titan_uranus

If Geelong thump West Coast, as I expect they will, they could finish 2nd (requires GWS and Port to lose, which are both possible, and to make up 7% on Port, which they could do themselves by beating West Coast by 120 at GMHBA). If they had lost to Fremantle two weeks ago, they'd be 9th right now and no guarantee to even make finals. They will IMO be one of the weakest top 4 sides we've ever seen, and if they finish 2nd undoubtedly the worst top 2 side we've ever seen. This has been the season for it.

There's no doubt Roffey's email was disingenuous. It's Christian Porter-esque, to be honest, and insulting to members as a result. Over the last few years I've generally found myself disapproving of Peter Lawrence's actions. As much as you and his other supporters on here seek to characterise his push for change as noble and in pursuit of best practice, it has always, and IMO reading the judgment clearly remains, also in push of his selfish desires. However, the judgment makes relatively clear enough that the club ultimately couldn't resist most of what he was asking for, because the majority of his proposals were clearly fair and reasonable. For that, the failure to work this out prior to litigation is a failure which sits as much on the club as anyone else. At its core, I continue to think that his selfish desires got in the way of a better and more important message. Even with what should be considered largely a success, I doubt he would ever be elected to the board, and I think that's something he should accept responsibility for. Related to that, I noticed the following parts of the judgment: The judge accepted that the board acted bona fide and without collateral motive, balancing the club's interests against Peter's. That is contrary to what I believe Peter has argued, and what I know some on here have argued (i.e. that the board had ulterior motives, designed to protect them or their boys/girls club) Peter persisted with the litigation because he wants the club to allow candidates for election to be able to go on radio and TV and give interviews in which they are permitted to disparage not just the current board, but members, players, the club at large and other candidates. The club's board and governance is important, but not important enough that we should be having candidates running a Trump v Harris style debate in public, bringing the club to the forefront of the media where we've been spending far too much time of late Both the club and Peter were faintly criticised by the judge for comparing the club's rules to other club's. The judge made it clear that is irrelevant. There's no doubt the club's election rules are in a better place now than they were 2 years ago, and for that Peter deserves credit, but the ends do not always justify the means. PS: there's also no doubt the board has failed in a number of its own KPIs (so to speak). The home base situation is a debacle.

Obviously not important but there’s no [censored] way McKercher, Wilmot or Rachele are better players than McVee. It’s amazing to remember how young Gulden is though.

So are you saying that if we were 1-6 on the ladder, or no chance of finishing 9-10, you wouldn’t be in favour of it? If we’re saying 8/18 isn’t enough, but that we’re rewarding the top 6, isn’t that inconsistent? Why not just reward the top 8? Using the outcomes of an H&A season where there is no wildcard to justify how good it is also doesn’t make sense. Teams would likely do things differently in the lead up rounds if they’re targeting 10th instead of 8th. But if you want to do that, go the other way. Would Fremantle v Port have any interest this week if Fremantle were already locked into wildcard round? Would there have been any excitement over Carlton’s final fortnight if they were already locked in?

I watched that video on instagram and didn’t think there were issues…

That’s twice you’ve run an “ends justify the means” argument. I don’t agree. We’d get bigger crowds with a whole host of bad or annoying ideas. That doesn’t stop them being bad or annoying. At any rate, we will see crowds and viewership diminish if we keep playing more games. Scarcity is an important concept and one the AFL doesn’t appreciate.

Yes. I hate that we’re in the bottom half of the competition after 22 games and yet would, if there was a wildcard round, still get a chance to play finals. Talk about rewarding mediocrity.

I always liked how we looked when Brown was in the side and playing well. He never gave anything other than 100%, even when his body and/or his limitations held him back. Obviously integral to the flag, for which he will always be a Melbourne immortal. But also should be remembered for being a great person and, I suspect, an under the radar key leader. Go well, Ben.

He’s also earned it off the back of his form since returning, IMO.

