Mazer Rackham

It's Leppitsch that's done it. It's his work that turned them into a defensive brick wall. Every time the oppo get the ball there's no one to kick it to.

At a guess ... that the people overseeing the rules of the game and the people running the umpire's department are not actually competent to do so?

The "restricted zone" is a great example of the AFL cluster**** that is the rules of the game and their refereeing. The problem: player with the ball being monstered from behind as soon as he takes one step. Player on the mark being blocked from chasing a player who plays on. The solution, AFL style: a "protected zone" around the player and the mark. So far so good. The intent is not bad. The c*ck-up, AFL style: the wording of the rule is vague and if strictly enforced, would not even allow players of the ball carrier's own team in the "zone". The execution, AFL style: the rule is "strictly enforced", except for the parts that aren't, and of course it is "strictly enforced" some of the time, and not the rest of the time. Another self inflicted wound from the masters of the grey area, the AFL. And then they pile grey on grey as if that will fix it. Well, there's your problem. Common sense doesn't negotiate record TV rights $$$. Common sense doesn't arrange for cheaper pies. Common sense, pah. There is no place for common sense in a high profile world's leading practice sports entertainment behemoth. Overrated.

Get a haircut and get a nice sheen Clean your act up and don't drink caffeine Get it together like your big brother Ian Get a haircut you damn drama queen No .... reckon it must be different Thorogoods.

This is a real phenomenon and apparently happens to boxers. They challenge for a belt and win. But then can't hold the belt. They get beaten. Again the challenger, they are dynamite and win the belt back. They just can't hold on to it for some reason. We will drop out of the 8, then we'll throw the switch back to challenger mode. By then it may be too late.

I knew we should have gone for the Black and Decker and not the Chinese knockoff version. Same goes for our imitation game plan. It's falling apart before our eyes. Not even out of warranty.

15.4.3 Permitted Contact Other than the Prohibited Contact identified under Law 15.4.5, a Player may make contact with another Player: ... (b) by pushing the other Player with an open hand in the chest or side of the body provided that the football is no more than 5 metres away from the Player; 15.4.5 Prohibited Contact and Payment of Free Kick A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player where they are satisfied that the Player has made Prohibited Contact with an opposition Player. A Player makes Prohibited Contact with an opposition Player if the Player: ... (b) pushes an opposition Player in the back, unless such contact is incidental to a Marking contest and the Player is legitimately Marking, attempting to Mark or spoil the football; It's all pretty clear unless you're an AFL level umpire. At the top level of the game.

Why should their seeing anything make a difference either way? You can actually lay hands on an ump, and even though the rule book says it's a reportable offence, no exceptions, the ump will laugh and chuckle along like it's tippity run at the beach. It's not like their seeing or not seeing anything has any influence on the decisions they make, so roll with it.

Come on now. That was rule of the week ages ago. Times change. This week it's in the back. Keep up!

Hmmm. Is the Whitten Oval a reputable venue? Also the organisers might have lied. They might have said it was a function for Vietnamese drug dealers to secure the booking.

Ump's Presentation Night ... I can just imagine it. It's by invite only. No outsiders and especially no press. Umps only. They text you the address an hour before. (It's usually a public park or other open space as no reputable venue will take a booking for an event like this.) To get in, you must wear as a secret signal a scarf of the team you barracked for as a kid, and still do as an ump. To test you, first they ask what you keep in your wallet. You have to show a pic of Joel Selwood. Then they show you a copy of the rule book and ask if you know what it is or if you've ever seen it before. ("No" is the correct answer.) A gatecrasher always runs the risk of being exposed, but given that all umps have major eyesight problems, chances are you won't be recognised. You can calm any fears they may have by telling a few war stories over cocktails. "So he marked it, one grab, on his own in the goalsquare. No defenders within 50. So I called it deliberate out of bounds and awarded 2 consecutive 50s against." Don't laugh at your anecdotes, though, as they are told not to entertain, but as a serious retelling of factual events. Real umps don't have a sense of humour. There is usually no food. It is traditionally the job of one ump to order some takeaway, but every year it seems another ump further away, with no clear idea of what's going on, cancels the order by mistake. The highlight of the evening is the awarding of the trophies. There is a bobble-head doll for most mind-boggling decision of the year, always hotly contested. There is a brandy glass full of dirt, the "Clear as Mud" award for most impenetrable decision that not even other umps can understand. And finally, to commemorate the "rule of the week", the umpire of the year gets a tiny motorised set of goal posts that when put on a table and switched on, move backwards and forwards and from side to side. At the conclusion of the evening, the umps are booed back to their cars by a crowd of bystanders who don't know what the event is, but by instinct have drawn near, and don't know why, but simply understand that booing is the appropriate thing to do.

Well thanks a lot! What have I ever done to you??

But they do! Didn't you see the one where Salem gave away a free for in the back? It was thought to be a legend of the ancients. This "push in the back" rule. Like the place kick. But it was paid! Like the sighting of a rare bird, that was thought to be extinct. A magical, breathtaking moment of sheer joy. (For the umps.)

On D-land always MFCSS will win Rage will trump reason Like rain on a pond Inner calm will be broken Those weak f***in c****!!!!!

