Max. Particularly against teams that have competent second ruck options. Against teams that don't AJ would be my next bet.

16 AFL-listed - great to see. I guess one will come out as a carryover for tonight's game?

If you go the second ruck option it can go many ways - when we had Jacko, he could go forward (naturally) or Max can take longer breaks while Jacko rucked. With Petty as a sole tall, Max could go forward whilst Campbell rucks. Plan A was probably adjusted on Saturday because Turner went down - let's see what happens tomorrow night. As I said, I expect Fullarton gets another crack at it.

Fair point - 6 disposals and the lowest individual player rating doesn't really do it for me. Happy to see improvement from Tom in Game 2, if he plays. The other consideration is what they expect from Max - with Turner going down, and Petty staying forward, it was suggested that Max played a more defensive role in the second half than otherwise?

There was no separation as such on the ground. These Captain's Runs are not used as match sims for the 23 who have been selected. Some cues are being taken from the order players came across from AAMI. I do not put much store in that as, for example, Kossie came across early and Culley came across with the main group. Kossie will play AFL and Jai will play Casey I expect.

Just my personal opinion - Campbell is a "fit for purpose" quality ruckman who has performed very well at Casey and he can give us a significant advantage in the middle and at stoppages when Max needs a rest. Of course, we may not always want to play a second ruckman, and it will largely depend upon what we expect from the opposition.