Mazer Rackham

We're doing exactly what we need to do. Winning games, playing exciting footy, buzz, crowds ... regardless of what Freo are doing, we're making it very hard for ANY player to want to jump ship.

Oh God, what a sensation. I'm supporting an actual football club that plays AFL quality football. Good fast entertaining high scoring football. GO DEMONS! 60,000 at the game, prime time TV and putting on a show for the football world to admire. GO DEMONS! Is Dom is good. Hogan: no standout but did the heavy lifting and created goals from being a focal point. Also reads the play well when down back. Brayshaw: off night. Just couldn't get his mitts on it cleanly. Everyone's going off over Max's rucking but his work when the ball is on the ground is deft and skilful as well. It's been coming for a few weeks but Bugg has tipped us over the line. We are now an unsociable footy team. Bustards to play against. Just what Neeld always wanted (if anyone can remember him). To think, Oliver, Tracc, Trenners(?) somehow have to fit into this combination. Matt Jones and a few former regulars are now very handy depth. To the nervous nellies, naysayers and those who seem to get their rocks off from failure and mistakes ... get positive and get on board. The ride has only just begun. Next up: Saints (check), Etihad (check)

Let's say he had gone back to the VFL ... now we can see that even good form in the VFL is no guarantee to crack back into the seniors. No player wants to be the one who drops down and can't get back in. (Col Garland??) The club is in a great place.

He's just an annoying little **** who gets under everyone's skin and they want to snot him instead of hunting the pill. Think Didak, think Milne, think Carr. He's an irritiating little Bugg[er] and he's all ours!

Fair enough but it's not actually Anzac day. Nonetheless I thought Ch 7 might pick up some easy ratings by showing the whole pre game hoopla instead of the news (which they could have put on earlier).

He's only coach when the ball is in the back half. When it crosses the centre line he tags Goody who takes over.

It's fair to say that a club with 70,000 members is "more popular" than a club with 30,000 members. The numbers don't really tell the story. A three-game member counts the same as a platinum legend 22-game with bells on member. Total revenue dollars from memberships would be a more reliable stat.

Yes, I'm wondering if all these close finishes are a sign of a team that always prevails when the heat is on, or a side that can be challenged more easily than in the past. Time will tell ... would be nice to answer that by beating them.

And in truth they don't. So many TV commentators do the old radio "horse race" calling thing ... "Smith kicks it to Jones who now handpasses to Brown, takes a bounce and short passes to Green, Green spins around looking for options" ... Yes, we can see that. We don't need you telling us much more than the players names. Good soccer commentators don't say a hell of a lot ... players names and some observations to explain the context. Aussie rules commentators have been trained to fill the airwaves with noise. On radio, that's only to be expected. On TV, not so much. The specialist commentators try too hard to either be super analytical, which takes time, so hard to do in play, or they try to be entertaining. I had thought the game was entertaining enough by itself ... crowds every week in the tens of thousands ... would seem to indicate the game doesn't need any sizzle on it. Not to mention the scourge of commentators having a known allegiance to a club. They seem to think that's part of the entertainment. It's not. Just give us impartial descriptions of what's going on and no fluff. Is that so hard? It used to happen every single week. Some commentators went for years and years without anyone knowing who they supported.

Nor should we have matched it. He wasn't worth it at the time and events since have shown he hasn't earned it at GWS. It would have thrown out our player payments and caused unrest amongst the other players. It's one thing to pay a huge salary to an Ablett or a Buddy. But a Scully?

I don't have a huge problem with Ess & Coll doing Anzac day. They (Sheedy really) were the ones to think of glamming it up and making it an event. I do not like the double standards that go with it. Not necessarily from those clubs, but the AFL. If those clubs can have a permanent lock on Anzac day, why shouldn't North get a lock on or at least a favourable draw for multiple Friday night games? They were the ones who thought of making it an event. "We thought of it. P!ss off and think up your own marquee games" say those two clubs (EFC & CFC). And not unreasonably. I'm glad that instead of whingeing, MFC did go out to develop new marquee games. We had this idea to have a regular battle of the capital cities. Melb v Sydney. I think we might have played one of them. (It didn't help that we were a bad side.) And what happens? Eddie says to Vlad/Gil, "why are you letting those hopeless minnows play in a marquee game? Make it a REAL marquee game, Sydney versus, oh I don't know ... some big drawing Vic club ... if we could only think of one ..." And the AFL says "hey yeah! Great idea Eddie!" Next thing you know Coll play Sydney in an annual marquee night game. Thanks for all your support, AFL. Hawks went to Tassie, other clubs flirted with Ballarat, Bendigo, other places ... instead of whingeing, MFC went to China to try to develop support there. Visionary. And what happens? Kochie says to Gil, "we've had this idea. Have you ever thought about China? We're going to go to China boots and all and own that market!" And Gil says, "great idea Kochie! We'll get the PM on board and really make a thing of it! We like this new idea so much, we'll force some minnow club to play a home game there!" Thanks for all your support, AFL. The Anzac day EFC v CFC in perpetuity is a message to clubs that if you think up your marquee games, the AFL will support you. Why then do they send mixed messages by not backing up other clubs budding marquee games? Why play favourites? Having said that, we have done well to devise the Anzac eve match (well done to Gale & Richmond and MFC in the face of opposition from Ed), we have the women's pink cancer game which gets good press coverage, and we get QB (although that is treated as charity by the AFL and CFC ... let's toss the poor mangy dog a bone out of the goodness of our hearts). Also we have been prominent with the upcoming womens league which looks like drawing good support. We're positioned pretty well with marquee games for a club of our size. (Oh for China and the battle of the capital cities!) May this year's Anzac day match be the worst in memory. Four goals to 3 played in miserable conditions with the ground half empty by 3/4 time.