Kicking the first three was a bad sign. Would have been better if the saints had kicked the first three. We won't start winning again until we're out of the eight. We are a head case that would exasperate Freud. (But wouldn't he love the ongoing fees.)

We really gave the Saints a football lesson. That is: what happens when one team does the basics right and the other team doesn't? We committed every football sin. Playing from behind. Giving them plenty of space. When we had it seemed congested and no one was free. When they had it they had free players everywhere in plenty of space. When we had it, we kicked it over our teammate's head or to his side or generally put him under pressure. Too many flying for marks, spoiling each other. I understand we have a forward coach. Looks like he's been out for 4 to 6 himself. Maybe he's been coaching the Socceroos. They also can't finish. Yes, the umps were their usual atrocious inconsistent arbitrary selves but that only seemed a factor because we were so deperate for goals. At half time 15 players had less than 10 possessions. Including Lewis (6) Viney (6) Tyson (3) Our defending was the worst seen since the Neeld days. Everywhere on the ground. Made it look like a training run for the Saints. A team that thought it might be top 2 material, was sh@t on by the Saints who can't kick more than 60 points. Goddammit that was awful. Now one thing which I picked up on in the Port game but I am not sure if it's real or if it is my imagination. Against Port our big forwards could not get anywhere near the ball and it seemed like they were being scragged and held off the ball. But on TV it's hard to tell. Third Q in this game Hogan got a free & goal for being interfered with. Is that (the interference) happening to him and McDonald over and over or is it my fevered imagination. I can't accept that they can not get near the ball under ordinary circumstances. I saw a number of times our guys in general being monstered off the ball. On the other side of the coin, I do accept that our delivery into 50 does not help. And Hogan and McDonald flying for the same ball is just stupidity.

Caro is not a football writer. She is a gossip writer, specialising in the world of AFL. Big difference. She has good sources and can and does get "scoops" but it's still firmly in the murky territory of "maybe it did and maybe it didn't".

This must be what it's like to be a big club. Are we becoming a big club? A tall poppy? If so then I welcome attempts to cut us down. We must be doing something right. GO DEMONS!!

Daisy is a breath of fresh air. I get a kick out of seeing how she's leapt out of obscurity into the glamourous world of TV, radio, etc, and has handled it with aplomb. At the QB match it was great seeing her on the big stage rubbing shoulders with everyone and seemingly totally at ease with it all. As for the commentary ... she does this thing called "putting in the work" that most of the ex-player commentators don't do. They think that having played the game is enough. How did they get to the top of the playing world? Putting in the work. In the commentary world, the same thing applies. It doesn't just happen. But the standards of the trophy collecting TV stations are so low, they're happy just to have "Lingy" and his ilk hanging around, not to mention their encouragement of the stupid antics of the roaming f***wit.

At least minnows like Italy and Holland will have a chance to show their wares on the world stage.

Disappointing but not that surprising. After the first two games it was clear we have a major weakness in scoring. Only two in 3 games and both from penalties. And the most conceded goals by a far shot. Also, Peru are higher in the FIFA rankings than Denmark. Now we're into the hands of Graham Arnold which does not inspire. Two things are now obvious. Bert is a better coach than Ange. Bert had us looking dangerous. Compare that to qualifying where we stumbled and bumbled and managed to leave it to the last leg of the last tie over 4 years to lock it in. Other thing is, we need a striker and how! Fozzy on SBS is crapping on about how we could have and should have done better, we had plenty more to give, etc. How Ange had us on track but then we make this dramatic change (Bert) for the last part of the tournament, why oh why? Foz ... where were the goals going to come from? And if Ange was in charge would we have even looked like scoring at all? France already through were not going to try hard against Denmark. And Denmark's only incentive -- knowing a win or draw would see them through -- was to stop France scoring. So no surprises there. Back to the drawing board.

Yes. Find him and buy him a Richmond membership!

If I recall, nearly all the big trees there are elms, ie introduced, not native. I believe most councils grant permits for felling them more readily than for natives. Because natives good, foreign bad. So our deal is, for each elm chopped, we plant TWO natives. Also free bike parking for councillors, free car parking for recalcitrant planet hating polluting car driving councillors, a wombat sanctuary and a ban on plastic bags.

I remember when we would start looking to the draft after round 1. It's good being a real club again.

Good point. And in one way, it makes bugger-all difference. I think the key of this is that we are football nomads and have had to beg and scrape for a training ground somewhere, anywhere. From our days at the Junction oval, to days where we literally had nowhere to train, to now at Gosch's ... and how long before Eddie gets an idea that CFC needs office space at the square stadium and the CFC women need somewhere to train .... like Gosch's .... I'm exaggerating but not much. Eddie has pulled strings to expand CFC's land grab before. If I understand it, this new Yarra Park thing, if it gets off the ground, will be OUR office, OUR oval, no-one else's, no one will have a claim to it, it will be a HOME rather than a temporary facility where we are liable to moved on like street beggars at the drop of a hat. The players in fact might not notice any difference at all, the spectators hardly any, but the club will have a HOME. A social club? Other facilities to help raise $$$. All round it's very attractive. I can understand why people who don't barrack for the MIGHTY DEMONS might be able to find negatives ... some may even be justified! ... but for the MFC it's very attractive.