On radio this morning Morris played two grabs from interviews Viney gave last week. The first was given on Thursday but wasn’t aired until last night. He was strong about loving the club and said “I love the Melbourne footy club…no plans to not be a one club player”. The second was the post-match with Lynch where he says “nah” straight away and then the “we’ll see how the year plays out”. Morris argued this shows a change in Viney’s thoughts. I disagree. I think it strengthens the argument that the “nah” was his true answer and the rest is contract negotiation talk. Two days earlier, which was well after the North target story broke, he sat down and said he has no plan to leave. I might be wrong but I’m not at all concerned.

How are Adelaide and St Kilda not numbers 1 and 2? David King had written us off prior to the Carlton pre-season game, whilst he talked St Kilda up all summer. Adelaide was supposed to be the next big thing and are going to finish bottom 4.

Well, what I had expected would be a 10,000 bump in attendance off the back of their win yesterday evaporated with Carlton’s win. It really is unfortunate that our home game against them comes in a dead rubber. Any other week of the year and we pull a bigger crowd. Hurts the coffers.

@DeeSpencer again ruining what could be a good debate with unnecessary guff like this: Criticising his leadership by signing on at a time when commitment to the club has never been more important from our leaders is an absolutely awful take that somehow surpasses your other awful takes. Is there a debate to be had about signing him for another three seasons, instead of perhaps two? Possibly, yes. But as is so often the case you launch with ridiculous OTT stuff like this and put people off side. FWIW I’m with @Gator - lesser rucks have recently played to age 35+, and Gawn is not only the GOAT but he is physically gifted. Age shouldn’t constrain him.

So did Trac…

Correct. Fremantle’s destiny is out of their hands. They may be eliminated by the time they play, if those three sides all win. But if any lose, they will pass the loser(s) with a win because of their draw. Collingwood effectively eliminated (mathematically alive but need 150+ point swings or something).

Pretty sure the pressure stat came up on screen in the third and theirs was high, and higher than ours. It definitely felt like their intensity lowered as the game went on but IMO it was only the fourth quarter where it felt like they truly stopped. In the third I felt like we put a gap on them when they were still up and about.

Currently the four required outcomes for Collingwood to make it are all favourites (WC and St K over Carlton, Port over Fremantle, them over us). It’s increasingly frustrating that this would be us if we had held on last week. Just that one game changes, all the rest stay the same (ie keep the Freo and Dogs floggings, the other three close losses etc), and next Friday is almost a playoff for 8th.

@dazzledavey36 said in the post-game thread that we should be thinking about targeting GC players in the wake of yet another disappointing Suns season. I agree - surely whatever lure Hardwick had 12 months ago has worn off to an extent. Is Bailey Humphrey truly happy up there? Fiorini? Does Alex Davies have another level in him which a change of scenery might bring out? I’m far from the most knowledgeable on their players but there has to be some talent on their list that isn’t getting played.

Why hindsight? We all felt it at the time. Those two fourth quarter misses from Billings and Tholstrup hurt.

Unless you have Carlton beating West Coast, a 1 point win over us and a Fremantle loss to Port puts Collingwood in the 8. Carlton winning tonight pretty much ends them but the Blues’ injury list means that’s unlikely.

Again, this is wrong. They only care about Carlton. If they lose, Collingwood is alive.

Have you seen Carlton’s injury list? They’re no certainty to win again. That’s why the door is open.

To confirm, they only need Carlton to lose both games. They don’t care about the Dogs or Hawthorn. If Carlton lose both, then they will pass Fremantle and make finals if they beat us and Fremantle loses to Port next week. Our game is first so they may be in the 8 on Friday night, leaving Fremantle to need to win to make it on Sunday evening. By the way - this would be the precise situation for us had we held on last week. We would be playing Friday night for a chance to take Fremantle’s finals spot (again, assuming Carlton lose both games).

Nope, they’re out to catch Fremantle. All they have to do is beat us and Fremantle lose to Port and they pass them. They also need Carlton to lose both too but with their current injury list that seems likely right now.