Is it so hard to believe that people don't watch that sh!t? No, they'll take it as meaning that the Tiges are useless and on track for the spoon. If we knock over St Kilda, maybe. If we knock over the Dogs, they'll definitely sit up and take notice.

He cops heat for his disposal by foot but can negotiate heavy traffic really well, and will risk a HTB to get a stoppage. He's only going to get better and better.

I'm not going to die in a ditch over it but it seems to be workable either way. Scoring from behinds has always been part of the game. 15 goals 10 equals 14 goals 16. The team with more scoring shots maybe should have kicked straighter. But they didn't. Games have been won by kicking fewer goals but lots more behinds. We don't go and reverse the results of those games. So winning a GF by scoring a behind should not be considered an outrageous proposition. Pathological example. Anyway, if you have the ball that close to goal 7 times and can't kick one, maybe you don't deserve to win? No matter which way you slice it, you can think of examples where it's "unfair". But it's probably fairer to keep playing 5-min mini quarters each way until one team wins or expires. To really spice it up: take 2 players from each side each 5+5 period.

Maybe he's sick of winning so many premierships. He's already climbed the mountain with one club, he should be up there with Barassi, Hafey, Sheedy, Jeans, Matthews. And he has the chance to entrench a dynasty, if he hasn't already. Can't see why Collingwood would be attractive to him.

In fairness to Robbo, he would have said this in a loud hectoring voice, talking over anyone who tried to get a word in edgeways, with all the authority of someone who has spent years playing and coaching at AFL level. I think it's funny how he pulls this stuff with Brereton, Schwarz, Mooney, King, etc, delivering football lectures to them, and they almost never call him out on it.

We're doing exactly what we need to do, which is win games and generally be on an upward trajectory. To be a club where any player would want to be. Beyond that it's out of our hands and not worth worrying about.

I think the 2016 fewer interchange open running style suits him way better than the rugby maul seagulls-fighting-over-a-chip style that was played over the last few years. I too was unimpressed after round 2 but was hopeful that we could turn on the same stuff we showed in the last quarter against GWS. And we have, and it works, and it suits H. It suits most of our players. You could see C'wood yesterday trying to close it down into a greco roman wrestling match but unfortunately for them, we're now better at that than they are.

Remember when Scully and Trengove were drafted and immediately came into the team and were our best mids, or at least in the best 4 mids. Now Tracc can't even get a game. Oh we have come a long way.

Most enjoyable game since ... since ... christ, can anyone remember back that far? Pies turned it into a close in slogging game. Which they were always going to do. It was the only way they were going to able to win it. They wanted us to play hesitant cautious footy like against Essendon. But all they did was stop our free scoring. They couldn't score themselves. Their plan had some merit. When they forced turnovers they did move the ball well but broke down inside 50. Basically they weren't good enough to overcome the mighty Demons! They are still playing last's years rugby maul style. Footy is different now. We won it with our early burst of champagne footy. Slick movement, good skills and looking very dangerous. We then saved the win by resisting their renewed effort toward the end of the 2nd quarter and in the 3rd quarter. Great that we held our composure and weathered the storm. It brought back long ago feelings of watching football ... laying dormant and nearly extinguished ... Seeing your team forge a lead with good play. Waiting for the oppo to fight back but holding them off. Knowing, not hoping but knowing, you are going to hold them off and win. It now feels like following a football club. a real football-playing football club. Frost and Hunt showed something. Fantastic that the club has the nuts to play raw talent in crunch games for us. Backing them in and they're responding. I know it's been bubbling under for a while but suddenly it feels like we're choking with talent. Petracca might not be good enough to make our best 22. (only joking all you TRACC lovers) I was sitting right above the C’wood race and Eddie walked off with the players. He wasn't red faced or anything. Not doing his nut over dropping a game to an "inferior" team. Just flat and resigned. He knows. Life is good. Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

Eddie will hang on to him for as long as humanly possible. To sack Buckley will be to admit to a blunder in forcing Malthouse out.

It's a river in Egypt.

No! No! Keep him there as long as possible! The icing on the cake would be seeing Eddie week after week defending the indefensible.

Daniher's 'stache gets ripped off leading to a total face reconstruction and 12 months out.

Totally understandable. I'm hoping for a scrappy sh!tty game that neither side can take anything positive from.