Jumping Jack Clennett

A great example of why the torpedo should be practised and encouraged in specific situations was Jason Gram's torp in the dying moments of last Fri's` game v the Dogs. No time left, 1 point down, and the ball in the back line. Best tactic?? Longest kick possible...a torp, hoping for a forward to mark. Sure enough, Reiwoldt marked, and fell short with his goalshot by an inch. Logical thinking nearly won the match.. A flat ban on torps, and they would have lost instead of drawing......season over! Perhaps Reiwoldt should have torped............

Sorry, Beelzebub, I wasn't having a go at you,I know it wasn't you that raised the topic of the "Spoon". I just wanted to re-direct the conversation to the likely vital importance of not beating Carlton in round 22. It seems some of the respondents on this thread under-estimate it!

This discussion has nothing to do with the "spoon". The Tigers have that all parcelled up. The crucial thing is, that Carlton MUST win another game! We can win ONE game, IF they win one. This is very important to our chances of future success.

I thought this somewhat provocative statement would draw some comment. Whenever I discuss rnd 22 with Carlton supporters they smugly, and confidently, inform me that there's no chance they'll win it. I'd like to be so confident that my Club is so realistic.

Does a lack of fitness make a player repeatedly drop chest marks? I remember playing B grade amateurs and feeling aggrieved after doing a good pass which resulted in a dropped chest mark. He does it over and over again and it makes me GRIND MY TEETH!!!!

Poor old Miller, Joe-boy. To say he played without passion seems heartless to me. I thought he gave his guts, and wasn't ineffective, when finally played in his correct position.(leading forward).

The players will always try (despite what many posters suggest), but this can be well over-ridden by the selectors and the footy dept (with unfavourable rotations on match day. Looking at Ess last year, Haw, Coll, and Carl in previous years and many others (including us in ?2003), it's naive to suggest that Clubs ("Clubs", not players) go flat out when draft picks are at stake. Whether or not the players are trying is not the point. If they know it's in the best interest of the Club to lose,it's impossible to play with the same endeavour as when the reverse is the case. Tell me how hard Carlton Footy Club tried after you've watched round 22.

I re-iterate my contention from another thread that whoever wins Round 22 Melbourne v Carlton has either the most naive footy department or the most undisciplined players. Consider the consequences of winning that game! There's only one hope left to avoid this disaster match....Carlton COULD beat Essendon the week after next. But no doubt Fev's thigh will play up with the scores level and 5 minutes to play. At last he's doing what he's told!

What the Hell is Travis doing playing in the VFL???? He should either be resting ,getting his injury right, or in the firsts. Or has the footy dept realised that if there's one player on our list who could wreck our draft chances by winning a game off his own boot, it's "Tigger"?

I notice that Mike Sheahan and Garry Lyon discuss this matter in the H-Sun today. Either side would be MAD to win rnd 22. BUT.......someone's going to have to! Why could the AFL not realise such a farcical match was a possibility when it created its priority draft system?Surely the Blues won't succumb to a shell-shocked Collingwood! If only they beat them, then we can have a real crack too,in round 21, and stuff up their finals chances!

It's been pretty reliable in recent years, compared to the early years of the draft system.

Same here. But we MUST NOT win that last game!

I think it's a serious problem. Surely no-one condones deliberately losing, but in the case of round 22,Melb/Carlton, winning the game would be a display of leadership incompetence and naivety. How do you tell the players not to go flat out? Either Melb or Carlton will solve the problem better than the other.

This topic is about THIS year's problem , not future years. Somehow the AFL has to fix up the problem it's created for itself.

Rhino, the Ess/Carl match was in round 16 last year,not round 22, so a lot of water had to flow under the bridge AFTER that match. Also, both sides ended up with 3 wins, so even in round 22 they had a win up their sleeve with respect to priority picks. So this year's potential farce in round 22 is DEFINITELY more of a problem for the AFL. (that's if you accept my contention that it's silly to play a game where the winner seriously damages its future.) Do you accept these facts Rhino? Another way the AFL could circumvent this situation is to make some secret financial or other incentive to Melb or Carl to reach 20 prem. points before round 22.

There was less hanging on the "Bryce Gibbs"match....both sides were going to get a top 2 draft pick, whatever the outcome. Also, there was a rumour at the time that Ess and Carl had come to an agreement before the match. Carl wanted Gibbs. Ess wanted Gumbleton. With respect to our victory against Carlton this year, we only won because we kicked straight, and they were very inaccurate. Also, we got an armchair ride from the umps, for a change.

The more I think about round 22, the more I think the AFL CAN'T let the farcical Melb/Carl match occur.

quote name='Rhino Richards' date='Jul 24 2007, 08:05 AM' post='90336'] "All power to the Coodabeens there songs about all Clubs including Melbourne are most amusing and witty." I agree, Rhino. In fact it's so light-hearted, I find Champion's lampooning completely inoffensive.

But it sure is a problem now, Gouga! My method would be to play like hell against the Blues, and try to win by as much as possible. 15 secs to go, put the 4 interchange on, making 22 players on the field. Make sure the ump knows, then lose all your score. Don't resume if Carlton try the same trick in response.(but a nil-all draw is no good to them!)

The AFL's nightmare is scheduled to occur in round 22. The winner of the Melb -Carl game(assuming they lose all games , and we win one or less), MUST be lost by both sides! The winner loses a top3 draft pick. There are only so many young inexperienced players to send out there.Backs can be played forward (and vice versa), rovers in the ruck,and star players omitted"injured". With BOTH sides desperate to lose, a farcical game could result. Solution?? The AFL must ensure either Melb win 2 games or Carlton one, prior to round 22. How does the AFL obtain a result it wants? They did it in the 2005 GF. Hall escaped suspension inexplicably, and the holding the ball rule was altered for the game, such that it suited Sydney's game plan.(NO holding the balls were given in the whole game, creating multiple stoppages for the side most adept at using them). What can they do to achieve the easiest required result(Carlton one win)? The only thing I can think of is to instruct a trusted umpire to pay a few frees right in front.(not difficult, since video replays show that contested marks are almost NEVER taken without a hand brushing a back.) Can Demonlanders think of any other clandestine tactics the AFL can employ to avert their nightmare.

Rhino, Waynewussell said that Connolly was an "average" player. You are backing up my contention that he was better than that by agreeing that it was arguable that he may have reached champion status had he not been injured. You say we were a mile from the '87 flag. I say we were a 15m. penalty from the GF. Carlton won a lack-lustre GF. We were on an incredible roll. We beat Carlton 3 times in 1988, including in the finals. I say we would have given them a blooody good game had we made the GF. I have it on good authority that Wilson was the only player who'd have missed the match (NOT Flower) and Dirty Dave Williams would have been an excellent replacement.

Tank you very much!

[quote name='condemned 84' "Leave him out for 2 more and play it v carlton in round 22", Oh NO, "condemned", what a shocking match for a milestone! The winner misses a top 3 draft pick. The "Tank-match" of the century! Perhaps we should play him if his injury is career-ending. It would be handy to be "one short" in this match.